1o. Minutes 141
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 10, 1989
Mayor_ Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. . The meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
' COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Boyt, Councilman Workman,
Councilwoman Dimler, and Councilman Johnson
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger_ Knutson, Gary Warren, Steve Hanson, Jo Ann
Olsen, Todd Gerhardt, Lori Sietsema and Jim Chaffee
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to
approve the agenda with the following additions to Council Presentations:
' Counci.lman Johnson wanted to discuss the TH 212 EIS update and Mayor Chmiel
wanted to discuss curbside pick-up and recycleables. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
' CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to
approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recommendations:
e. Resolution #89-47: Accept Utilities for Lake Susan Hills West, Phase I
(Project 87-32) and Phase II (Project 88-8) .
f. Authorize Execution of Railroad Crossing Permit for Audubon Road Watermai.n.
g. Authorize Execution of Utility Easement, County Road 17/County Road 18, City
' of Chaska.
h. Resolution #89-48: Authorize Readvertising for Bids, Mi.nnewashta Meadows
' Project 88-2,4.
i. Accept Storm Sewer Management Proposal from Enviroscience, Inc.
1. Resolution #89-49: Approve Resolution Calling for Public Hearing on the
Modification of Development District #2 and Tax Increment Financing District
No. 2-1.
' m. Approval of Ordinance Amendment Authorizing Certain Public Safety Personnel
to Issue Burning Permits, First Reading.
n. Resolution #89-50: Correction to Year End Closings and Transfers.
o. Resolution #89-51: Resolution Proclaiming National Consumers Week.
' p. Approval of Accounts.
' q. City Council Minutes dated March 27, 1989
Planning Commission Minutes dated March 15, 1989
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
1
City Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS:
A. APPROVAL OF EAGLE SCOUT PROJECT, SCOTT DUMMER.
Councilman Johnson: This is a Boy Scout Eagle Project. I just had one
question. In the area they're putting the footings down, I'm very familiar with
the area. There's a lot of peat in that area. I don't know if Lori's here but
I don't think that 42 inch footings are going to hack it there when you're going
to be putting it on peat. I think we need the City Engineer to take a look at
the situation out there before they start construction. Otherwise I think it's
a great project for the Boy Scouts to do, to add a foot bridge across a creek in
one of our City parks here. But I have a little problem with the soil
engineering going into the project so if our city engineering staff can look at
that, I have no problem otherwise with it. It's an old lake bed so I assume
we've got peat to substantial depth. When they dug out the settling pond near
there, they never got through the peat and they went 4 foot deep on the pond.
So I'm assuming there's at least 4 foot of peat or at least highly organic soil.
If there's nothing else I'll move approval of item, 1(a) .
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve the Eagle
Scout Project of Scott Dummer_. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
B. APPROVAL OF 1989 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT BUDGET ADJUSTMENT.
Councilman Workman: I just have a question for. Lori once again. On the
basketball equipment for North Lotus Lake Park and I was unable to get up there
today. I guess I'd like a little more clarification on how those hoops are
going to work with that court. If those hoops are set there, how is the tennis
court going to be used?
Lori. Sietsema: What would likely happen is we will mount them on a pole on the '
side of the tennis court that comes over and will be hanging over the fence...
Councilman Workman: So don't go by this diagram? I
Lori Sietsema: No. We'll probably do it different. ..
Councilman Workman: You made it look like it was on the edge of the court. '
Lori. Sietsema: That was the drawing that the request was sent in and we
probably will revise that. . .but we don't want to have poles on the inside that
the tennis players might run into so they will be mounted on the outside. Put
on the outside of the court and hang over the fence.
Councilman Boyt: I have another question as long as you pulled this. Lori, I
think there should be a sign there stating that tennis has preference on at
least one of those courts.
Lori Sietsema: Again, we probably will do it so that it only affects one court
and one tennis court will always be available and they can still play
basketball.
2
City Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve the 1989
I Capital Improvement Project Budget Adjustment. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
1 C. COUNTRY OAKS ADDITION.
Councilman Boyt: If you'll look at the new conditions for approval, item 5. I
' think we have seen recently that, and I'm thinking of the tree cutting situation
we were looking at a couple of weeks ago. The develop-rent contracts do a very
poor job of controlling builders. They control the developer but once the
' developer's finished, they have no impact really and so I would take our
experience to mean that item 5 has no ability to accomplish what it set out to
do and that's protect that ponding corridor contour. So I'd like to see us come
up with a stronger way of wording that and suggest that we have the developer
'
enter into the deed for the property, the ponding contour, and indicate that it
will not be altered by the homeowners.
'
Councilman Workman: I have also one thing to bring up and I'll ask for Jim
Chaffee's concerns quickly. Last council meeting I brought up the continued
developers bringing in plats with roads all having the same name but different
endings. Now this one has Country Oaks Drive and Country Oaks Road but they're
' relatively in the same place. It could be, probably isn't a problem for fire
safety, etc. in this situation but at this point, is it something that perhaps
we should ask for a differentiation?
a I 1 Jim Chaffee: We could take a look at it but typically you'll find a plat coming
in with one main road with off shoots with similar names. That isn't a problem
' to us. It's when they get into different areas, extreme opposite areas of the
city where it tends to be a problem.
Councilman Johnson: I was going to pull this one also but mine was more of a
' nit picking detail. According to our platting regulations, plats are supposed
to have the legal description and the key map on them and this plat is missing
those two items. I'd like to have staff double check to make sure if I'm right
in my reading of the ordinance and if so, have the legal description and the key
map added to the plat. That was condition 9 I guess.
Jo Ann Olsen: Preliminary plat has to have that. The final plat I don't
' believe so.
Councilman Johnson: Okay, could you check on it because I thought the final
' plat was supposed to have everything the preliminary plat was supposed to have.
Councilman Boyt: I would move acceptance of the 8 conditions noted by staff.
' Changing 5 to read, the deed for each lot adjoining the ponding site will note
the ponding site contour and that that contour shall not be altered in any way
by the homeowners period.
Councilman Workman: Second.
3
Ad
"`cit'y Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the Final Plat as
amended for Country Oaks Addition. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
D. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REZONING AUDUBON COURT, FINAL READING.
Councilman Workman: Again, same issue with the name change on Audubon Court. '
Has that been done? We'r_e still on track for that?
Jo Ann Olsen: Yes. They're working on a new name. '
Councilman Workman: Okay, that's all I wanted to do was make sure.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve the final
reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Rezoning Audubon Court. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
J. AUTHORIZE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR UTILITY AND ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS TO FRONTIER
TRAIL FROM HIGHLAND DRIVE TO KIOWA.
Councilwoman Dimler: Item J has to do with authorizing a feasibility study for
the utility and roadway improvements to Frontier Trail from Highland Drive
to Kiowa Circle. I think this is a most needed project and I'd encourage it to
be done ASAP. But my concern with it is that this project be done in
conjunction with the sanitary sewer restoration.
Councilman Boyt: That was mentioned in here wasn't it?
Councilwoman Dimler: No it wasn't. I don't want to see the new road go in and 1
be constructed and the citizens get assessed for it only to be torn up later for
sewer restoration.„ Gary, can you comment on that?
Gary Warren: Yes, Councilwoman Dimler. The intent is that, as with all
feasibility studies, we would look at the existing utilities and the repairs
would be done at that time. The sewer rehabilitation report which is later in
the agenda, we televised those sewers already and those repairs would be
incorporated into this project, yes.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. That was my concern. So if that is taken into
consideration, then I would move item (j) .
Councilman Johnson: Second. 1
Councilman Boyt: You mentioned, or your report mentions Gary that the condition
of this road was contributed to by having axles in excess of 7 tons run across
the roadway. Do you recall that?
Gary Warren: In our road rater report, their evaluation.
Councilman Boyt: How can we
y prevent that from happening in the future since
apparently the road was broken up by trucks that were too heavy for the road
surface?
4
' City Council Meeting - April 10, 1989 I -
Gary Warren: Like you see at this time of the year, we have our road
restrictions that are posted similar to the County and the State and it becomes
one of an enforcement issue I guess to monitor trucks. To weigh trucks. To see
that they are not exceeding the limits of the roadways.
' Councilman Boyt: Is there a load restriction on that road this time of year?
I've never seen one.
' Gary Warren: We don't sign all the roads. Only those roads that are typical
roads as far as truck traffic and through truck routes. Normal residential
traffic doesn't bother us.
Councilman Boyt: It strikes me as interesting that the road surface here seemed
to be a half inch or more thicker than what we're going to replace it with.
' Gary War_r_en: That was an overlay recommendation in certain areas. The sub-base
is the real problem. It doesn't matter within limits how much bituminous you
put on top of the sub-base is not corrected which is the case with Frontier
Trail, then you're going to have a failure eventually and that's the real cure
' that's needed for Frontier Trail is to correct the sub-base problems and the
drainage problems.
' Councilman Boyt: Well I don't doubt that the work needs to be done. I just
think the road's been abused and I'd like to see something done to prevent this
and other roads from being abused in the future. That's all I've got.
Resolution #89-52: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
' authorize Feasibility Study for Utility and Roadway Improvements to Frontier
Trail from Highland Drive to Ki.owa. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
K. APPROVE RESOLUTION ELECTING TO DESIGNATE CERTAIN BONDS ISSUED IN 1986 AS
QUALIFIED TAX-EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS.
' Mayor Chmi.el: Maybe I'll ask Don to address this. I had some concerns with it
and I just want to make sure that everyone else understands it.
' Don Ashworth: The issue before you is primarily a housekeeping item. The
Federal 1986 Tax Reform Act required that the bonds be designated as tax exempt
as a part of the resolution itself. The change that was made occurred after the
' time that the City had sold those bonds. They are tax exempt bonds. We'r_e
simply clarifying and insuring that the bond holders do in fact have tax exempt
bonds.
' Mayor_ Chmi.el: Clear with everyone else?
IMayor Chmi.el moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve Resolution electing
to designate certain bonds issued in 1986 as qualified tax-exempt obligations:
t 5
City Coun-i 1 Meeting - Apr.i 1 10, 1989
1. $195,000.00 G.O. Equipment Certificates
2. $4,615,000.00 G.O. Bonds of 1986.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: There were no Visitor Presentations at this meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING: EMPAK, INC., LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 2, CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS '
PARK SECOND ADDITION:
A. VACATION OF UTILITY EASEMENT.
Jo Ann Olsen: The first proposal is a vacation of the utility easements. The
applicants are proposing to replat two industrial lots into one lot. Therefore
the interior utility easements are no longer needed. We are recommending
approval of the vacation with the condition that the Council approve the final
plat for. Lot 1, Block 1, F]npak Addition and the recording of the plat with
Carver County.
Mayor Chmiel called the public hearing to order.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to close the public
hearing for the vacation of the utility easements. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
Resolution #89-55: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to
approve Vacation Request #89-4 to vacate the interior utility easements between
Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 2nd Addition with the
following condition:
1. The City Counoi:l approve the final plat for Lot 1, Block 2, Fipka Addition
and the recording of the plat with Carver County.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
B. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL.
Jo Ann Olsen: Again, the applicant is proposing to combine two of the '
industrial lots into one. The Planning Commission reviewed this and
recommended approval with the condition that the applicant receive vacation of
the interior drainage and utility easement between Lots 1 and 2, Block 2
Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 2nd Addition.
Mayor Chmiel called the public hearing to order. I
Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to close the public hearing for
the preliminary plat approval. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Councilman Workman: I have just one quick question in regards to the current
Lake Susan Park road and the status of that. During construction, is it going
6
MI
City Counci 1 Meeting - April lg, 1989
to c?e :.:?re? During the construction we're going to take it into account with
Lake Dr i..,e and you can give us an idea of what. . .
Gary Warren: Yes, -;e're currently working on an access plan th at addresses not
only the park access but also the Church of the Living Christ access and the
' rest of the property out there. As you are aware, we have to get to the park
for maintenance of our Well Y4 also so we are looking at, BRW is looking at the
access road and we're probably going to have some temporary road condition
available for that access separate from the actual Lake Drive construction.
Councilman Workman: So at that stage we'll lose the chain gate? Will there be
a chain gate there?
Gary Warren: We would probably lose it because that road would also be access
then, public access for the church.
11 Councilman Boyt: I foresee a parking problem here. I think we've indicated in
our requirements are that you have 1 parking spot for each person working on a
' shift. They've got how many thousand square feet, 79,000 square feet? Is that
right?
Councilman Johnson: That's the next item. That's the site plan review.
' Councilman Boyt: I'll wait.
Councilman Johnson moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to approve Subdivision Request
89-3 to create Lot 1, Block 1, Emoak Addition as shown on the plat stamped
' "Received March 1, 1989" with the following condition:
1. The applicant receive vacation of the interior drainage and utility
easements betwoon Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park
' 2nd Addition.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
C. SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
Mayor Chmi.el called the public hearing to order.
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to close the public
' hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing for the
site plan approval was closed.
' Jo Ann Olsen: Again, the Planning Commission reviewed this and they did
recommend approval. At that time there were 27 conditions. Since then, the
It applicant has provided amended plans that satisfy 17 of those conditions. There
are still 10 conditions that are typical conditions that are required with
almost all site plans that have to be met along with the development contract
and with plans and specs. tie are recommending approval with the 10 conditions
listed in the report.
' 7
City Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
Councilman Johnson: Jo Ann, in the packet here, there was a statement made that
they're not going to have any hazardous materials at this industrial site. j
Jo Ann Olsen: That's what they stated.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. What are the storage tanks on the outside of the '
building?
Jo Ann Olsen: I think they explained that. I
Councilman Johnson: I'd some more information. I'd like Flnpak to come forward.
Todd Cristopherson: I'm Todd Christopherson. I'm the project manager for '
AMCON. We are the designer and also the builder of the project. I have with me
Jeff Anderson. He's the project architect and also Larry Welter. He represents
the Hrpak Corporation so any questions regarding the actual production inside
the facility, Larry can answer those.
Councilman Johnson: Larry, briefly review what you're making. What type of
materials you use making it and are any of these hazardous. Are there SARA 313,
11 or 12 materials on there that you're going to be reporting and what are thos
storage tanks outside.
Larry Welter: The storage tanks are going to be used for storing the raw
plastic. The product being made will be plastic bottles which will be 1000
recycleable. What was the other question? ?'
Councilman Johnson: Are there any hazardous materials used? Epocnlorile z
Hydrant or any other good stuff?
Larry Welter: No there isn't.
Councilman Johnson:- What type of plastic? ,
Larry Welter: Polyethelene.
Councilman Johnson: When you clean, you don't use any solvents to clean up
after, to clean your machines? There's no solvent carriers in your process?
Larry Welter: No there isn't. 1
Councilman Johnson: It's amazing. You make a petro chemical product without
hazardous material. I don't see those tanks on any of our drawings. We've got
elevations. Maybe your engineers. On the plan view they show 4 tanks but on
the elevations they don't show any tanks. What happened to them when we show
the side view of the building, the tanks disappeared?
Larry Welter: I don't know why they didn't show up there. They shown
the plan and called out as material storage tanks. y are on
Councilman Johnson: I know. That's why I saw them.
Larry Welter: The tanks haven't actually been ordered and we're not sure
exactly how high they are but I believe that they will be 60 feet plus or minus.
8 '
1 _ aFJ
City CotInc' l ;`.aet i ng - '.or i 1 17, 1989
i
1 Council.nan Johnson: It shows there's some kind of wall around them. Is that
,:all going to blend in so well that we won't be able to see the tanks
whatsoever?
' Larry Welter: No, that's not a wall. That's the foundation down on the ground
that supports the tanks.
Councilman Johnson: And what size of dike are you going to have around these
tanks?
Larry Welter: No diking. The raw material is solid. It's like plastic
pellets.
Councilman Johnson: Okay. So these aren't liquid tanks? They're plastic bulk
tanks.
Councilman Boyt: I have one about your operation. It's my understanding that
' you have 50 people on a shift?
Larry Welter: That would be the maximum when Phase 2 is built.
' Councilman Boyt: During Phase 2?
Larry Welter: After Phase 2 is built which is not part of this.
Councilman Boyt: How much of the parking is going in on Phase 1?
Larry Welter: Everything that is shown on the plan in solid is planned to be
built now. The dashed lines indicate parking that would be added with Phase 2.
' Councilman Boyt: Is this a one shift or two shift operation? Or three?
Larry Welter: Basically a three shift operation that goes around the clock.
' Councilman Boyt: Are you going to have parking that will take care of your
shift change time?
' Todd Cristopherson: That's the reason for the extra parking with Phase 1. It
shows 109 parking spaces I believe on Phase 1 which will accommodate the shift
change as well as the office parking.
' Councilman Boyt: Okay, good. I have another question then. Until you build
Phase 2, how many square feet is going to be vacant out there?
Todd Cristopherson: I guess first we should clarify on the packet that I got,
it listed the building as being 77,000 feet and actually what we're showing on
the plan there is 95,000 to be built now and approximately 78,000 to be added
with Phase 2.
Councilman Boyt: Okay, that's the area you're showing as seed and mulch
g mulch for
now?
Todd Cristopherson: Correct.
1 9
City Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
1
Councilman Boyt: Would you be interested, since you're going to grade all that
now I would imagine, right?
Todd Cristopherson: Correct.
Councilman Boyt: Would you be interested in putting up a backstop for a
bailfi.eld there? With almost 2 acres of ground, you have something that we need
and it would be nice if you would go to a bit of additional expense and put a
backstop. We'd have a ballfield. If you allowed your employees or the City to
use it and it might be a way to help us out.
Todd Cristopherson: I guess I'm not prepared to answer that at this time. I'd ,
like to take that back to the owners of the company. Larry might have some
thoughts on that but I'm relunctant to agree to something like that at this time
because we haven't had a chance to evaluate it.
Councilman Boyt: Okay. Larry, what's your feeling about this as long as you're
right there? I
Larry Welter: I'm not at liberty to give you an answer either. There's some
issues that have to be looked at. Liability and so on so I guess we can't give
you an answer right now.
Councilman Johnson: Would you be willing to discuss it?
Larry Welter: Yes.
110
Councilman Johnson: Are you part of Flourware?
Larry Welterr_: No we're not.
Councilman Boyt: That's all I have Hr. Mayor. 1
Mayor. Chmiel: Okay, any other discussions?
Councilman Johnson: I've got one added here. A little birdy added something to '
my ear here just a minute ago. We have a few, you're going to be vaccum moving
your solids from your storage tank to your press process I assume. A lot of
these have a high pitch whine to the fan system. You want to make sure that we
are in compliance with the MPCA, especially the nighttime noise regulations
because you're fairly close to some residential areas. You're just sitting
right across a valley to a new residential. area. Your current facility does
have a whine to it but there's very few residents nearby so we don't have much
of a complaint.
Larry Welter: I wasn't aware of a problem there but if there is too much noise, ,
it can be muffled with insulation.
Councilman Johnson: What we want to do is make sure you take a close look at 1
that in your design phase.
Larry Welter: Okay.
10 '
- :J a
City Council �`eeti nn ',or_i 1 1'7, '.989
II .- -- Councilman Johnson: I' ll move apbroval of Site Plan, item 2(c) for &npak with
the 10 conditions of staff and two additional conditions. One is that they
11 review their design to insure that they meet the NIPCA noise requirements. Sound
emission requirements from their facility to the residential areas and bark
areas. 12 is that they look into the possibility of working with our Park and
Rec people for interim utilization for needed more balifields in this area.
' Both for the industrial ball leagues we have that play softball and whatever.
That would be item 12. I'm not saying do it. Look into and negotiate and
discuss it with your management.
' Councilwoman Dimler: I second that.
iCouncilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve Site Plan
Request #89-1 as shown on the amended site plan stamped "Received March 28,
1989" with the following conditions:
1. Erosion control shown on plans shall be Type III.
' 2. All site slopes greater than 3:1 will need erosion protection.
3. All driveways shall be consistent with city standards.
' 4. A typical section of roadway is to be shown on the plan.
5. Access must be maintained for city forces to monitor and maintain Well No.
II 4 at all times during construction and should be addressed in the
Development Contract with the city.
' 6. The development contract will need to be signed prior to construction on
the site.
7. Approval of- the site plan is not an approval, nor does it imply approval of
any notations of plant expansion set forth in the site plan. Any
additional phases or expansion of the site will require a site plan review.
' 8. The applicant shall receive an access permit from Carver County for access
at County Road 17.
' 9. The applicant shall provide screening for roof top equipment if the same is
visible from a public right-of-way.
10. The applicant shall be required to pay park dedication fees and construct
an 8 foot wide bituminous trail on the east side of Powers Boulevard to
receive 100% trail dedication credit.
11. The applicant review their design to insure that they meet the MPCA noise
requirements, sound emission requirements from their facility to the
residential areas and park areas.
12. Look into the possibility of working with the Park and Recreation staff for
interim utilization for needed ballfi.elds in this area.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
1 11
1- f Counc, _ Meeting - April 10, 1989
II
II
AWARD OF BIDS: CITY HALL SECURITY SYSTEM.
i
Todd Gerhardt: Attached to your packet you will find a bid from Alpha Video and
Audio for a bid of $12,761.05. The second bid was from Southwest Audio Visual
for a bid of $13,389.45. A difference of approximately $628.00. Staff's
recommendations that award of bid go to Alpha Video Audio for $12,761.05. Also
I
included in your packet are the specifications for the installation and the
equipment to be used on the project.
Councilman Johnson: I'll move approval of the award of contract to the low II
bidder Alpha Video and Audio in the amount of $12,761.05. And I'd like to thank
Southwest also for their bid and also for setting up the audio for tonight's
presentation.
Councilman Workman: I do have one quick comment. Todd graciously called me
today before he got busy setting up here tonight. My biggest concern when items
like this, $13,000.00 here and $20,000.00 there and $5,000.00 here is that
staff, and this certainly isn't only Todd but that staff place in there maybe a
trail of where this money came from. Where it's coming from and where it was
designated from. I did find out that the money, the $13,000.00 is from a cable II
TV fund. We all pay everytime we pay our cable TV bill and that puts the
expenditure of $13,000.00 into a different light. But if in the future it will
probably save us all time a little bit if we could maybe find out where that
II
money is supposed to be coming from. A couple meetings ago the Lions in the
consent agenda, the Chaska Lions donated $10,200.00 to the City of Chanhassen
Park and Rec department. Nobody on the Council brought it up. I happened to I
office with the past president of Chaska Lions and said, where's this money 3
coming from and why are we getting it? I found out that was from the pulltabs
here in town but it wasn't in the report so I'd like to know not only how we're
spending it but how we're getting it a little bit. Maybe we can get a trail and II
save some time.
IIResolution #89-56: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to
award the contract to the low bidder, Alpha Video and Audio for the City Hall >
Security System in the amount of $12,761.05. All voted in favor and the motion
II
carried.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH, 1/4 MILE NORTH OF
I
HIGHWAY 5 AND WEST OF POWERS BOULEVARD, ECKANKAR CHURCH, PETER BECK.
Public Present: 1
Name Address
Mitch and Janet Weaver 4309 W. 113th Street, Bloomington 11
Dan Mahady 1020 Butte Court, Chanhassen
Tom Hickey 6990 Utica Lane, Chanhassen
Ginger Gross 2703 Ches Mar Farm Road, Chanhassen
ii
Cindy Jones 2739 Ches Mar Farm Road, Chanhassen
Bill and Helen Loebl 7197 Frontier Trail, Chanhassen
Jane Klinkenberg 180 Cascade Court, Chanhassen
12 1
ow
I `y i ,:„n -t 1 Meeting - April _ 1, y 89 _hd 2J
II -- Name Address
II Adward A. and Marton Ziegler 920 Butte Court, Chanhassen
Matt and Laurie Hoffman 931 Saddlebrook Trail, Chanhassen
Chuck and Peggy Beecker. 7211 Pontiac Circle, Chanhassen
II Douglas and Jane Cook 290 Trappers Pass, Chanhassen
Eric Rivkin 1695 Stellar_ Court, Chanhassen
Bill and Karen Gleason 1031 Saddlebrook Trail, Chanhassen
Chris Burns Sailor Newspaper_
II Mr. and Mrs. Kubitz
Ike and Helen Pesonen 7492 Saratoga, Chanhassen
7257 Pontiac Circle
Curt and R.L. Hausen 6220 Horseshoe Curve, Chanhassen
I Herbert J. Kask 115 Pleasant View Road, Chanhassen
Albert and Karen Dorweiler 1565 Bluff Creek Drive, Chanhassen
Sandy Eastling 7285 Pontiac Circle, Chanhassen
II Esther Steller 6311 Steller Circle, Chanhassen
Earl and Ana St. John 1621 West 63rd Street, Excelsior
Lydia E. Porter 7217 Pontiac Circle, Chanhassen
Mary Johnson 1044 Pontiac Lane, Chanhassen
I Patsy Ward 6960 Utica Lane, Chanhassen
Susan Johnsrud 7061 Shawnee Lane, Chanhassen
Sharon Koenen 6960 Shawnee Lane, Chanhassen
I Georgia Cox
Jack Atkins 6990 Shawnee Lane, Chanhassen
220 West 78th Street, Chanhassen
Joanne Nelson 7290 Cactus Curve, Chanhassen
Robin K. Norby 6801 Redwing Lane, Chanhassen
II - Cawne Erhart 775 West 96th Street, Chanhassen
Bob and Mary Rezac 6970 Shawnee Lane, Chanhassen
1).os1 Schlenk 501 Chan View, Chanhassen
Ic-en Kohman
LueAnn Wallentine 7615 Kiowa, Chanhassen
507 Chan View, Chanhassen
Shirley Kreger 7606 Kiowa, Chanhassen
I Torn and Carol Barrett 7051 Redman Lane, Chanhassen
Thomas Lehmann 330 Sinnen Circle, Chanhassen
Timothy and Carol Vadnais 8110 81st Street, Victoria
Jim and Br.i.tta Pasek 141 Oak Glen Drive, Hopkins
I Doug Arnold
Susan Bode 400 Deerfoot Trail, Chanhassen
7105 Pontiac Circle, Chanhassen
Sheryl Mickelson 981 Pontiac Lane, Chanhassen
I Dale and Gloria Carlson 6900 Utica Lane, Chanhassen
Ross and Dei.dre McE1lhi.ney 733 Preakness Lane, Chanhassen
Richard Potz 6991 Tecumseh Lane, Chanhassen
Bud Andrus 7078 Red Cedar Cove, Chanhassen
I Mat and Sue Strand 7410 Chippewa Trail, Chanhassen
M.H. Wittrsas 6022 Dakota Avenue, Chanhassen
Mark Pahl 8056 Erie Avenue, Chanhassen
I Eleanor Widey 7610 Great Plains Blvd. , Chanhassen
M. McNutt 410 Chan View, Chanhassen
Ivan and Mildred Underdahl 7502 West 77th Street, Chanhassen
Steve and Dianne Clabots 1021 Pontiac Lane, Chanhassen
Kathy Doeper 8026 Cheyenne Lane, Chanhassen
Trent and Nancy Manaren 7552 Great Plains Blvd., Chanhassen
\--- Chuck Hirt 7007 Cheyenne Trail, Chanhassen
IIKen Earhart 6880 Utica Lane, Chanhassen
II 13
E.
City Counc i L .Ieeting - -,ori 1 1J, 1989 II
Name II
Address
Barbara Fransdal 6200 Murray Hill Road, Chanhassen I
Lois Fiskness 8033 Cheyenne Avenue, Chanhassen
Joe Kasid 7013 Sandy Hook Circle, Chanhassen
Mrs. L.J. DeMarai.s 6979 Pima Lane, Chanhassen
Stephen Cobb 880 Nez Perce Court, Chanhassen
Don and Solveig Huseth 7332 Frontier Trail, Chanhassen
Judy Coloy 7307 Laredo Drive, Chanhassen
Janet Paulsen 7305 Laredo Drive, Chanhassen
II
Karl Hinkle 1603 West 161st, Westfield, IN 46074
Alan Lei.rness 608 2nd Avenue So, Minneapolis
George Benick 412 West 76th Street, Chanhassen
II
Jerry Paulsen 7305 Laredo Drive, Chanhassen
Jan Rome 405 Del Rio Drive, Chanhassen
L.J. Anderson 400 Cimarron Circle, Chanhassen
J.H. Kasper 411 Cimarron Circle, Chanhassen I
R.W. Robinett 401 Cinarron Circle, Chanhassen
K.W. Wenaland 8040 Dakota Lane, Chanhassen
V. Punnicutt 8051 Cheyenne, Chanhassen
II
Wayne and Sharon Skoblik 701 Bighorn, Chanhassen
Michael Wangen 420 Chan View, Chanhassen
Dan Barnett 777 Carver Beach Road, Chanhassen
II
Lisa Wei.k 720 Preakness Lane, Chanhassen
Rob Reynolds 760 Santa Vera, Chanhassen
Merlyn Wanous 6231 Church Road, Excelsior T
William A. Claas 791 Belmont, Chanhassen ,
Mark Schblock 7100 Pontiac Circle, Chanhassen
Karen Anderson 6881 Utica Lane, Chanhassen
3i11 and Kathy Engebretson 7120 Utica Lane, Chanhassen
II
Kurt J. Weimer 6211 Dogwood Avenue, Chanhassen
Scott Torrey 731 Bighorn Drive, Chanhassen
Monte EAstvold i 7051 Pima Lane, Chanhassen
Doug Hansen 108 Pioneer Trail, Chanhassen
Mike Gorra 1680 Arboretum, Chanhassen
Terry Forbord 935 E. Wayzata Blvd.
Bill Eggert 800 Preakness Lane, Chanhassen
II
Dave Sime 790 Preakness Lane, Chanhassen
Julie Farmakes 7100 Utica Lane, Chanhassen
Leneda Rahe 1021 Carver Beach Road, Chanhassen
II
Al Klingelhutz 8600 Great Plains Blvd., Chanhassen
Cindy Schallock 7100 Pontiac Circle, Chanhassen
Dianne Priedote 7401 Frontier Trail, Chanhassen
Pat Leiter 7613 Kiowa Avenue, Chanhassen II
Daniel Remoz 7560 Chippewa Trail, Chanhassen
Jim Eastling 7285 Pontiac Circle, Chanhassen
Mike Farkas 7501 Chippewa, Chanhassen
Dean Brown 18737 Clear Drive, Minnetonka
Alan Putnam
Mr. and Mrs. Walter_ Whitehill
I'
14
I
MD
r
City Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
1 --
3
Steve Hanson: The Planning Cotnni_ssion at it's regular meeting on March 1, 1989
Ireviewed this particular request and held a public hearing pursuant to your
regulations. At that time they did recommend approval of Case 89-1, Conditional
Use Permit for Eckankar Church. That vote was a 4 to 1 vote by the Commission
with two of those members absent. The approval was subject to several
conditions. Pri.nci.ply as contained within the staff report delivered to the
Planning Commission. At that time the applicant had agreed to the conditions
' that were placed on the application and subsequently have revised their plans in
conformance with the conditions as placed on the application by the Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission also at the time when they did recommend
approval also had a couple items that they wanted the City Council to consider
'
in your deliberations. There were four of those. The first of those was hiring
an independent consultant to review the proposal as far as the impact on
property values and I believe you have in the packet a copy of that document.
' The second item was that additional services that the facility may need should
be re-evaluated by staff. We have done that and I'll go over that in a minute.
The third was the status of Eckankar as a church. We have gone back through and
looked through the definitions that we have and'have found that the facility
11 does qualify as a church under the City Codes. The fourth item was a further
evaluation of conditions 1, 4, 6 and 11 of the general issuance standards for
conditional use permits. Also I would note, I tried to put out copies of the
' general issuance conditions for the public. I didn't make 200 copies but I had
before the meeting started, set some of those out on some of the chairs and I
believe some of the folks have them. Also we have a set of those up at the
podium if people want to reference those specific conditions that you have for
' ; evaluating this particular request. Also in the report that you have before
you, I've done a further evaluation of conditions 1, 4, 6 and 11. Briefly I'd
like to go over those. The first of those states that the application will not
' be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or
general welfare of the neighborhood or the City. Previously staff and the
Planning Commission's report had recommended that the application did comply
'
with this criteria and that when we apply the standard we take into
consideration a variety of uses, operations and safety issues. The application
does comply with the zoning requirements and greatly exceeds the setback
requirements. The application also complies with fire and safety
recommendations for the facility. From a land use standpoint, the isolation of
the facility from neighboring uses provides an excessive separation and there
are no identified nuisances that would be detrimental to the public comfort.
The church use presents no endangerment to the general welfare nor has an
investigation conducted by the Public Safety Department noted any problems in
other communities where they have had facilities. The fourth criteria that was
brought up as a concern at the Planning Commission states that the application
will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. We
have been unable to identify any hazardous materials or hazardous operations
that would be conducted on the property. And further, again, the investigation
done by the Public Safety Department has identified no disturbing uses for the
property or from the Eckankar Church itself. The sixth criteria states the
applicant will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
As stated in the staff report to the Planning Commission, this use will have
less need for public facilities and services than if the property were developed
residentially pursuant to the existing zoning on the property. Also the
investigation has not turned up any additional requirements for facilities that
the City would have to provide for this particular use. The last item was item
15
City Council Meeting - >LD-T_) � L089
11 in that the applicant will not depreciate surrounding property values.
Again, I'd refer you to the appraisal information that is included in your_
packet regarding that item. The staff is recommending approval of the
conditional use permit for Case 89-1, for. Eckankar Church with several
conditions which are really a modification of the conditions that were approved
by the Planning Commission and recommends that City Council take the following
action. That the City Council finds that the Conditional Use Permit Case #89-1
for Eckankar. Church is consistent with the zoning standards of the City of
Chanhassen and approves the request subject to the plan stamped "Received March
22, 1989" and the matters of record in the official City Planning File #89-1,
Conditional Use Permit, Eckankar Church with the following conditions:
1. Detailed lighting of the exterior of the building be submitted for review by
the City. At staff's discretion the lighting may be presented to the
Planning Commission for review to determine if the lighting is consistent
with the character of the neighborhood.
2. All detailed construction plans and specifications are to meet city
standards.
3. The Watershed District permits required prior to construction. I
4. There shall be no outside speaker system on the site.
5. The facility is for the express use as a church and limited to normal
operations and activities associated with the church. In no case shall
rallies, conferences, meetings or gatherings in excess of the seating
capacity of the proposed facility be allowed.
6. No tents, mobile homes, trailers or similar temporary structures shall be
allowed on the property.
7. Parking shall only be allowed on the improved parking areas as designated on
the site plan. { I
8. No overnight stay shall be permitted including camping or lodging with the
exception of the caretaker.
9. No use other than that specified in the conditional use permit shall be
permitted unless the applicant applies for and receives approval of a new
conditional use permit pursuant to the City Code r_equir_ements in effect at '
that time.
That concludes my comments at this time Mr. Mayor_ unless you have any questions. I
Mayor Chmi.el: Are there any questions from Council?
Councilman Johnson: I'd like to bounce two things off of you. I think one of 1
them I talked to you on the phone about. I'm hoping you came up with some
alternate wording for number 5 which is the facility is for the express use as a
church limited to normal operations, activates associated with the church. I
have no problem with that sentence. In no case shall rallies, conferences,
meetings or gatherings in excess of the seating capacity of the proposed
facility be allowed. That we have to put on every church in town. If we're
16 1
City Council :`eeti ng - Cori 1 10, 1989
going to put it on one church, they all get it which means that we can't put out
folding chairs for Easter services. I've never been to an Easter service, even
in our new facility at Mount Calvary that we just built the new auditorium. At
Easter we had to put out folding chairs already so we exceeded the seating
capacity. That design seating capacity so somehow we have to treat everybody
equal. Now as far as the rallies, conferences, meetings go, I think we should
specify there, something of a national or international type thing. This is for
a local church and churches have local rallies and stuff like that but we're not
' looking for this to be an international headquarters of any sort and we don't
want any national or international rallies. I think we need to do that. I'm
not exactly sure how to handle the seating capacity. Is the seating capacity
and the occupancy capacity the same as far as fire limits for occupancy
'
capacity? No, it's two different things. We can't exceed the fire occupancy
capacity which we're probably closing in on on this .room today. I hope our Fire
Marshall's not here. The other thing is we talk about tents, mobile homes,
' trailers, can we add except during construction because all the construction
companies want to put in their little mobile home construction office. Say
something like except construction offices.
Mayor Chmiel: That's normally accepted.
Councilman Johnson: But we're giving them a condition that says you can't put a
1 construction trailer on there basically. It says no trailers and we didn't say
except during construction.
II ?ayor. Chmiel: I think the intent behind that is that no trailers will be on
site once the site has been brought up to standards.
Councilman Johnson: Good. That's what I'm saying. Let's say it. Do you have
any problem with that?
Steve Hanson: No. I think that would be beneficial to put that clause in there
so it is clear that they can't have the construction trailers during
construction. I think right now the way it's stated, you could make the
interpretation that it does not allow anything at all, even during construction.
Councilman Johnson: That's all my questions of staff. I do have some general
comments later I guess.
Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to just establish a few parameters for this evenings
meeting. I would like to have each individual from the group have a spokes
person for it to get up and address the issue. Any other members or any other
' people that are here this evening who would like to address this issue, we'd
like to limit that between 5 to 10 minutes at the very most. So with that, I'd
like you to take that into consideration when it's your time to come up to the
podium. When it's that time, also indicate your name and your address. Thank
you. Are you presenting it this evening Peter?
Peter Beck: Yes. Mr_. Mayor, members of the City Council, Peter Beck, 7900
Xerxes Avenue South representing Eckankar. I intended to present the project to
' the City Council. Of course it would take longer than 5 or 10 minutes. Was
your intent that we proceed to take the time necessary to present the project
and then the further discussion would be.. .
17
-`City Council Meeting - April 18, 1989
Mayor Chmiel: I think you can give your full presentations basically and any of
the people who are going to submit their discussions are limited to that.
Peter Beck: Okay. I'd like to introduce first quickly, the folks that are here
tonight to answer questions from the Council or fr_a-n the public. They include
my nar.tners Jim Larkin, who is here now and Bob Hoffman who is at another
meeting and will be here as soon as he possibly can. Also, the architects for
the project, Ron Krank and Peter Sussman with Korsunsky, Krank and Erickson
Architects. Mr. Krank is the lead architect. His qualifications are set forth
in a statement that he submitted to the City. Essentially he has 26 years of
experience as an architect with particular experience in Chanhassen including
buildings for the Press, Instant Webb and Redman Products and with considerable
experience in the design of churches including Mount Olivet Lutheran Church and
being a lay leader in charge of the Temple of Isarel's recent 4 million dollar
addition and remodeling program. Again, Mr. Krank's written statement setting
forth his qualifications and his analysis of the project and it's compliance
with the ordinance of Chanhassen in the record. Also tonight are several
representatives from Barton Aschmann and Associates Inc. who are also
consultants to Eckankar for civil engineering and environmental issues. We have
submitted statements from four representatives of Barton Aschmann being Dan '
Lutenegger, Chuck Ri.ckart, Scott Mi.nnous and Ken Horns addressing separate
issues of traffic, air quality, dust, wetlands, erosion and sedimentation
control, utilities and landscaping. Barton Aschmann has also prepared a
voluntary Environmental Assessment Worksheet which is a part of the record that
was before the Planning Commission as before the Council tonight. The
conclusion of the statements submitted by Barton Aschmann and the Environmental
Assessment Worksheet is that the church complies with the City's ordinances and
has no potential for any significant environmental effects. In addition to
those development team members, we have also had Eckankar retain two independent
consultants to review the church and the Chanhassen ordinances and to render
their opinions on the compliance of the church with the City's ordinances.
Mr. John Shardlow is a partner in the firm of Dahigren, Shardlow and Uban. His
professional qualif .cations are also set forth in a statement submitted to the ,
City and in the record. Essentially he has considerable experience assisting
communities in the preparation of Comprehensive Plans, zoning ordinances and the
analysis of development projects. We asked Mr. Shardlow to review all of the
plans for the church and the City's ordinances, Comprehensive Plan and render
his opinion on compliance. His written statement summarizes his conclusions
which are consistent with staff's conclusions that the church as proposed does
comply with the City's ordinances and other. requirements. We have also had Mr.
Shardlow conduct a separate investigation of Eckankar's current locations in New
Hope and Minneapolis to determine whether or not those cities have any negative
experiences with the Eckankar locations in their_ cities including increased
calls for services or complaints and the result of that investigation is ,
summarized in a brief letter that we submitted this evening which is that
neither community had had any complaints or other call for special services due
to Eckankar facilities in their city. Mr. Shardlow along with the development
team members is here tonight to present this statement in greater detail if the
Council would like or to answer any questions. Finally with us tonight is Al
Leirness, real estate appraiser with the firm of Robert Boblett Associates Inc. .
L:1111
Mr. Lei.rness is an MAI designated appraiser with over 12 years of experience
appraising real estate including specific experience in Chanhassen with the CPT
building, Lyman Lumber Plant and other properties. He was specifically retained
to address the zoning ordinance standard with respect to the impacts on
18
2ity sleeting - 10, 1-.
surround 1 ng property values. His f
_ s first written statement was submitted to the
City at the time of the Planning Commission hearing concluded that the church
' swill noo epreciate surrounding property values. Since the Planning Commission
hearing, we have requested that he look into that issue in greater detail and he
has done so and will submit a report tonight which summarizes his detailed look
at specific property sales. The approach he took was to do a detailed analysis
of actual Property sales in the areas surrounding Eckankar's properties in New
Hope and Minneapolis. Also in the areas surrounding a church in Southwest
Minneapolis called the Church Universal and Triumphant which was a very
controversial church at the time it wasn't approved. They had to go to the
Supreme Court to establish their right to locate but subsequent to their
location in Minnapolis, Mr. Leirness' findings is that there has been no adverse
impact on any pr_oper_ty in proximity, in any kind of reasonably close proximity
to that church. That is also the conclusion that he arrived at after studying
property records and records of property sales in New Hope and Minneapolis. Mr.
Leirness also analyzed the specific residential properties surrounding
Eckankar's Property in Chanhassen. The purpose of that was to identify the
types of residential property surrounding the Eckankar property and to get a
better idea of whether any impacts could be reasonably anticipated. His
conclusion was that the types of residential property surrounding Eckankar in
Chanhassen are of the affordable type housing which are in very high demand and
short supply, particularly in this part of the metropolitan area. It is his
opinion that due to that fact, coupled with the actual experience in New Hope
and Minneapolis, that there is no reasonable basis to conclude that there would
be any impact on surrounding property values as a result of the Eckankar church
' as proposed in Chanhassen. I'd like to emphasize again that that report which
we will submit this evening is based on his analysis of actual facts from the
property records. The rest of our presentation tonight will be basically a
summary of materials which we have previously submitted to the City. Review of
' some graphics showing the project. All of the materials that we'll be
referencing are .n the record with the City and we'd like to summarize our
understanding. The record does include our application including cover letter,
plans, Envir_ordneiital Assessment Worksheet and all the other attachments and
materials we submitted with our application as well as the staff report of March
1, 1989 including all of the attachments to that staff report which did include
' some follow-up letters from us related to the project. And the record should
also include the staff report of April 4, 1989 also including all attachments.
Specifically our letters to the City Council members with follow up information
with respect to the proposal. Additional materials which we've submitted this
' evening I've mentioned. The statement from Scott Minnous with Barton Aschmann
is basically identical to a statement filed earlier from Barry Warner with
respect to landscaping as Scott and Barry worked together on the landscaping
plan. Barry had a conflict tonight so Scott is here and therefore we submit his
written statement. This additional letter from John Shardlow on his
investigation in New Hope and Minneapolis. The statement from Mr. Leirness
which I just mentioned as well as a copy of an April 7, 1989 letter which we
addressed to the City Council is not in the packet but I've submitted a separate
copy for the record. We've also submitted a copy of a portion of the April 6,
1989 Chanhassen Villager which we request be made a part of the record.
Eckankar is, those of you who were present at the Planning Commission meeting or
have taken opportunity to review those Minutes are aware, is a tax exempt
religious organization under the Federal Internal Revenue Code and has been
designated as a church under the Internal Revenue Code since 1975. We've
provided the City with a copy of the current Internal Revenue Service
' 19
City Council ' eeting - April 19, 1989
I
determination letter with respect to Eckankar's status as a church which is
dated 1975 and remains in effect. ..under_ the laws of the State of Minnesota to
solemnize marriages and we have also submitted confirmation of this with our
application. Eckankar has over 190 Eck centers in 92 countries around the world
and has had a local Eck center in the Twin Cities since 1971. This Eck center
was located in St. Paul at 1879 University Avenue from 1973 until 1975 and then
in Minneapolis at 807 SE 4th Street from 1975 to 1986 and at 2526 South 25th
Street from 1986 to the present. Eckankar purchased the property at the
intersection of TH 5 and CR 17 in 1986 for the purpose of relocating it's
international headquarters from Menlo Park, California and establishing an
international adminstrative headquarters or campus in Chanhassen. The property
was purchased from the First National Bank of St. Paul which had acquired it in
a foreclosure proceeding following a failed proposal for a planned residential
development. The entire property was then and remains today a single parcel of
property legally described as Tract B, Registered Land Survey 88. Eckankar
purchased the entire 174 acres because the bank was selling it as a parcel. '
There wasn' t an option to purchase a portion of it. It was purchased for a
number of reasons including the fact that the central portion was at that time
and remains to date, designated by the City's Comprehensive Plan for campus
business purposes. This was consistent with Eckankar's proposal and their
thought of building an international adminstrative campus in Chanhassen. The
concept plan for the first phase of that campus included an adminstrative office
building and a design graphic, audio visual and publishing facility. Eckankar
has since discontinued publishing in house and contracts for most of that work
but at the time they were performing those sorts of functions themselves and
were proposing separate buildings for that. This concept plan was approved by ,
the Planning Commission and the City Council in 1985. Eckankar subsequently
withdrew the request before public hearing before the Planning Commission and
located it's international headquarters in New Hope, Minnesota. This is where
the international headquarters is presently and this is where it will continue
to be located. The Chanhassen property is proposed only for a church. The City
subsequently rezoned Eckankar's property from planned residential to single
family, medium and high density residential. Specifically the RSF, R-4 and R-12
zoning districts. Since churches are allowed as a conditional use in all three
of those zoning districts, Eckankar has decided to use it's property for a
church. The church, as we've stated in our application materials, will be a
building consecrated to religious worship where people will join together in
public worship under the direction of a person authorized under the laws of the
State of Minnesota to solemnize marriages. The church will include an 800 seat
sanctuary, a care takers residence, classroom facility and other areas as
detailed on the plans submitted which I'll review in a minute and all is
permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. The church will not include any uses not
allowed by the zoning ordinance definition of a church. Office space will be
provided to serve administrative staff of the church only. As I mentioned,
international headquarters is and will remain in New [-lope. I'd like Bob, maybe
we'll go through the slides fairly quickly. Hopefully everybody can see them.
This is a computer generated graphic of the Eckankar property and it also shows
Lake Ann Park there to the west or left of the graphic. North would be up on
this graphic. The church is shown in yellow about in the middle. Parking area
is the darker area right below or to the south of the church. To the west you
see the access road to Lake Ann Park. The church as you can see is located
virtually in the center of the property. I think Bob, let's try the next slide.
I believe it's the site plan. This is, it's not as pretty but I think it will
give you a little better idea of the relationships here. This is the Eckankar
20 1
city C ,_i l ' t ng - ',grit 10, 1989 _ .i�e:>
a — property. Again, you see the church in the center. The parking area
immediately to the south. The gross floor area of the building will be 43,000
I square eet. The percent of entire property covered by the building is .44°," or
.7 acres. The percent of the site, entire property covered by impervious
surface !s 3.3% or 5.7 acres and the percent of site covered by parking area is
1.3% or .].3 acres. The church is designed to accommodate approximately 20
Iemployees. The sanctuary as I mentioned will have 800 seats. The number of
parking spaces required is 276 and the plan provides 290 including handicap
spaces. The building is 36 feet in height as measured under the zoning
I ordinance due to the hipped roof. Probably a more accurate way to think of it
though is that it's height from the ground level in front of the building to the
highest -point would be approximately 50 feet and from the ground level at the
II rear or walkout level of the building will be approximately 65 feet. This
height compares to an allowable height under the zoning ordinance, given the
setbacks proposed of something in the neighborhood of 2,000 feet. Setbacks are
820 feet from the east, 930 feet from the west, 1,960 feet from the south and
I 1,980 from the north. Those are setbacks from property lines. Access will be
off of CR 17 via a driveway aligned with existing Saddlebrook Curve to the east.
You can see for reference later, in addition to, the setback lines which you see
II on this slide, there are also four lines designating sight sections or sight
line studies that we'll look at in a second. The sight line studies are taken
from the north, where it's approximately 2,000 feet the nearest residence and
II coupled to the northeast there, and then we're taking one directly to the east.
Then there's one, as you can see it goes off to the north, kind of west,
northwest. Take a look at what would be visible from Lake Ann. Here are the
sight line studies. At the top we see sight line study of the 2,000 foot
II distance from the closest home to the north. Across, there's some existing
c?egetation that will be between most of those homes and the church and then the
church building would be down to the south. The second study is from
II approximately 1,000 feet away from a residential area to the northeast. Again
shows with the home to the northeast on the right there and the church on the
left. The third one down is directly from the east and shows some of the
II landscaping that.will be installed as part of the project and the relationship
of that landscaping to sight lines directly from the east. Then the fourth at
the bottom is the sight line study from Lake Ann and the church will not be
visible from Lake Ann given the intervening grades and the vegetation along that
I eastern shore of Lake Ann. In addition to this sight line study, we've done
again some computer assisted diagrams that give views from different locations.
This is a view from the south and west at the entrance to Lake Ann Park. That's
the entrance road to the Park. Highway 5 going across the front and the church
I is about in the center of the- slide. It's difficult to see from this distance
but it appears as a slight structure to the left of the second tree. This slide
II is from the intersection of TH 5 and CR 17. Again you see the intervening
grades screen all of the parking areas for the church and you can just see a
portion of the church about in the center of the slide. This slide is from the
southeast at the top of the TH 5 overpass. Over the railroad tracks. From the
I top of that overpass, you will be able to see the church although it will be
several thousand feet away and there's a considerable amount of green area, of
course about 2,000 feet between the highway and the church. This is a view
looking from the east directly at the entrance of the church showing what will
be visible. The entrance road does curve around to the south and of course
there's landscaping which will be installed 'abet een. This is a view from the
i_ north over to the east side of north where the existing vegetation for the one
or two houses where existing trees will not intervene between the houses and the
II 21
_C t tv Counci ee t i ng - April 1n4, 1989 I
II
church showing what those, we think it's 2 or 3 houses to the east and Greenwood
Shores would see the church. This is detailed site plan. Again, we probably a
should have shown it a little earlier of the central portion of the Eckankar
p
II
roperty. The site for the church, showing the entrance road off of CR 17. The
parking area. The two service drives on the northeast and southwest. These
are some additional sight sections prepared to comply with city ordinances which
give essentially landscaping and berming details to demonstrate the techniques II
that will be used to screen the parking areas from public roadways and from
other surrounding areas. This is another CAD slide. This slide is from the I
believe it's the south. It's from on the Eckankar property about 1,000 feet '
away. t,,e Picked a few slides that are actually from the property itself just to
give an idea of what the computer says anyhow the church will look like from
closer up. This is from about halfway up the entrance drive before the drive
II
curves to the south. This is a little bit closer down the entrance drive
showing the proposed landscaping as well as the church. This is the artist
rendering of the proposal which is to scale and does show proposed landscaping.
IIIn other words, those trees aren't just put there for show. They are consistent
with the landscaping plan. You can see the church is built of attractive
materials, high quality materials. The lighting has been designed to comply
with City Code and the recommendations of staff. As staff report indicates,
II
final lighting of the building itself will be reviewed with city staff and fine
tuned as the building goes into final design. The landscaping is in excess of
city requirements. Will include a variety of shrubery and different tree
varieties. The objective of both the landscaping and grading plan has been to II
compliment the existing natural site conditions while meeting and in fact
exceeding the code requirements. Landscape will include a variety of deciduous
and coniferous trees as well as shrubery and flowers. The parking lots, as I ,
mentioned, will be bermed from all directions with landscaping on top of the 4
berms so the parking area and cars will not be visible from public rights-of-
way. Service areas are, you can see the one service road curving off to the I
right in this slide. Go down to the lower walkout level of the church and will
also be screened with berms and landscaping. The balance of the site will be, a
portion of it closest to the building will be sodded. The balance will be seeded
IIin prairie grasses and maintained in that state. This is a floor plan of the
main floor which has been submitted to illustrate the relationships. As I
mentioned, it's a 48,000 square foot building. The main worship area is on the
right in this slide. As I said, it has 800 seats surrounded by some classrooms,
II
chapels, ore-function areas and other small meetings rooms. To the left is the
adminstrative wing which will include offices for it's church staff, reading
room, coats, storage, that sort of thing. The church as I mentioned will not II house any publishing facilities. Any theological seminary. Daycare center nor
any other use not allowed by the City Code. Public access to the main floor
will be through the front entrance which you can see between the two wings
there. From there into the sanctuary or the administrative offices or down the
II
steps or the elevator to the fellowship hall. This is the lower level floor
plan which will include a fellowship hall which is on the right underneath the
sanctuary area. Kitchen. Caretakers apartment as well as some additional
II
classrooms and storage. I think that's it for the slides. We can go back to
them if there are any questions specifically about the slides. In our
application materials and the subsequent letters and other materials which we've
I submitted, we've set forth in considerable detail the compliance of the church
with all of the standards and requirements of the zoning and other_ ordinances of
the city. Your_ planning staff has also reviewed the plans and prepared two
reports analyzing the project in detail against the standards of the zoning
22 1
mi
' City Couei ] :"eecing - on 1 10, 1989 _ `y
ardinance. `:I've also submitted the statements of our development team and the
two independent experts that I mentioned earlier addressing specifically
11 -:omolionce with the standards of the zoning ordinance. All of these materials
are in the record. We didn't plan to present them in detail tonight but we can
do t_nat :'f course at the request of the Council. The planning staff and
Planni.nd Commission have recommended approval subject to a number of conditions.
'
We have submitted letters to the City setting forth our agreement which each of
these conditions that were in the original staff report and in addition we'd
like to put into the record tonight, we haven' t had the opportunity to put this
in writing but will if requested, that we are in agreement with the 9 new
conditions recommended by staff and listed during staff's presentation this
evening. :7e also had some questions about a few details in those conditions
including the ones that Councilman Johnson mentioned but it was our feeling that
the conditions were close enough, that we understood the intent and we can work
with the City and with those conditions. I'd like to continue for a few moments
and address some additional issues that we didn't talk about at the Planning
Commission which we did touch on in our April 7th letter to the Council members
but which I'd like to dwell on a little bit further this evening. They go to
the inaccurate statements that have come to our, attention about the Eckankar
'
church. Also to specifically address in a little more detail the issue of
surrounding property values. Finally to address the suggestion that the City
acquire the entire Eckankar property. A number of statements about Eckankar
' have come to our attention. Have been made in various public forums and
publications over the past month. We'd like to address those which we feel are
relevent to the issues, land use issues before the Council tonight. First I'd
like to advise the Council that Prince is not a member of Eckankar. Has no ties
' to Eckankar and is not related in any way to Eckankar's purchase of it's
property or to the proposed church. Second, Eckankar as I said, is a tax exempt
religious organization. Has been since 1971 and has been a tax exempt church
' under the Internal Revenue Code since 1975. Eckankar's former international
headquarters building in Menlo Park was owned by Eckankar and was tax exempt as
is it's current international headquarters building in New Hope, Minnesota.
' Eckankar has been paying property taxes on it's land in Chanhassen to date
because the land has not yet been put to use for church purposes. It was our
advice to Eckankar that, in that circumstances, there was enough authority for
the proposition that they owed the taxes, we felt they should go ahead and pay
' them until they put the property to active use. Third, and I've mentioned this
a number of times already in the presentation but I do want it to be very clear
that their world headquarters are presently located in New Hope and that's where
' they will remain. The proposal is for an Eckankar church. Not to relocate
their headquarters onto this property. Onto the Chanhassen property. And as
I've stated a couple times tonight and we've set forth in our submission
materials as well, Eckankar will only use it's property in Chanhassen for
purposes allowed by the lawfully adopted zoning and other ordinances of the
City. Fourth, Eckankar will not host any large scale national or international
conventions, seminars or camp outs on it's Chanhassen property. Eckankar does
sponsor several seminars annually. These seminars do involve several thousand
participants but they are all held at large convention centers throughout the
world which offer adequate facilities to accommodate participants. In fact we
It
have submitted for the record letters which Eckankar has received from locations
OU where these seminars have been held. Including Connecticut and Idaho to name
the ones I can think right off the top of my head. It has never been the intent
of Eckankar to have such a gathering at the Eckankar church and as I just said,
we agreed to the 9 new conditions set forth by staff tonight which would
11 23
AM
-Ci't Counc Meeting - April 10, 1989 II
prohibit any such use of the property as we understand the conditions. Fifth is I
that the plans which I just showed do provide for a caretakers residence in the
walkout level of the church as allowed by the zoning ordinance but there would
not be any other residency within the church or on the property by any member. of
Eckankar. Eckankar is not a communal religion. Encourages it's member to live
throughout and within the community and there are no communal residences for
Eckankar members anywhere in the world and no intention on the part of Eckankar I
or any of it's members to do so in Chanhassen. I'd like to spend now a few
minutes on the issue of surrounding property values. There are a couple issues
tied up in this general discussion and I'll try to call those out as I go. As I
II
mentioned a little bit earlier, we have commissioned Robert Boblett and
Associates, including Al Leirness to conduct two studies addressed to the issue
of whether the Eckankar church will adversely affect surrounding property
values. Both of these studies concluded that it would not based on facts which
II
he gleaned from property records, property sales surrounding other Eckankar
properties as well as from his research regarding the surrounding residential
area to the Eckankar property in Chanhassen and the supply and demand for that
I
type of residential property. The City has also addressed this issue. Staff
has concluded on a couple of occasions that they saw no facts that would
adversely impact surrounding property values. That the City also commissioned a II study by Andrus Agency Inc. on this issue. This study is quite long but if you
bear with it you will glean from it that Mr. Andrus also found no evidence
following his extensive investigation that Eckankar or any Eckankar facility
anywhere in the country has ever caused or been in any way related with a single
II
penny's worth of devaluation in surrounding property values. In fact Mr. Andrus
found just what city staff has found. What Councilmember_ Johnson has found and
which everybody to our knowledge who has looked into Eckankar's properties in other parts of the country and other parts of the world, have found that their III
neighbors i.n all locations support them and find them to be a good neighbor. `-
Mr. Andrus goes on however from that point to say that there may be a slight and II in all probability short lived dimunition in property values as a result of
doubts and perceptions in the minds of the community. This statement is
supported in his report exclusively by opinion. His opinion and the opinion of
some of a number of anonymous real estate brokers that he apparently canvased.
II
We urge the Council to contrast those conclusions and the basis for them to Mr.
Leirness' study which looked at the facts. Looked at property values in areas
surrounding existing Eckankar facilities. Looked at the nature of the property II surrounding Eckankar in Chanhassen. The supply and demand for that type of
property and concluded that all things considered, there will be no adverse
impacts on surrounding property values. That's looking at it, comparing apples
to apples if you will but we think there's a more important issue here which is
II
the fact that Mr. Andrus' conclusion that any dimunition in value at all,
however slight or temporary, would be the result of doubts and perceptions about
Eckankar as a religion rather than the use of Eckankar's property for a church. II The issue before the City Council is whether the use of the Eckankar property
for a church meets the standards of the zoning ordinance without reference to
the religion which will occupy the church. The issue is land use, not religion.
The Council's obligation is to weigh the facts before it and I emphasize facts
rather than opinions from anonymous realtors and the others, people canvased in
Mr. Andrus' report. The facts as compiled by City staff and by it's own
consultant, Mr. Andrus, Councilmember Johnson and others is that Eckankar is a
I
good neighbor everywhere in the country and has never had a negative impact on
surrounding property values at any location. We're unaware of any fact contrary
to that. Finally, I'd like to spend a few minutes on the suggestion that the
24
II
MIK
' City Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
City acquire Eckankar's entire property. It's our understanding that this
suggestion has been made to the Council. That the Council is sponsoring a
Isurvey to determine whether there's public support for purchasing Eckankar's
property for school, community center and park uses. We want to state most -
emphatically at the outset of this discussion, as we did in our March 10th
' letter to the City Manager, that the property is not for sale. Eckankar has
invested substantial amounts of time and money in preparing and planning for
i.t's church. Has paid property taxes for several years and has paid substantial
amounts in special assessments and will not abandon it's effort to build it's
church on this property under any circumstances. We also see no circumstances
under which the City could justify an attempt to condemn the property. The City
has evaluated i.t's park needs on a number of occasions over the years and no
' plan that we're aware of, including the City's duly adopted Comprehensive Plan,
park plan, has ever identified a need for parkland in addition to the 40 acres
which were obtained by the City. Were originally part of the parcel that is now
' the Eckankar property several years ago let alone the need for 174 additional
acres. The suggestion that Eckankar's property could be condemned and rezoned
for a higher use and then resold or developed by the City at a profit is far
' beyond the limitations of the City's eminent domain authority. Furthermore,
it's our understanding that even if the City did have the right, the ability to
condemn the property, it does not have the funds to do so. The cost of such an
acquisition would be substantially in excess of 5 million dollars. Again, it's
' our understanding, the City currently doesn't have the debt capacity to bond for
•
this amount even if the citizens of Chanhassen would authorize it. ..increases
in residential property values which were included in the survey questionaire
that went to, as I understand it, to all Eckankar residences but we urge you
I also to consider the increase which such a proposal or bonding to fund the debt
to acquire the property would have on commercial and industrial taxes. It's our
analysis from information that we have available, that virtually every
' coneuercial and industrial property would incur several thousand dollars a year
in increased taxes to fund such a bond issue and many would incur many thousands
of dollars in increased property taxes. Of course, if the debt capacity were
' filled up to acquire the property, it would leave the City without the ability
to generate any additional funds to improve it. To build a community center.
To build a trail system or for that matter to do anything else. So we see, we
' think it is very difficult to see how a scenario like this which would raise
residential as well as commercial and industrial taxes, and limit the City's
ability to provide additional services as opposed to land for it's residence,
would be in the best interest of the community. As I mentioned, Eckankar has
' been paying property taxes and has paid and is continuing to pay special
assessments for trunk water and sanitary sewer projects. The City has received
and will continue to receive over roughly a 15 year period beginning with
' Eckankar's acquisition of the property, something in excess of $500,000.00 in
taxes and special assessment payments from Eckankar. Acqui.siti_on of the
property on the other hand will cost the City over a 15 year period well in
excess of 9 million dollars. Probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 9 to 15
' million dollars in acquisition costs, principle and interest payments,
management and maintenance expenses, etc. to say nothing of loss economic
benefit to the community as a whole as a result of the construction of the
church and the fact that that property will, with the church constructed, be
generating activity and spending in the city. We have prepared a diagram that
illustrates that. Perhaps we can get it out in a minute if there are questions.
I'll conclude now just by saying that the Chanhassen zoning ordinance does
' define church. Makes churches as conditional use in residential zoning
1 25
�C1 y Counc L Meeting - '.pr_il 10 158` ,
districts and set forth standards for the issuance of conditional use permits.
The Eckankar_ church falls within the definition of church. Meets all the
standards for the issuance of a conditional use permit. These facts are
conclusively shown in the materials which we've submitted as well as the staff
reports and other analyses that have been performed and submitted for the
record. The church will be an attractive, high quality addition to it's
neighbor and to the City. We request that the City Council approve the
Conditional Use Permit without any further delay. We believe the City Council
has all the information needed to make a land use decision which is the issue
before the Council. Further delays will cause Eckankar damages, particularly if
the 1989 construction season is lost. The proposal has been presented and
process by Eckankar with the intent of being under construction and completed in
1989 in order to serve their members. So we urge you to consider the issue and
to decide it and to approve the conditional use permit this evening. With that,
I'll conclude. I'm available of course to answer questions as are all members
of the development team and the two consultants that we have retained. All of
whom are here to answer whatever questions the Council or the public may have.
We appreciate your time.
Mayor Chmi.el: Is there anyone else wishing to address this proposal? If not,
those who wish to present their sides of their proposals would please come up
and indicate their names and addresses and who they also represent.
Councilman Johnson: Mr. Mayor, I think with the vi.si.ti.ng...to hear a short few '
words from each member of the Council as to where they sit on it at this point
so they know where we're coming from. So they can be more precise in their
presentation. ,
Mayor. Crmi.el: I would just as soon proceed with the position that I had
indicated and we'll indicate that afterwards.
Tom Hickey: Honorable Mayor, members of the Council and fellow citizens. _
name is Tom Hickey and I reside at 6990 Utica Lane. I've been a member of this
community for 17 years. For the past 30 years I have been in the commercial
real estate business and I've seen this community grow from a sleepy hollow to
it's present status. As a member of the Concerned Citizens for Chanhassen and
also one of their workers, they've asked me to be their spokesman this evening.
The Concerned Citizens for the Future of Chanhassen was formed as a result of
the March 1st Planning Commission recommendation for the citizens of Chanhassen
to improve communications between the citizens and the City. Our only concern
is the gross misuse of the 174 acres of prime lakeside land in the heart of our
community. We also need to determine if this concern was shared by other
members of our community. In order to determine if there was support for our
views of this issue, we held informal meetings with neighbors. Met with the
local city officials. Performed phone surveys. Mailed out petitions.
Conducted door to door petitioning and ran ads in the local paper. As a result
of these efforts, 2,576 citizens of Chanhassen signed our petition in favor of
supporting the City acqui.r_ing the 174 acres of tax exempt Eckankar property for
public use. At this time Mr. Mayor we would like to present to you and your
Council 2,576 signatures. At this time I would like you to bring the petition
forward. I would like to invite all of those in attendance here tonight who
support this petition to stand at this time. As concerned citizens for the
future of Chanhassen, we would like to lend our support and direction to the
City Council and to help you in making the tough decisions that lie ahead for
26 ,
Ns
' City Council .?aeti ng - April 10, 19S9
the fut:;re betterment of this community. Thank you.
II ' Dean Brown: '±y name is Dean Brown. I'm building chairman of the Family of
Christ Lutheran Church which was the last religious or_gani.zation that built a
church 'n this town. ;gnat I'm here to do is two things. First of all, as a
member of the building committee, that I would like to make sure that the
Council and the Planning Commission do the same thing to Eckankar as they did to
us and that is make sure they comply with every ordinance that we had to comply
with. To give you a background, we sat with the city in January of 1988 to
'
begin the process of a building permit and we actually received that building
permit in June of 1988 so consequently it took us 6 months to get a building
permit and I hope that that same consideration is given to Eckankar. Second of
all, we would like to note that due to all of the ordinances for our church, we
had an additional $150,000.00 added to our program which originally only
$400,000.00 so the percentage is quite substantial. So I want to make sure that
as a council, that you consider the same thing for this religious organization
' as you did for us. As I looked at his slides, I did not see a secondary access
for fire which for us was an additional $8,000.00. We had originally asked that
the City Council and City Planning Commission for a balcony and we were required
to put in an elevator due to the State requirements for handicap access to all
areas. I did not see that in this particular church. Currently our lot is
about 4 acres. e are developing on 2 acres of that lot right now and to meet
the minimum r_equi.rements of the landscaping requirements for the City of
Chanhassen, we're spending $56,000.00 and we hope that that same consideration
and requirements are also given to Eckankar for their 174 acres. We had to
provide one parking space for every 2 to 2 1/2 people in our congregation.
III hope that those same requirements are imposed upon Eckankar. We had to pave
and also curb our entire parking lot and have been warned we will never be able
to park on the street so we hope those same considerations are also given to
'
Eckankar. For your information, paving and curbing our parking lot for 93
spaces was an additional cost of almost $66,000.00. We had to sprinkle our
building. We hope that same consideration is also done for Eckankar. Last, I
U would like to appeal to Eckankar in terms of as a resident of the nearby area. I
think it's important to realize that you're a neighbor here and that the
neighbors behind you are giving you a statement in terms of what they think of
your organization. When we built our religious organization, our concern was
' that we were expecting to get from the immediate neighborhood and I hope that as
a Council, that you also consider that. What is good for the City of
Chanhassen? Is Eckankar going to provide for the city residents or is it going
' to provide for someone else?
Mayor_ Chmiel: Dean, for the record, could we have your address please?
' Dean Brown: 18737 Clearview Drive, Minnetonka.
Alan Putnam: My name is Alan Putnam. I live at 6285 Chaska Road. I have two
' things. One is since the church will require very little, a small percentage of
the land that is there, one alternative might be to allow the church to be built
and use approximately 20 acres and perhaps the city buy the rest of the land
from them. Another thought that I wanted to give is that most of the churches
that have been built in the community have been churches that have been built to
meet the needs of the residents of Chanhassen and I guess I'd like to know, how
many members of the Eckankar organization live in Chanhassen now?
11 27
City Council Meeting - April 13, 1989
David Schupe: My name is David Schupe. I'm a fellow Minnesotan. I live at 11
1353 Stowe ,Avenue in Arden Hills. Next month on this day I will be flying to ;
Warsaw, Poland and I'll be a participant in the Second International Conference
on ways to promote the 1981 United Nations Declaration on the elimination of all
intolerance of intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief and it is in
that capacity that I'm here to observe these proceedings and your decision.
Walter Whitehill: Good evening. I'm Walter Whitehill. I reside at 7250
Hazeltine Blvd.. I noticed how artfully the representative speaking for
Eckankar told the Council how it must conduct it's business. They told the
Council what it could and what it could not consider. As a member of this
community I object to that quite strongly and I would think that the Council
would too. They told us that the religious belief and teaching were of no
importance. That they could not be considered and to the Council and to my
friends here, I believe that this is wrong. Now I want to ask whichever
representative for Eckankar would choose to answer, who is the head of the
Eckankar church? Is it a mortal or is it the same god that's recognized and
worshipped by the Christian Judeo community of the world? Is there an answer?
Come gentlemen, let's not be so bashful. I did address it to you. You did say
you were here to answer questions did you not? From the community, that was
part of your opening statement.
Peter Beck could not be heard on the audio tape.
Walter Whitehill: No way. He said that he was here to answer questions from
the community. I am representing at least two from the community and I'm asking
that question now. I
Peter Beck: Am I to understand that the Council is directing that question?
Walter Whitehill: No sir, I am directing it to you. You requested questions '
from the community. Do you not have the answer?
:Mayor Chmiel: So we don't basically get into a debate. If you could just 1
proceed with the balance of what you have to say, I'd appreciate it.
Walter Whitehill: Mr. Mayor, I am complying with the opening statement of this
representative and I'm asking for an answer to my question. I don't want to
take up any more time. Time is being taken up here.
Mayor_ Chmiel: We could address that question as we proceed and maybe Mr. Beck '
could.. .
Walter Whitehill: Then the Council is changing the rules of the deck by saying '
that you will not allow this question to be answered at this time?
Mayor Chmiel: I guess that's basically what I'm saying, yes.
Walter Whitehill: Does the entire Council side with the Mayor on this?
Councilman Johnson: Mr. Mayor, I do not believe the lawyers for Eckankar can '
speak on the religious beliefs of Eckankar_. I don't know if the religious
leaders of Eckankar are here due to the treatment they were given 5 years ago
when they were here and did try to answer these questions.
28
Mk
City Council Meeting - ',pri l 10, 1989
---
Walter Whitehill: That's a sad state of affairs.
Councilman Johnson: Now I can tell you what my research has shown. I'm
not a
member_ of Eckankar. but I can tell you what all reading various books and talking
' to various people that the answer to your question, if you'd like it from
somebody who's not a member of Eckankar Church. They believe in one god. They
believe there is only one god.
' Walter Whitehill: That god being whom?
Councilman Johnson: If there's only one, it's the same one that you and
I believe in.
Walter Whitehill: No way. That's not what I understand and that's why I
' addressed the question. I'm going to close in this way. I believe that the
religious aspect of this is the most important issue before the Council and
before the community.
' Councilman Johnson: Can you give me the basis that you do not believe that the
god that Eckankar believes in is the same god you believe i.n?
Walter Whitehill: Well I didn't ask the Council you see. I asked
representatives of Eckankar.
' Councilman Johnson: Ah, but you won't answer the question either.
Walter Whitehill: Certainly I will. The books that I have read and the people
that I have talked to are contrary to what you state.
Mayor Chmiel: Let me redirect something here if I can. I would like to ask Mr.
Beck if he would like to address that. If he does not, he does not have to
answer.
Peter Beck: Mr. Mayor, we are here as representatives of Eckankar to answer any
questions that the Council might have with respect to the issues before it. The
' land use issues. We are not here to debate or defend Eckankar as a religion.
Walter Whitehill: I'll have to let that answer suffice for now. So I leave
' appealing to the Council that by god it's time to stand up on your own hind legs
and declare where you stand from a religious standpoint. No way should this
country, down to the individual communities, be so weaken that we are afraid to
' stand up and say no to anyone who will propose an organization that has a belief
that is counter to the religious background that this country was founded upon
and that which we believe in. Thank you.
' Matthew Hoffman: My name is Matthew Hoffman. I reside at 931 Saddlebrook Trail
in Chanhassen. I've been a resident here for approximately a month and a half.
I have a direct view out my patio door looking right up the driveway of the
r
proposed Eckankar site. I do know a little bit about plant material. I have a
couple of questions regarding the site plan. Would you be willing to answer
those?
' Mayor Chmiel: Would you address that particular issue?
1 29
City Council Mooting - April 10, 1989
r
Matthew Hoffman: Yes I would. I guess first off, I would like to know on your
CAD dr_awin7s. Are they projected, your plant material size to me looks like it
is mature height.
Peter. Beck: Mt. Chairman, the architects advise me that the landscaping as '
shown on the CAD drawings was at time of planting but they also showed existing
vegetation which will not be disturbed.
Matthew Hoffman: I thought he said 5 years.
Peter Beck: I said 5 years. I was wrong. 5 years is kind of an industry
standard. In this case, they wanted to show time of planting.
Matthew Hoffman: And I'm to understand that most of the views are an average of
50 to 60 feet tall on the building from the east? '
Peter Beck: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, the height from the front door
to the top is 50 feet. Okay, that's not the way they define it in the zoning
ordinance but that's the way you and I call 50 feet. Then from the back, it
would be roughly 65 feet. Actually it's closer to 60 feet. But views depend on
where you are in relationship to grades. In many instances, intervening grades
will screen a portion or substantial portions of the church.
Matthew Hoffman: I guess with your site plan there must be a planting list of
some kind. I'd like to make the Council aware I guess to take a close look at
that from planting size. It takes a long time to get trees to mature size and I
just want the Council to be aware of this. I know from a fact that I have a
view that is not going to shield, no matter how many trees they plant, it's not
going to shield a 60 foot tall copper or whatever plated roof from my view and
my neighborhood's view no matter what kind of trees you plant. And if you're
planning on moving large caliper trees into that area, I hope you have a big
budget and coincidentally, what would be the landscape budget for a job of this
magnitude?
Peter Beck: There is a detailed landscape plan that has been submitted and
reviewed by the City and it's consistency with City requirements has been
documented. You're quite right, portions of the church will be visible from
surrounding properties and I have no reason to believe yours wouldn't be one.
The plantings will be at an average of 2 1/2 caliper inches and I do not know
whether or not a budget for the landscaping has been arrived at. If it has, I
don't know what it is.
Matthew Hoffman: For the Council's information, a 2 1/2 inch caliper ash tree,
which is a standard shade tree planted in a lot of plantings these days,
approximately 20 to 25 feet tall maximum at 2 1/2 inches. I guess that's all.
If they don't have a landscape budget, I wish them luck. It's going to cost
them a pile of money.
Janet Weaver_ : My name is Janet Weaver. . I'm a future homeowner in Chanhassen. '
My current address is 4309 West 113th Street in Bloomington, Minnesota. Since
Councilman Jay Johnson made statements as to the one true god, I felt it was my
obligation to address his statement for the record. And to address that
comment, on the one same god, I'm compelled to note for the record that after an
30 1
III City Couw;ci 1 `.eeti ng - ',pril 10, 1989
ext`nsIve doctrinal discussion with an Eckankar member this past week, our
doctrinal differences are vastly different and Eckankar doctrinally stands,
their doctrinal stands do not align with or stand in harmony with the god I
serve, namely the god of the Bible. Jehovah God and his expression of himself
in Jesus Christ.
Susan Johnsrud: My name is Susan Johnsrud. I live at 7061 Shawnee Lane in
Greenwood Shores. I'd like to add to the previous speaker's statement on a book
entitled Eckankar from the Spiritual Conterfeits Project in Berkley, California.
It states the Bible, the entire structure of it's moral teaching and Jesus
Christ himself are identified with the evil power of the cosmos. In a word,
with the devil. If this is not a put down of another religion, then it is hard
to imagine what is or could be. In actual fact, Eckankar's commonly made claim
that we do not put down any other religion. It is not so much false as it is
incomplete. It should really read, we do not put down any other religion to
Pit's face. I would also like to read from this book, something written by Paul
Twitchell himself in 1967. There is too much dishonesty among those who try to
get tax shelters because they claim to be religious groups. God didn't
establish non-taxable foundations so why should I try to get under such claims.
If Eck can not take care of itself, then it can be of little value to anyone
else. It also states that Eckankar has been given tax exemption from Federal
Income Tax. It states the identification number and the Chairman of the Board
of Directors, W. Elmo DeWitt and this is dated 1973. So it is definitely a
conflict of interest hare between Paul Twitchell's teachings. My husband and I
and our 3 boys moved here last August and little did we know what we were
getting into. We purchased the original Kerber farm in Greenwood Shores. I
would like to know if Eckankar would eventually have a negative impact on
pr_o�rty values, who would be responsible for_ the purchase of our home if we
decide to sell it? We had planned on spending the rest of our lives in
Chanhassen and at this point, we do not feel that we know if we are going to
stay. Thank you.
Doug Cook: My name is Doug Cook and I live at 290 Trappers Pass. I don't have
a prepared statement but I'm absolutely amazed at what I'm hearing here.
There's a litness test on moving into Chanhassen I understand. You must be
Christian. That's a sad status of affairs. Back in the 30's in Germany, they
had a crew they got together and if you were Jewish, you didn't have a long life
span. There were 6 million people that were killed because of religious
intolerance. That's what I've been hearing here. Think about the discussions
that have been going on. I'm here because I'm upset about the increased taxes.
I'm here because I can not see the value of buying property for 5 million, if
we're lucky and then we have to develop that property which will cost additional
money. We have to pay the note. I don' t know where the money's going to come
from but the religious intolerance thing, that's a sad state of affairs for
everybody here in Chanhassen. Listen to what has been said. You've had an
individual stand up here and demand of another individual in this room what his
I/ religious beliefs are. That is nobody's business but the individual person. We
took a pledge of allegiance when this thing started. One nation under God. It
I/1 didn't say your god or your god. Didn't it say one nation under God,
indivisible, with liberty. Liberty means the freedom to practice religion. And
justice for all. If these people after complying with all of the requirements
of staff, are not awarded or given the ability to build their church, there is
something inherently wrong with Chanhassen and some 170 acres of land if they
yet it, will not solve that problem.
1 31
MR
, 4
City Council Meeting - April 10, 1909
1
Leneda Rabe: Hello. My name is Leneda Rahe and I reside at 1021 Carver Beach
Road in Chanhassen. I was wondering with the results of the petitions, would it
be possible for a referendum to be taken to see how many people are in support
of the City acquir_i.ng the property for public use? I'd like to know, just
because I don't understand what would prompt a referendum and how you go about
that. Could someone from the Council or the Mayor?
Don Ashworth: The City Council has the ability to establish a referendum. It's
.:.y understanding that the City Council, we have again sent out the survey and
it's my understanding that the Council wants to look at the results of that
survey before making any determination as to whether or not to conduct a
referendum.
Leneda Rahe: Okay, thank you.
Mary Lang: Good evening. My name is Mary Lang and I live at 1000 Butte Court
right across the street from the proposed building site. Up until a few minutes
ago, until that last gentleman spoke, I was very much ashamed that we had chosen
to live in Chanhassen. I came because I had one of my distant cousins had a
very moor_ experience with the Eckankar religion so I was very skeptical when I
read in the paper of their proposed building of a church. I have a 5 year old
daughter who's going to be waiting out for the bus right out on CR 17 and I can
honestly say I'm going to go home tonight a lot more worried about the prejudice
of the general public than I am what I have heard about the Eckankar church. So
I hope all those people with young children who spoke up tonight and applauded ,
the prejudice can go home and take a close, hard look at themselves. Thank you. i1
Sandy Eastling: My name is Sandy Eastling. I reside at 7285 Pontiac Circle.
When I came it was not my intention to speak whatsoever. However, I feel that
it is important that I state that even though some of us may have our own
personal oeliefs regarding the religious stature of Eckankar, I personally do
believe in personal, religious freedom. However, I feel that it is important for
us to look at some of the elements that have been listed and even though one
person may get up and speak, it does not necessarily mean that while some of us
are opposed to the use of the land as outlined by Eckankar, we may not
necessarily advocate religious intolerance. I personally don't feel that that
is the general consensus of the people who at one time did stand up in support
of other use of the land. I would encourage the City Council to take into
perspective that when one person gets up here and speaks, they do speak for one.
They may speak for more than one. I also agree that we should not be intolerant
of religion. However, we must look at what is the best use of the land for
Chanhassen. Will Eckankar serve the people of Chanhassen? Are there members
within Chanhassen who have requested that this church be located here? Or is
this the will of a church who does not necessarily have a community interest
coming in. Thank you.
Ken Walter: My name is Ken Walter_ . I reside at 341 Deerfoot Trail. I do not 11
know a lot about the Eckankar religion. My question primarily is the tax
concerns and I guess basically my question would be, if we do do this purchase
option, what solution can be presented in the future to prevent the same thing
from happening again? Chanhassen only has so much money to spend and the card
that came out and the information that I read about at the time was mentioning 3
1/2 to 5 million dollars. You're looking at a 9 million to 15 million dollar
investment, if those numbers are right. I don't know what the exact dollars
32
re-
City Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
III
are. My concern is where is
My this money going to come from? What other uses or
III I- betterm`n for the next 14 to 15 years could this money be put forward to? It's
my money. It's all of our taxpayer's money and that's my concern. Thank you.
Doris Hanson: My name is Doris Hanson. I live at 6210 Cypress Drive. My main
concern is, what about all that lakeshore property? I understand from the
slides the church was not going to have a view of the lake so what's going to
happen to all this lakeshore? I feel that our lakes are so precious to us and
should be protected. I live around Lake Minnewashta and I moved there primarily
for the use of the lake and I really worry about protecting our lakeshores.
Also, what about the use of the highways? Right now TH 5 is so underdeveloped
and there's no money appropriated at this time so what about all the heavy
traffic that's going to be coming in? Thank you.
Councilman Johnson: I think because of what she asked there, there's a little
misconception there. The City owns parkland all the way around the lakeshore so
between the Eckankar property and the lake is parkland owned by the City. So
they do not have any lakeshore property whatsoever. I'm not sure about the
highway question.
Mayor Chmiel: Highway 5 is in the process of hopefully gettin g started sometime
this year and will be completed by 1991. That will be a four lane highway.
Mary Johnson: I'm Mary Johnson. I reside at 1044 Pontiac Lane in Chanhassen
and I was interested in the slides that you show but I'd like to know what it
would look like in the wintertime since we in Minnesota have winter most of the
year. Also, I am a Christian but even if my church wanted 174 acres of tax
exempt land, I would be against that and I don't know why you need 174 acres of
tax exempt land and what the future is for that land. Your church site takes a
small portion of that land. What is the future?
Robin Nordby: My name is Robin Nordby and I live at 6801 Redwing Lane in
Chanhassen. I c■ould like to address the mailing that the Council sent out last
week, the little green card with the estimation of what you pay for taxes now
and what the proposed increase would be if referendum. The estimated increases
in taxes to acquire the land, do they contemplate new homes? Chanhassen is
growing enormously and do they contemplate the increase in revenue that this
city is going to have for 1989 and forward? The increase that was shown, was
that annual? That was an annual increase and I think at the $100,000.00 level,
it was about $103.00 annually which you split that in 12 months and that's a 12
month figure. Because of the overcrowding of this school, I was in the spring
program and it was ridiculous. All the parents could not get into the building.
I/ What are the proposed or the plans of the City Council for the proposed
facilities for the school, for the community center and what other sites have
you thought of for these facilities and what is going to be the actual
difference in tax dollars, is my question? How much will the other sites
I/ increase our taxes? We know this is going to increase. We know that taxes are
going to be increased no matter where the facility is. The appraisals of the
properties, I just have one comment on that. About the poll given in the St.
Paul Pioneer Press. There was an overwhelming response that people would not
purchase land next to an organization such as this and that's I think a big
concern. Thank you.
I
33
City Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
Mark Johnson: My name is Mark Johnson. I live at 1010 Butte Court, Chanhassen.
I guess I'm here as a real confused citizen to begin with. There's been a lot
of misinformation that's been thrown around this thing it seems for the last
month, two months. I guess I'm confused at some of the things I've heard from
the people of our community. Some of the religious beliefs and the things that
go on there. But I'm really confused at, if we have a church that's moving into
our community, why do we have 14 blue suits sitting here instead of 1 individual
from their congregation that can give us some information just basically on who
they are. I would feel a lot better as a citizen if, I don't care if it's a
Lutheran church. If it's a Jewish church. Whoever, if they're open enough to
come and sit and talk to me and say well this is what our plans are instead of
bringing the 5th Fleet in here and trying to get everything done that way.
Dawn Opitz: My name is Dawn Opitz and I live at 870 Nez Perce Court. I guess
just to be really honest, I wasn't really involved in what was going on in the
community before this and this, if anything else, it's just helped me to be
aware of what goes on and it has caused me to be concerned and take part. But
as the woman who spoke before said, when I really started being interested in
this was when I went to the first and second grade,spr_i.ng concert here at
Chanhassen and she's absolutely right. That was for first and second graders
and not even all the parents could fit into the auditorium to watch your
children. I also have a fourth grader who's in a class that has well over 30
children and this is the main concern to me. My concern is school and I'd love
for my kids to be in school around here, to stay around here. I'm with the
other woman I guess. I'd like to know what are my other options then as far as
my children's schooling goes because I just don't think that it's fair to the
kids or the children. What we have right now. It may be selfish on my part to
obtain Eckankar's land, but this is for best interest of the most people in
Chanhassen and that's when I started being concerned.
Boobie Kussard: My name is Bobbie Kussard. I live at 7604 South Shore Drive.
Eckankar isn' t in the community yet. Their church isn't here. It will seat 800
people so I would assume, I would like to be near my church so they will start
moving into our community. I don't have a problem with that but back to the
school issue, I was at the program. There wasn't room for the parents we have.
We are growing leaps and bounds. Let them go someplace else. Let's take care
of us for now.
Councilman Boyt: I'd like to respond to that situation. Before you speak,
those of you who are interested in the school issue, I hope you recognize the
City Council doesn't have impact on the school district. If you would take your
concerns to the school district, you'd find that they have a method of funding
their schools that says let's wait until the doors break out and then we'll put
a referendum in front of the people and see if they pass it. I suggest that if
you think these schools are crowded, you let the school district know that and
maybe you'll get some action. They plan to build another elementary school but
they're still busing kids from Chaska into this elementary school. I think you
should let them know if you're concerned about that.
Jo Ann Nelson: My name is Jo Ann Nelson and I reside at 7290 Catcus Curve. My
view is facing right that line. I supposed you couldn' t get any closer as a
homeowner. I don't know much about the religious organization so I can't judge
them in any way and I have no problem with that. I'm concerned about the land
use. I'm concerned about the 800 people or however many and how many days out
34
.2 1
� tv Co:: ci M=!etinq ,spr; 1 13, 1989
of the _ Kok do they worship. I'd like to find that out. Is there anybody who
could chs°wer that? jre you going to coming every day out of the week or on
Sunday?
Peter. Beck: The church will of course be ooen every day of the week and there
will be „:'J employees working there during the day and there will be small
meetings in the evenings to accommodate uo to 30 or 40 participants and then the
main meetings would be on Sundays. That is the scenario that was analyzed in
the Environment Impact Statement in terms of impacts on traffic and that sort of
thing.
Joan Soaldin : My name is Joan Spalding and I live at 7520 Chippewa Trail, just
right behind here in Chanhassen. I would just like to pose the same question to
them as you did to the ampak people and since they've got all that extra land,
if they'd want to build some softball fields and stuff like that and take that
into consideration.
Councilman Johnson: I actually drew some in on my diagrams.
Peter Beck: We have advised the Council on a couple of occasions when inquiries
have been made about the availability of land for a community center and then
for a possible community center and middle school that Eckankar would make land
available, reasonable amounts of land available for those types of uses at a
fair and reasonable cost and I assume, however we did suggest that all those
discussions cease until the issue of the church was resolved and I suggest that
- we treat this suggestion in the same manner. I'm sure that Eckankar would be
Iopen to looking at the site plan but perhaps it's something that should await
resolution of the fundamental issues.
Linda Kullman: My name is Linda Kullman and I live at 1015 Pontiac Court. I've
been sitting around just like everybody else here listening to what's been said
on both sides. I have a real concern. my property is very close to the
property that I'll be looking at the church. Obviously I have some concerns
about that but the biggest concern that I have is that I don't understand why we
have to wait to talk about future. What I'm concerned about is not the church.
How it's going to affect our property taxes. How it's going to affect the whole
environment and for someone to say, well we'll talk about that later, I really
think it's much better for you and for the community to sit down and really talk
this out first rather than hold back. I just have a personal thing where I'm
afraid that you're holding something back and once you have control over that
land, I'm not going to have anything to say about it.
Councilman Johnson: Could we get Peter to address his reasoning for not
discussing the future?
Peter Beck: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, the intent of the application
and all the materials that have been sulani.tted in support of it is to set forth
a very narrow issue for the City Council to consider and to decide. As the
Council may know, in 1985 with the concept plan for the adiii.nstrative campus
showed in concept potential residential development to the north of the campus
and roughly the northern 1/3 of the Eckankar property and potential future
commercial development on roughly the southern 1/3 of the property because at
that time portions of the southern 1/3 were already designated, if not zoned for
commercial use and the City requested in connection with that rezoning and
I 35
En
City Council Mooting - April 18, 1989
platting proceeding, that concept plans for the north and south be provided. It
was our opinion that in connection with this conditional use permit procedure,
getting into those issues would unnecessarily and unduly complicate the single
issue before the Council which is a conditional use permit for the church. So
what you have before you is an application for a conditional use permit on what
is now one single parcel of property and that's what you should be evaluating.
We just don't believe that clouding the issue with discussions about prices for
land for schools or community centers or whatever is going to the issues before
you. That's why we've suggested that those discussions await resolution of the
issue on the conditional use permit. That's why we haven't shown any conceptual
plans or other thoughts for other parts of the property. And also, quite
frankly, Eckankar has not devoted any internal time towards a lot of thought
about the rest of the property. They are focused on this church project. They
put a lot of energy, a lot of time, a lot of money into it and that's where
they're focusing their efforts and I guess that's where we ask the Council to
direct their attention.
Dan Mahady: My name is Dan Mahady. I live at 1020 Butte Court. I'd just like
to say that if there's going to be 174 acres of tax exempt land, I think it best
be served by the whole community and not a private tax-exempt organization
which, from what I'm hearing so far, is offering nothing back to the community.
Councilman Johnson: Mr. Mayor, can I ask Peter a question on that? Peter, as
you understand the zoning, assessment tax rules, it can only be tax exempt if
it's used for church purposes. Are you aware of any other places where a large,
only a small portion of this property is actually going to be used for church
purposes. Are you aware whether the remainder of the property, whether our tax
assessor can determine if the remainder of the property is or is not tax exempt?
I would believe from my layman understanding of tax law, which I don't think
anybody really understands tax laws, that you're not going to utilize the whole
174 acres so the whole 174 should not be tax exempt. Only that portion utilized
for actual active church purposes.
Peter Beck: Mr. Mayor, Councilmember Johnson, I think I would ask that the bulk
of that question be directed to the City Attorney for a number of reasons but it
is, if the church is constructed on this property, Eckankar will apply to Carver.
County for tax exemption. It's a single tax parcel so that will be the way the
application will go in. It will be the Carver County Assessor's responsibility
to determine whether all or a portion of it will be tax exempt. Quite frankly,
I don't know, I have not researched that issue for Eckankar. If I had of
course, it probably wouldn't be something that I would, the results of the
research probably woulnd't be something that I would set forth in a public
meeting. I am aware though, from representing some other clients, that there is
some case law where a church owned separate parcels of property, separate tax
parcels, separate legally described parcels, that tax exemption on parcels that
were adjacent to the, I can't remember right now whether they're adjacent or in
close proximity to their parcel they were using, was denied on the grounds that
it wasn't used for church purposes. Whether that rule of law would apply in
this situation with a single tax parcel, I do not know. I think again, those
are issues that will be resolved by the Carver County Assessor and also perhaps
maybe the City Attorney is more up to date on that issue and could give you a
more definitive answer.
36 1
>' Cauuail Yeet nq - April 10, X39
Counci.l_n_,n Johnson: Actually he gave me about the some answer. I was honing had pore information. g
Gloria Cox: Mayor, counciloeople, my name is Gloria Cox. I reside at 6990
Shawnee Lane in Chanhassen. I've been hare since 1977 with my husband and my
Eam]ly. First of all, I'd like to comment on the fact that here in Chanhassen
everyone who turned out for the meeting tonight should be complimented for the
time and the effort that they have put into this very important meeting. After
all, we' re not getting paid but they are. It sounds like they've done a very,
very good job. You should be commended but on the other hand, our dream is
alive and well. Most of the people that I have talked to here in Chanhassen are
very involved in their community and yes, number 1 priority to the people I've
talked to is religious rights. So it's not the religious right issue as much as
it is that this 174 acres of land was supposed to be development of housings for
family, for young children to grow up in a good, healthy environment. Also, it
would mean tax paying. Educational opportunities for our young people and if
we, right now, and I don't know. . .the heavens and earth of this world. Thank
you.
I William Olson: My name is William Olson and I reside at 1060 View Court. My
question to the Council is, due to the given traffic that will be added to
CR 17, will the speed laws be the same or will that be changed or is that taken
under advisement?
Jim Chaffee: As far as I know the speed laws will stay the same. Enforcement,
as you all know, is attempting to be picked up right now by the Carver County
Sheriff's Department. I think they're doing a pretty good job of it. The speed
limit will, to my knowledge, stay the same.
I William Olson: Given to the amount of traffic that is going to be taken along
that road, being at 1060 View Court, my driveway is no more than 200 feet off of
CR 17. I do have an 8 year old son. I do worry very much about the added
traffic that will be along that road and along for our community. I hope it's
taken into advisement more than it is.
Councilman Johnson: Jim, that also is a county road, the County has
jurisdiction on the speed limits? We' re only advisory towards them?
Jim Chaffee: That is correct.
Bill Eggert: My name is Bill Eggert and I reside at 800 Preakness Lane. I'm
somewhat confused and I just have one question to direct towards the Eckankar
representatives. Earlier it was stated that if the construction of the church
was not approved, that the acqui.si.tion of this land would be very costly.
Somewhere in the area of 9 to perhaps 15 million dollars. Then later I heard
that if it was approved, that there would be a fair and reasonable cost for
acquiring some of the r_ mai.ni.ng property. My question probably leans towards,
is the fair and equitable purchase for the remaining property contingent upon
the approval of construction of the church?
Peter Beck: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, what we have said is that we
suggest that entire issue be deferred until the issue before the Council is
resolved. We haven't said anything- about contingencies. We just think that is
' an issue in terms of acquisi.ti.on and costs that should be considered after the
' 37
s - -
City Council Meeting - '»ri i ._:I, 1 9`.0
current issue is resolved.
Bill Eggert: My statement would be that if 9 to 15 million dollars represents a
fair and equitable purchase, if the church is not approved, if the church were
approved and we were to acquire say half of the remaining property, would we be
looking at a cost of anywhere from 4 1/2 million to 7 1/2 million and would the
residents in Chanhassen be willing to pay that price to acquire that land? I
think that the citizens might want to be heard on that.
Linda Kullman: I have one question, and maybe you can kind of clarify something
for me. Do I understand this correctly? Right now that land, the City of
Chanhassen now that it's owned by this company or this church, we will not as a
city ever get any kind of tax from that land period from now until doomsday? Am
I understanding this correctly?
Mayor Chmi.el: As you just mentioned, that's a portion of it but it's not been
decided until the Carver County reviews that status of that land and determines
whether or not all of that 174 acres will be tax free or will not be tax free.
Linda Kullman: Do we have to make a decision or does the decision have to be I
made before that decision by Carver County is made?
Councilman Johnson: I would say that if for some reason we turned down the
church, then the land would stay on the tax rolls as it is now and has been ever
since they owned it. If the church is approved, then it goes to Carver County
to determine the change of it's status. Is that a more clear answer?
Linda Kullman: Yes it is. I just want to make sure that I understand exactly
ctly
what our options are as a community and if we do have any options.
Councilman Johnson: I think we will be making some suggestions to Carver County
\ssessor's Office on what we would like to see him do with i.t.
Linda Kullman: Is there a way that as a community we can find out whether or
not we have to make a decision or if the decision has to be made before the
Carver County Assessment? To me that's real important because if we just turn
over that whole entire parcel of land now, we are never going to get any kind of
tax revenue off of that ever.
Don Ashworth: I did talk to Jean Shivley. She's the Assistant County Attorney.
It's their office's responsibility to settle any type of tax related issues so
if there's any court proceedings, it will go back through their office. After
the number of articles that had appeared in the newspaper, Jean had called me to
try to correct those statements and to tell me that in her opinion that she
would do everything within her power to insure that that full 174 acres did not
go tax exempt and that only the acreage associated with the church would receive
that tax exempt status. Again, that is Jean's position. The only cautionary
that I would make is that issues like that are resolved in tax court so even
though Jean can present that position, we are not assured until the issue goes
through a tax court whether her position would be sustained or not. I would
also make the position that Eckankar would fight that position. I'm not sure
that that's the case either.
Linda Kullman: I'm sure it would be. Right? I mean let's just say how it is.
38 1
City Council \!eeti ng - April ,), 1239
II Is 7ounci L,:an Johnson: The option of purchasing this land by the Ci ty would also
Bake it tax exempt forever.
Linda :Tullman: Right. However, there would be facilities on that land that
would benefit the community and I think that's what we're basically talking
about.
Councilman Johnson: 9 to 15 million dollars worth of benefit? We have to
decide that too.
Linda Kuliman: Right, but I think as a member of this community I would ask you
to allow us to have as many options available as possible. Not only right now
but down the road.
Wayne Skoblik: My name is Wayne Skoblik from 701 Bighorn Drive. Now I've
watched all you guys up here and Bill's come to my house when he was looking for
a vote and said vote for me. Mt. Johnson, I read some of your editorials you
know and even on the building issues, when people come up here, do you always
give your permits and then find out your facts after that on what they're going
to do? I mean a hazardous waste issue, why don't you get a list of hazardous
materials that they' ll be using on site instead of asking them now so he can
present it?
Councilman Johnson: The hazardous waste issue was brought up at Planning
Commission and they said there were no hazardous wastes but I never believe that
so I always ask the question again. But staff has looked into it.
Wayne Skoblik: Did they give you documentation to that? Do you see something
on it?
Councilman Johnson: Now that they've told me what their process is, I know the
process and there is very little need Eor hazardous waste in that process.
Wayne Skoblik: Everybody's an expert.
Councilman Johnson: I'm an environmental engineer. I work with this everyday.
Yes, I am an expert in that field.
Wayne Skoblik: Well good. I'm glad we have somebody who knows what's going on
then right? Is there a law against how much tax exempt land can be acquired in
Chanhassen?
Councilman Johnson: Not yet.
I/ Councilman Workman: In talking to the Assistant Assessor, basically, sically the process
is, they' re not going to get tax exempt until the church is built at which time
they file this application and it's look at. It's very liberal and very much in
the favor of a church to get the tax exempt status in that just about any use. ..
Wayne Skoblik: And you knew that before? You knew all this was going to be
Lax exempt when you okayed the site plan and all that stuff?
Councilman Workman: No site plan has been.. .
' 39
amity Counci Meeting - Apr i1 10, 1989
Wayne Skoblik: Well whatever you okayed.
Councilman Workman: e haven' t okayed anything yet.
Wayne Skoolik: So it's still up for grabs then? You're g oing to let these guys
intimidate you. Good luck.
Bob Hanson: Good evening. My name is Bob Hanson. I live at 6620 Horseshoe
Curve. It wasn't my intention to say anything and in fact most of the things
that I've boon interested in, somebody else has mentioned. Aside from one fact
and that is, I have never seen anybody come before a City Council before so
prepared to be turned down and that brings question to me. Why would you be so
prepared to be turned down if there wasn't something wrong with what you're
trying to do? The other observation, one last observation and that is, I have
never seen such a turnout for a Council meeting before. Apparently we've got a
lot of people here that are fairly concerned about this issue. I think it would
behoove all you people on the Council to take heed to that and try and put this
through as a referendum so that the people can be heard. Thank you.
Patsy Ward: Honorable Mayor, members of the Council and citizens of
Channassen. We had a chance to have a community center a little while ago. We
had a referendum. It was defeated because we didn't like the location. We love
this location. Let's go for it.
Jan Lash: My name is Jan Lash. I live at 6850 Utica Lane. I guess my main
concern with this property is the land use. People have talked about the
concerns for the school and I know that the school district has talked of a111
middle school as near as 1995 which is 5 1/2 years away. We have a task force
that's been looking at this site as a possible site for a community center and
so, I think with these amount of people looking at this property, to benefit the
City, that it's time for the City to look to the future to address these needs
and I'm afraid if we wait until 1995 to start looking for a site for a school,
we aren' t going to find a prime location that would be adjacent to town.
Adjacent to the elementary school. If we're looking at a middle school by 1995,
you're looking at a high school probably 3 years after that. As much as people
hate the thought of raising their taxes and they hate the thought of having to
pay for schools, the thing is we're all going to have to bite the bullet and do
it anyway so why not get the best piece of property we can if the City is
capable of doing it. This would then serve the needs of all the community.
Thank you.
Councilman Johnson: Mr. Mayor, before we have too many more people leave, I'd
like to ask for some hand votes here. Or not votes but show of hands of how
many people here would support buying the southerly third of this property for a
middle school and community center? Southerly third.
Public: How about the whole thing?
Councilman Johnson: The whole thing's not for sale.
Public: Either is the southerly third. ,
Councilman Johnson: Not many people want to pay their taxes to buy a school
site.
40
�i tv Cr:nnci 1 Heeting - _,oril 10, 1989
William Olson: How many people know exactly what land is available until
they've got their hand in your heart until they get the decision of yes, they
get the church. Then they'll start divying up. I might give you this property
and I might give you this. I haven't heard any type of working relationship at
all.. .
Leneda Rahe: My name is Leneda Rahe again. I live at 1021 Carver Beach Road
and I know that we need also to have a housing for senior citizens. A senior
citizen center would also, we need to have housing for the senior citizens in
ow- this community which we don't have. That would also be another prime site
becaues of the adjacent to the lakeshore and close proximity to the shopping
malls and to the medical centers.
Monty Eastvold: My name is Monty Eastvold and I reside at 7051 Pinacle Lane.
I just had a question regarding the actual conditional use permit and maybe a
clarification on that. Is that an annual permit and if so, it's not? Okay.
So is there any time when if some of the conditions are not adhered to that it's
reviewed and amended or whatever?
Mayor Chmiel: At sometime when the conditional use has been
respected individual, they have to comply with all the requirements that that
I have contained within that conditional use. If they so desire to expand beyond
that conditional use, a hearing is held again to review that particular
proposal.
Councilman Johnson: To further address and I think you missed part of the
point. We do not have a set schedule at this time, even though I've proposed
one, for conditional use permits for an inspector to go out and look at those
conditional uses. We have literally hundreds of conditional use permits in our
city right now. Last year I proposed and hopefully staff is still working on my
proposal, of making a schedule by which we will review conditional uses. If
somebody is not lh compliance with the conditional use permit, we can go and
pull the conditional use permit. Right now that's at any time. We have
challenged some users of conditional use permits to come in to us and prove that
they are still in compliance with it. Unfortunately my position is, our
enforcement of that is not stringent enough as of yet.
Mayor Chmiel: Any further comments? If not, I would suggest that we close this
I/ portion of it and very possibly to continue this hearing, probably to our next
council meeting. The reason I say that is that there are many facts that have
come before us. A lot of the proposals as we had sent out to the residents are
still not in so therefore I would move to table this discussion to our date of
April the 24th. I would like to make that into a motion at this particular
time.
I/ Councilman Boyt: I object. I think you've got 500 people here, 200 people who
want to know how you stand and I think it's a big mistake to table this before
the Council has responded to what they've heard tonight.
Councilman Johnson: I agree.
Mayor. Chmiel: Okay. With that position Bill, why don't you go ahead and start.
1 41
EMMA
City Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
Councilman Hoyt: I guess I deserve that. First, it is impressive to see '
p e the
number of people that have turned up and I'm glad that that many people are
interested in an issue in front of the City. I'd like to say to the concerned
citizens that you've certainly put in a lot of time and energy and a great deal
of money I would guess. There have been other issues when we've had quite a few
citizens in recently. The rerouting of TH 101 would be one of them. The Lake
Lucy trail issue is another one but this certainly is the biggest turnout I've
seen in 2 1/2 years. I guess I have a question and a concern. Do we have any
of the, I guess you don't have to show your hands but it's sort of a rhetorical
question. Where is the clergy of the community? I hope that they've discussed
this issue where it really needs to be discussed which is in their churches and
I've only in the course of the month and a half or so that this issue has been
sort of a hot one in the community, I've only had one member of the local clergy
talk to me about it or write to me about it. I've got to tell you that I'm
disappointed about that. I think it's awfully important for them, since this
impacts on them, to take a stand. Then I guess I have a note for the attorneys
representing Eckankar. You've certainly presented the facts well. I think
you've addressed the concerns of the staff and Planning Commission and you've
made it real clear through your mailings to us and to staff that you consider
that there's very few options here for the City. But I think you've missed the
point in that you may well win the legal battle to build while losing the war
for acceptance. I guess I respect a lot of the people out here tonight who've
challenged your proposal. I think both you and the City have attempted to
gather the facts to answer many of the concerns, if not all of the concerns.
The staff report pointed out any number of things that have been cleared up
I think or at least addressed since the Planning Commission meeting. The
newspaper has made, both newspapers that cover this city rather extensively have
interviewed Eckankar people. Have interviewed many of the people in the
concerned citizens. Have interviewed those of us on the Council. I think
they've made every effort to get the issue out to you. I think Jay's letter to
the Editor_ that appeared in the Villager this last week demonstrated that he and
staff have certainly done a great deal of research. Two weeks ago the Council
moved to put out a piece of information to you and ask for your response about a
referendum. I see several of you that have yes signs. I'm not exactly sure
what that means but I'll take it to mean that maybe you're in support of that
effort. But we all need to know that the referendum to buy this property does
not remove Eckankar from our community and it shouldn't be seen that way. It
simply gives them 5 million or 7 million or whatever to go across the road and
buy more property and do it again. What I would say to the attorneys and
concerned citizens is that the process we go through takes some time. I got
your lightly veiled threat that you better not miss any of the building season
but I would suggest to you that there's more to this than simply getting your
building in the ground. I believe that as the facts come to light, the decision
about your proposal will become much easier to make. We've already received a
lot of facts. I'm more concerned about the climate of fear that's been
generated in our community. Over the last month I've received several letters,
most of them against the proposal. Some for the proposal. And I will admit to
having wondered myself how this was going to resolve itself. But I received a
letter this last week that for me identified what's become the important issue.
That important issue came from a person who has appeared in front of the Council
over the last year I'd say 4 or 5 times maybe representing his neighbors on
issues in front of the Council. I think that if you knew who he was, many of
you would say that that's a person you hold in fairly high respect. I've not
always agreed with this individual and he wrote to tell me that he feared for
42 1
MN
City Ceu ici 1 X eti.nq - April lg, 1999 _ J
— his children and
his wife and you know he ,,bash t afraid of Eckankar. He was
afraid Df us. He thought that if people in this community knew that he was a
:;ender of Eckankar, that his family wouldn't be safe. I would say that that's a
desoar_ate situation whichever side of the coin you' re on. For me, it's that
climate that needs to be diffused or our loss will be much greater than whether
or not this church comes into our town. I've always assumed that Eckankar could
make a strong legal case for building this church. Part of being on the Council
I guess is being willing to take a clear position on the issues and I may not be
here when the vote takes place so from what I know right now, I'd like to tell
you what my position is. First thing. I think that all citizens concerned
should be researched. I've sometimes fought the City spending the money to
researcn some of than that I thought would come to naught but I nevertheless
agree that the City is right in answering your questions and those should be
answered. The second thing is that I believe the City is responsible to protect
our safety and the well being to it's best ability. The third thing is I
believe that we should treat this church like we treat any other church, as the
gentleman earlier today said and I guess the thing that I've learned out of the
last 6 weeks is I'm amazed at how fragile our basic rights are. Your rights to
know. To pursue. To debate. Someone elses rights for religious freedom
possibly. I think we have to answer the question would we be here if this was a
Catholic, Lutheran, a Mormon, a Muslim and so on down through the list? I don't
know. I can't answer that question for anybody but I can say that religious
I freedom has never been the issue for me. The key issue has been can we find the
best use for the land. I think we're going to find out what people think about
that when they return the survey that the City has sent out. That survey by the
I means that you'd be spending $8,000.00 of our tax money to conduct a
~eferendum so don't take it lightly when you respond to it. But maybe that's
what we snould do with the issue. I think that the second key issue is how do
we eliminate the climate of fear that I certainly heard when I attended the
Planning Commission meeting. I didn't hear quite so much of it tonight. Maybe
as this evolves, if the City is given some time, we can resolve that particular
issue. I think that we need to take that time and we need to have patience on
all sides and we need to work to get this resolved the best way we can. That's
all I've got. I've got some comments I'd like to make about conditions. I
would suggest that the conditions recommended by staff and Planning Commission
be amended and I have 3 additional conditions. The first one, I think that
traffic control should be in place for any meetings of more than 200 people or
at least that Eckankar should agree to install traffic control if and when
public safety would determine it necessary. Second, you're going to have a
great deal of land that you're going to be grading and then replanting as I
understand it. If I have that correct. I would encourage you to replant with
native prairie flowers and grasses. It's about time we had some native prairie
around here. The next condition I would add is, if you'll note, one of your
consultants John Shardlow, are you here? Okay John, on page 5 of your report
and item 9, you state an interesting situation that I think the City should
pursue and maybe you're indicating by your report being part of Eckankar's
package, that the church generally agrees with this. It says through the
conditional use permit process provides the City with a mechanism to require the
full payment of any costs reasonably associated with providing services to the
proposed church facility. I'm not exactly sure what that means but it may mean
that you're willing to pay the tax burden that you incur to the City.
Inter_esti.ng proposal. I'd certainly like to see that discussed further before
this is resolved. Thank you Mr. Mayor for the opportunity to speak to this
issue.
1 43
—City Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
I
Councilwoman Dimler: Thank you Mayor Chmiel: I want to thank the lawyers of
Eckankar for their well thought out and complete presentation. I want to thank
the citizens of Chanhassen for taking time out of their busy schedules to show
their concerns here tonight. And thank you for all the hard work that went into
your information for the Council that you did prior to tonight's meeting. I
guess my first concern was that the use of this worship center be only for the
larger metropolitan area and that no rallies, international or national
confernces be conducted here. But in Peter. Beck's presentation, that was well
addressed and he indicated that this condition in writing would not be a problem
for Eckankar. Since he reiterated it several times, I tend to believe him so
that is no longer a concern for me. Secondly, I see a real need to work on an
ordinance restricting the numbers of acres that any tax exempt entity may
occupy. I think 174 acres of tax exempt land is way too excessive. Just to
compare the other churches in the area. In Chanhassen they have between 3 to 10
acres of tax exempt land. Now we've talked about purchasing some of this
property from Eckankar for a community center, for schools and other public
purposes. Well I'd like to note that I'm on the community center task force and
that our request to purchase some land from Eckankar was made prior to this
application for this conditional use permit. I don't know what happened in the
negotiations but we repeatedly asked city staff to get us a price after we were
told that Eckankar would be willing to sell us some acres. We were never given
a price per acre to my knowledge. But now we are told that further discussions
can not be held until the conditional use permit has been granted. My question
is why. Again, Peter Beck stated that he wanted to narrow our considerations.
I feel a little like I'm between a rock and a hard place. I'd like to have more
options. I don't believe it would cloud the issue. I think it would clarify
it. And what to do with the balance of the land is a concern for many of us
here and I think in fairness, maybe Eckankar should focus on their future
desires for the land in the spirit of open communication and putting citizen's
concerns at rest. It would seen to me that the fair and good faith negotiations
at this time might be beneficial to all concerned parties. I've received
letters from residents who feel deeply about the excessive tax exempt land issue
and encourage the Council to consider how to limit the tax exempt land now
before the permit is issued. That's what I heard Linda KulLnan to say. I don't
want to treat Eckankar's conditional use permit any worse than other churches
and neither do I want to treat it any better and I think that's only fair. As
Dean Brown mentioned, just recently the Family of Christ Lutheran Church built a
worship center on 3.5 acres on Lake Drive East. In talking to some of their
other members, they went through a long process of jumping through hoops and
members of the church made up the building committee and appeared two times
before the Planning Commission and at least once before the Council. Pastor
Nate Castens also appeared and it was my hope that Peter Skelsky would be here
this evening. Is Peter here? When Torn and I met with Peter Skelsky and Peter
Beck last week, we expressed our concern that the fear of the unknown breeds
suspicion and that his presence might help to disspell some fears. I think the
fear of the unknown is a human condition that we all understand and I'm not sure
that we can blame anybody for it. In my opinion, all sides have reacted in
fear. Comments made at the Planning Commission meeting on March 1st may have
stemmed out of fear of the unknown and fear of public reaction may have kept
Peter. Skelsky away from public meetings and this meeting here tonight. But it's
my belief that any change usually requires the involvement of all parties
affected by that change. It is easier to introduce the change if those
conditions are met. Surprise is usually reacted to in the negative and I hope
44
MR
,l l�
Ch ty Council o_eti ng - April 10, 1989
that there are no surprises but if there are, I hope that they will be pleasant
ones. Lastly, I believe that the City is here to serve the best interest of the
citizens and since we just recently sent out a survey giving the citizens of
— Chanhassen some input on how they would like us to proceed for the best use of
the land, and unfortunately the results of the survey are not in and have not
been tabulated. I think in the interest of fairness, we should wait for the
results and take them into consideration. Therefore, I recommend tabling this
request for tonight. That's all.
JIM
Councilman Johnson: I too would like to thank everybody for coming tonight. I
think most people, a lot of people have read my letter to the editor and
probably think where I'm coming from. When you get sworn into this office, I
believe you're sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States. When I
was sworn in as an officer in the United States Army, I'm sworn to uphold the
Constitution of the United States and any threats from within or without. I
believe that unfortunately this issue of land use permit, conditional use permit
has gotten messed up in our First Amendment. I never had any ideas I'd ever get
up in a Constitutional issue. Now I wish in high school I'd studied the
Constitution a little better. But just to make it easier for me to kind of go
over for those of you that didn't read my letter to the editor, go over it and
actually add a little bit to it because I cut a lot because I wanted it to get
brief, even though it was fairly long. Over the past several-months some
citizens of Chanhassen have been consumed with the fear of the unknown. Rumors
and opinions have been spreading but I have yet to see any evidence of a threat
or a basis for fear. However the fear is there in the minds of our citizens and
I have reacted to this fear by performing an independent investigation of
Eckankar. Over the past two months I have researched the Eckankar religion
trying to find any evidence of deceptive recruiting, recruiting of children,
soliciting for money or any other activity which would lead me to believe that
the Eckists are a threat. I have not been able to find any. I add here that
there's been a lot of talk about children and a threat to children. Everybody
I've talked to, I've asked them about children. I have found nothing to
indicate that the Eckists are out trying to recruit our children into their
religion. As a matter_ of fact, most of their recruiti..ng is ver y,
Some of the things I've done. I've gone to the Minneapolis and South alew key.
libraries and our own library here and researched all the books I could find
which referenced Eckankar and there have been some of these that have been very
right wing or very fundamentalists point of view in which Judo and Karate were
considered cults. In which Jehovah Witness and Mormons and everybody considered
cults. I look at the entire book, not just one section of it. I contacted a
company here in Minnesota which is called Free Minds Incorporate. They are a
cult watch group. They are formed by parents of children that have been
involved in cults and they have been deprogrammed. Free Minds had some
information on Eckankar. However, they had only had inquiries. They had never
had anybody come in and say they had a problem with Eckankar. So they were able
to pull some information. They gave me some quotes out of Larson's Book on
Cults. Larson's is one of the group that considers Judo a cult. They also gave
me the article from, parts of the article that somebody read up here from the
Religious Conterfeits Group published in the early 80's I believe. After that I
also went and asked my pastors at Mount Calvary Lutheran Church if they would
look into this for me and they did some inquiries and they have found nothing.
Now it's a standing joke with them. They ask me when I'm joining Eck every time
I see them. I invited them to go with me to an Eck meeting and they couldn't
go. I talked to some of our local clergy here and asked them what they thought
I
45
i
Counci L Meeting - \pri L 10, 1989
of Eckankar. Really I primarily went with the Lutheran because Ruthenbeck's
across the street and I know Nate and then my Lutheran pastors. I tried to get
a hold of the pastors at the Catholic Church here, St. Hubert's and couldn' t get
a hold of anybody. But to amend, the Lutheran preachers here were standing up
for the Constitution and religious freedom and they did not fear. That was one
that they said to me. I have no fear of Eckankar themselves, even though they
have children. Some of them very young. New borns and the like. I went and
talked with our Public Safety Department extensively and they contacted the
Minneapolis Police Cult Unit and the local Federal Burearu of Investigation. I
contacted the New Hope police. They contacted the Villa Park, Illi.noi.s police
for me and the Clayton, Missouri_ police. Clayton, Missouri is a suburb of
St. Louis and Villa Park is a suburb of Chicago. West and south of O'Hara.
None of these public safety units could give us any information that would
indicate that there's a threat. The Villa Park Chief of Police didn't even know
they existed. When I went to Villa Park to look at the center, there I found the
police department was only a few blocks away from the Eck center. The Eck
center is on their main street with a sign out in front saying Eckankar. The
Villa Park Chief of Police didn't even know they existed. When I went to Villa
Park, I stopped in at their next door neighbors. They're in a commercial
building. Their next door neighbor is a financial planner. When I went in
there they were doing IRS 1040 forms right and left and they were kind enough to
give me about 10 minutes of their time to discuss what they knew about Eckankar
who was next door, there's just a plaster wall inbetween them. They had two
ladies there I would say in their mid 40's to early 50's that had gone and
attended one of the Eckankar meetings. They said, that's strange. They said
they have some odd beliefs. I says, well did they try to recruit you? They
say, no. They just gave us information. I said, did they try to solicit funds
from you? They said no, they didn't try to get any funds from me. I said, have
they ever come over later and tried to get funds from you? They said no. They
said they've been a very good neighbor. We rarely ever see them. The people we
met at the center were very pleasant and seemed well educated. That's the
basic comment they had. By the Villa Park facility there's a Lutheran church a
block to the east wnd a Free Evangelical Bible Church, the Harbor Avenue Bible
Church a block to the west. The Lutheran church was having what appeared to be
an i\A meeting at it but no church functions the night I was there so I didn't go
in and talk to anybody there. I went into the Bible Church and as they were
having their Wednesday night Bible meeting. I went up to the pastor of the
church and asked him what do you know about Eckankar. He said who? I says well
there a religious organization a block away from you. He said I've never heard
of them. So then I talked to some of their parishioners and I found, I guess
I don't know if a free bible church has parishioners but anyway, some of their
members and I found one member who knew of Eckankar. He had met some Eckists at
a County Fair. He and his wife said, yes, they've got some strange beliefs. In
their opinion their beliefs were strange. So I went through the same questions.
Were there children involved? Did they try to recruit you? Did they try to
solicit funds from you? All the questions and it was all no. No, they're nice.
The people they met seemed very well educated. Public Safety got a hold of the
Clayton, Missouri which is a suburb of St. Louis police. The Chief of Police
there said that they've operated a center there since 1975 and they have had no
reason to investigate them. The final actual thing that I did was attend one of
their services. It's nothing I'd be interested, I'd guarantee you that. But
there were about 40 people there. A nice friendly group of people. It was a
little different than a Lutheran or a Church of God or a Baptist or whatever
ceremony. They started with a reading from their Bible. The reading that day
46
III ' City Co,_ ,cil Meeting - `.pri 1 19, 1939 __,_.,,
was about ag o and the evils of eg o. You're having ving moo much ego, nut your ego
III behind you. Listen to that lawyers. 7lver_y meeting I've got to give a threat to
the lawyers. Then they ,vent in and they sang the hue song which is a form of a
chant :,here they meditate. Than after that they read some more from their
3ible. -gain, some additional verses on the ego. That seemed to be the thing
M of the day was ego. Then they opened it up for discussion amongst the people.
They held a discussion about what their spiritual feelings where for that week.
I don't see a threat from that. I didn't see anything there. Then afterwards
everybody got up and left and somebody asked me what my little lapel pin was and
I said it's for Chanhassen and then I introduced myself at that point. Talked
to a doctor who was there and there were some other professional folks there. I
didn't get what their professions were and talked to some of the members of the
III church that actually work up in New Hope. I found them to be friendly people.
They didn't know who I was coming in. It wasn't planned. I didn't tell anybody
I was coming. I brought a neighbor with me. I guess there's always, I didn't
III want to be alone actually. There's always fear. Fear of the unknown you know
and I admit it too. what did I find out about them? I found out they are
considered a new age religion. They're fairly new. About 25 years old.
I They're based on a lot of different tradition including Hindu. There seems to
be a lot of various sects of Hindu. I've learned more about religion and the
non-Christian religions in the last two months than I ever did. It was really
interesting on a lot of them. They believe everybody has a soul and that soul
III is a part of god. Now here's where they get a little beyond me but they believe
the soul can travel outside the body into a spiritual realm and they believe in
reincarnation so the soul is always there. I don't see how that's a threat to
I me. That somebody believes that their soul, it's not my soul they're talking
about. It's theirs. That doesn't seem to be a threat to me. Eckankar teaches
that you have to overcome the 5 passions. Lust, anger, greed, attachment and
vanity and then you can experience wisdom, charity and spiritual freedom.
I Overcoming lust, anger, greed, attachment and vanity. 'e should be scared of
that. And they want to have charity and spiritual freedom. I really can't find
anything. They're non-evangelical. While there has been some early references
I from another Hi.ridu type religion that blamed plagerism against Paul Twitchell
and they took Paul Twitchell's teachings and one of the main references used by
everybody against Eckankar is a paper written by another Hindu group, another
I new age religion who was fighting for membership from the same prospects.
I think that's kind of funny at times that you get two non-Christian groups
fighting and then the groups that want to fight them grab their literature and
use that as their evidence. If the other group were coming in here, we'd have
II the same people in here so I don't know. Do they go door to door and airports?
No. I have no evidence of them going door to door or running around airports or
shopping malls or schools. They advertise in publications. They make their
I literature available. If you want to find them, you can find them. I have now
met Eckists who live in this town. I don't know a lot of them by name. At the
service I went to I did recognize two people that have participated in youth
I sports here in the City of Chanhassen. I've seen them. I participate a lot. A
lot of you all know me from youth sports more than City Council because I worked
in T-ball, baseball, soccer. Mostly soccer now and I recognized some of the
faces. I didn't know the name. I go through hundreds and hundreds of names
I" every year organizing sports. So I do know there are Eckists living in our
town. They have the same rights as anybody else. Should we buy the Eckankar.
property? This little green thing that we sent out I fought against. It is a
,
I very unscientific survey. We may want to use it but I'm not sure if it's going
to tell us much. The referendum would tell us that this type of survey, it's
II 47
i
' , l
City Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
bad U
not a
s ad as the other survey that went out that only gave you the choice of
yes. At least we give you two choices. Yes or no. But we don't give you
adequate information to make up your mind on this and full mailing is not a
scientific survey. I'm an engineer. I believe in doing things scientifically
with when the results come back, we can defend them. A lot of people will see
this and not bother. Another thing from the City and throw it away. Another
group of people are going to be looking for it. I don't know what's going to
happen. But I don't put a lot of faith in this survey. I asked if people would
be willing to buy one-third of it and only a few people wanted to buy one-third
of it. They want it buy it all or nothing. All or nothing. Why? If we need a
school site, we don't need 174 acres. The area up by Greenwood Shores is not a
good school site. That's a good residential site. The area down by TH 5 is a
fairly good school site. I don't think we need 174 acres. I'm going to get off
onto should we limit tax exempt land? If the University of Minnesota came in
here wanted to have 200 acres for a research facility that's going to being
1,000 jobs to town, we're going to say no? Because tax exempt facilities can
only have 5 acres in this town. Are we going to tell the Landscape Arboretum,
one of the most beautiful things we have in this city, that they have too much
land. No. I think before we start saying no tax. exempt land or limit tax
exempt land, we'd better find out what the full impact on all the different
possible tax exempt lands are because another tax exempt land is city parks.
We' re trying to buy 35 or 50 or 100 acres down south right now of tax exempt
land that we want to take off of the tax rolls and make it into a park so the
people in southern Chanhassen. There's a purpose for tax exempt land. Do I
think, I've said I will bet the Mayor's next month salary that eventually some
of this land will go back to tax status. Or Don's salary maybe. The City
Manager's. It's a better bet I guess. My wife won't let me bet my own. But I
truly believe that we should not take this land and convert it. I think that
the courts won' t uphold it. I think we're going to be ridiculed in the press.
cie' re going to be ridiculed by other parts of the town and maybe the country and
maybe in Poland. My time's up. I think all the yes people would like me to get
out of here. Okay. Basically I'd like on condition 1 to get specific. Can
your computers genezate a computer image at night to show the lights? Mr.
Computers? I challenge your computer programmers to give us those slides
showing how it's going to be, when you decide what the lighting's going to be,
how it's going to be lit up. Are we going to have a shining edifice on the
hillside, which is what we don't want to have.
Peter Beck's answer could not be heard on the tape.
Councilman Johnson: I see all the engineers over here going like this with
their eyes as the lawyer talks again. Because I think that's part of, yes,
winter view also. The person who mentioned winter view. I
Mayor_ Chmi.el: Is that it Jay?
Councilman Johnson: That's about where I stand. I have not seen anything yet
to tell me that they don't meet the conditions of the conditional use permit or
that the results of this survey are going to change whether we' re going to issue
the permit or not. I don't see a whole lot of reason for tabling.
Councilman Workman: I am a quicker_ speaker. I have a few questions and Jay hit
on the concerns of the unknown. The unknown is a frightening thing. I reached
into my refrigerator the other day. But seriously, why do we fear Eckankar?
48 i
NE
ty C loll .1eeti ng - April 11, 1989 ✓_:
Because we are not sure quite frankly what they are. Citizens of this community
have I believe reasons to be concerned. Eckankar is an unknown religion let
alone a Alit which evokes strong emotion. Eckankar is aware of that. A couple
years . .acre I read the book Miracle at Philadelphia on the day to day process at
the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia over 200 years ago. I knew there
was a reason why I did that. 3igger minds and bigger people dealt with this
issue better. than I will and I have 200 years of history to fall back on. The
power of the mind is a very strong force. Eckankar's very existence gives proof
that they understand this. Likewise many in the room this evening have
dedicated their lives to their own beliefs. Eckankar is not surprised.
Currently wars are being fought around the world over religious reasons.
Eckankar and their legal counsel are not surprised by Chanhassen's citizens
tonight. While everyone here tonight understands the First Amendment, I doubt
anyone here is exercising the Second Amendment. Are there any guns in the room?
Eckankar has amassed large sums of money in what I would term a relatively short
period of time. To pay for expensive representation, an incredible church
facility, multi-million dollar land acquisition. It's come to my attention that
as a tax exempt organization we have the right to request financial State
records of the church. It is my understanding that they've denied twice. A
rather unassuming site was not selected in our City but rather a monument which
represents everything that is good in our community. Rolling hills, trees and
lakes. Both here tonight and at the Planning Commission has strong
representation including principles of a large law firm and experts too numerous
to count but no representation from their church. I'm disappointed. While
local churches operate on tight budgets in an effort to fund soup kitchens and
programs for Minnesota's needy, no one from Eckankar is here tonight to tell us
how they will help our community. Rather than simply take up space and attempt
to fade away in our minds, while enjoying tax exempt status on this prime piece
of property, I would have preferred their comments. We are not like
Californians from where this church came or people from India from where this
religion began. This is Lake Wobegon and we have a pretty good idea what a
horse looks like. It doesn't look like a zebra. Likewise we know what a church
looks tike. We'r_e not sure that's what this chur_cn is going to do for our
community. Eckankar is not surprised. Eckankar is asking an awful lot of this
community tonight. Eckankar knows this and this is a tense situation for all
concerned. I am concerned nonetheless about the unknown future use of this site
considering it's large size and choice location. As I've said to both Peter
Skelsky, the Priest and Peter Beck, his legal counsel, they have the property.
Lucky for them. They're very lucky. It's a beautiful site. I would prefer not
to see any denomination church i.n. this location using such a large parcel. On
the other hand, I do not feel members of Eckankar will harm us and I pray we do
not harm them. This is a special site in our community, made even more special
by this issue. I knew very little about Eckankar when I ran for office last
fall but win, lose or draw I accept the challenge as does the entire Council I'm
sure. I do need further information regarding the benefits of this project to
our community so that I may make a sound and wise judgment on this subject. I
would approve tabling this item until the next council meeting.
Mayor. Chmi.el: I guess that leaves me and I don't know if there's too
much that
I can say that's already been said basically by the Council. I'd just like to
reiterate some of the things that did get touched on. The ones that Tom just
mentioned. I think we have to be concerned as a city and we have to look at
that aspect of the City. Not against the religion part of it but the land
development that we see. Taking that amount of land out of the tax base or if
I/
49
i
_l.LY a)..nc 1 .aeti ng _
,ar, 1 10
we decide to go to the other
options of the schools, community center and the
addition to the ballfi.elds. I guess I've looked at different things as to
Iim
seeing what we would derive from taxes off that existing property and it's
lill
really sort of astronomical.
really s 80 Somewhere up in the neighborhood of probably about
also feel 0 ppersyearoandhehat'sequ to a bit to take out of the community. I
addressed and most of those were salr_eady mentioned. I have not t go through
III
some of the past information when Eckankar had requested aptoecome ti go rough
At that time I was just wondering, the position has taken a much different turn
�.n as a campus.
from what it was before and it was indicated at that time by one of the Eckankar
members and stated that Eckankar would be willing to
N
III
Nowow that has changed. 9 pay local property taxes.
erh chascheange . Itdidasome research on this as well. I've talked to
working at this church. Specifically to the 20 people who will be
than n3 In congregations of 1,500, they
people. Congregations of 800 have 8 ' �Y don't have much more
the need for 20 people for people. I guess I don't understand 809 people or the 400 as what was indicated. There
III
are some concerns there. So rather than to continue and keep reiterating some
of the things that has been said, as I made the motion previously, I would e
to see this tabled for the next two weeks and I'll call a question on ult l�.k`
Councilwoman Dimler: that.
III
r• Second.
Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to table action III
Conditional Use Permit for the on the
the next construction of a church, Eckankar Church, until
xt regular City Council meeting. All voted in favor except Councilman
Johnson who opposed and the motion carried.
iii
REBATE OF INTEREST PAYMENT REQUEST, 1811 LAKE� LUCY LANE, MARK RIDDERSON.
IIIDon Ashworth: May I ask, is Mr. Ridderson present?
Councilman Boyt: I•••would move denial.
Councilman Johnson: I'll seco nd that. II
Don Ashworth: May I make a point and that is, I did make sure that a copy
t
II
his was sent to him. Since we did not get our Thursday
mailed until Frida not e
Y. And I also talked to him on the phone usuto, it did that get
would be this evening that it would be heard. But if for whatever easo ahe�t
feels that he would like to be in front of you, I could bring the item back •.
two weeks? �n
IIMayor Chmiel: Alright. Do you want to clarify that motion Bill or_
to incorporate the fact that if he does want to have it within 2 weeksswencant
i.t?
do
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to den
rebate of interest pa deny the request for
appear. payment in the amount of $402.95. If the applicant wishes to
before the City Council, he may do so at the next regular meeting. All
illvoted in favor and the motion carried.
50
93
City Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE ADVERTISING FOR BIDS FOR TH 101
REALIGNMENT/LAKE DRIVE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 88-22.
Resolution #89-57: Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve plans and specifications and authorize advertising for bids for TH 101
realignment/Lake Drive Improvement Project No. 88-22. All voted in favor and
the motion carried.
WEST 78TH STREET DETACHMENT PROJECT NO. 87-2:
A. APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE ADVERTISING FOR BIDS.
B. APPROVE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WITH CARVER COUNTY FOR CR 17 IMPROVEMENTS.
Gary Warren: One clarification Mr. Mayor. The actual it is recommending that
Council table any action until the 24th meeting. It was just to convey the
information from the property owners.
MCouncilman Boyt moved, Councilwoman Di.mler seconded to table action on the West
78th Street Detachment Project No. 87-2 until the April 24, 1989 City Council
meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
ACCEPT SEWER REHABILITATION REPORT.
1— Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to accept the Sewer
Rehabilitation Report. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS:
SOUTHERN MINNESOTA VETERANS HOME COALITION, MAYOR CHMIEL.
Mayor Chmiel: Basically we received a letter from the Southern Minnesota
Veterans Home Coalition basically requesting that this be located within the
city of St. Peter. The purpose for this is to cover respectively those who need
medical attention. The close proximity of this is within that area. This is
going to have a 60 bed facility and the important issue is the service to
southern Minnesota veterans of four recommended sites with St. Peter as best
able to do this. One in 50,000 veterans in our 27 county area which is 50%,
live within a 50 mile radius of St. Peter. The facility would be highly
accessible to veterans and their families from within that area. They're asking
us therefore to provide a resolution supporting the efforts of southern
Minnesota Veterans Home Coalition to establish a Minnesota Veterans Home in
St. Peter_. We have the resolution here. Rather than reading it, I hope everyone
has had the opportunity to read it. Do I have a motion on it?
Councilman Johnson: Yes, I'll have a motion as soon as I make a quick comment.
We've got the story on 1 out of 4 cities that's looking for this. I don't want
to start voting on a resolution to support St. Peter until Worthington and the
other 3 communities that are competing for this have provided us information to
I/ find out whether St. Peter is the best choice. Obviously if they wrote to us
and gave us all this information, they believe they're the best choice but I'd
51
l
=LQi y Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
like to not perform a resolution on the opinion of one. I'd like to table this
and have staff write a letter to the other 3 cities asking for their literature LI
and their reasons that they think they are the best site. At that point we can
make a decision as to which site we need to support for our veterans.
Councilman Boyt: I'd move denial. Are you going to second that?
Councilman Johnson: I was just going to move to table.
Councilman Boyt: No, I don't think we can even do this. I don't think it's our
purview to do this.
Councilman Johnson: Yes, I'm not even sure why we're involved other than
voicing for our veterans here in the City of Chanhassen.
Mayor Chmiel: We're talking about the southern portion of the state which is in
close proximity to.the city too that they have in here.
Councilman Johnson: 'I think this one is supposed to cover all Carver County?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. U
Councilman Johnson: So I think we should review it.
Mayor CYnmeil: I think we should review it too and I agree with your position
Jay. I would suggest that we do ask staff to address the other areas to see
their basics of concern and take it from there before we move on the issue.
Councilman Johnson: I personally think that �t
will probably end up. St. Peter
is as close to us as anything and for our seniors that are veterans, it would be
the best thing probably.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Boyt seconded to table action on the
Southern Minnesota Veterans Home Coalition until staff can check out the other
three cities concerned. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Councilman Johnson: This is the draft of the Environmental
These are some of the attachments to it. We're finally tothisa stage aafterta
year and a half of work on this puppy. I just got this in the mail. I'm
supposed to have it reviewed by Thursday for our meeting Thursday but I'm sure
Steve's got it totally reviewed for us. But anyway, we're going along on the TH
212. A lot of information. A lot of research. It's looking pretty good.
Councilman Boyt: Have we decided
on which route? Weren't we doing that on both
routes? North and south?
Councilman Johnson: Yes. The environmental impact statement will be covering
both routes. I haven't read this one yet. I've read the supporting documents
some of which we've had since December I read on the way to Boston. It's a lot
of work that this $300,000.00 is going towards.
Councilman Boyt: You'll see a couple hundred people in here for that one too.
52
_95
City Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
Councilman Johnson: Yes. The official mapping. Do we have the official map
_ now?
Gary Warren: We have been given layout for TH 212 which is waiting completion
of our preliminary TH 101 realignment study so I would envision that MnDot will
be regenerating a final version of that map for us after we get back to them on
our TH 101.
Councilman Johnson: The next big issue for us on TH 212 will be the map. The
official map that shows the construction limits and where it will be. Right now
the official map only shows the northern alignment. It does not show the
southern alignment because that is considered the preferred alignment. That's a
separate issue slightly from the Environmental Impact Statement. The
Environmental Impact Statement does the entire both alignments and all
corridors. I just wanted to show you the weight of it, bulk of it. It's about
M $100,000.00 per inch.
Mayor Chmiel: The other. item I wanted to discuss is the curbside pick-up.
Recycleables. As part of the curbside pick up of recycleables, the City of
Chanhassen is sponsoring a $50.00 prize drawing. The City Council will randomly
pick an address within the City and if that person participates in the curbside
recycling, they will win $50.00. The drawing will occur prior to each pick up
day. Tonight City Council will draw an address for the April 15th special
curbside pick up. This pick up will occur beginning at 7:00 a.m. and will
collect glass bottles and jars, newspapers and aluminum cans. A biweekly
curbside pick up will begin in May. See the Chanhassen Villager and also the
Sailor for announcements of any winners. We're going to have to choose a page
number between 1 and 69 and choose a line number between 1 and 50. Ursula, give
me a page number.
Councilman Boyt: Before you_do that, you better pass the motion?
Councilman Johnson: I'd like to say that I'd like to make about 6 people
ineligible for the $50.00 and those are the 6 people sitting right here.
Mayor_ Chmiel: Yes, I agree.
Councilman Boyt: How about anyone within the City?
Councilman Johnson: Should City employees be. ..
Don Ashworth: This is the only time you're going to have worry about this. The
next time you're going to have cards. We' ll do a drum roll. Dave will come up
and actually pull the card out so no one here will know and Dave does not live
in the City so that takes care of all of our problems.
I/ Councilman Boyt: I think we'll get the same benefit for $25.00. Why spend
$50.00? Maybe I'm underestimating our folks.
Councilman Johnson: How about two $25.00's? Double your chances.
Councilman Boyt: How about two 25's. That might in fact increase the
I/ possibility.
53
i
Council Meeting - April 10, 1989
Councilwoman Dimler: Do you know why they picked $50.00 for one time every
month.
Steve Hanson: I believe that's what used in another community and that's where
it came from.
Mayor Chmiel: If it's in other communities, I think we should continue with it.
Councilwoman moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve having a $50.00 prize
drawing for the curbside recycling, the address to be randomly determined by the
City Council prior to each pick up date. All voted in favor except Councilman
Boyt who opposed and the motion carried.
The City Council picked page 57, line 27.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
Fll
ESTABLISH NO SMOKING POLICY, CITY HALL - CITY MANAGER.
Don Ashworth: I'm making recommendation that we tighten up the policies
basically to have the entire lower area as no smoking. The way the report is
written is to have Councilman Workman be the one who would be responsible if
there's any type of a problem with the two remaining smoke areas. I guess what
I'd like to do is change that slightly in that I think it should still be myself
who would actually consummate any final action but in terms of sending this out
to employees, having them feel that they can contact Tom or really any council
member for that matter, and that the item then would be acted on. In other
words, if you would not release to me who it is that feels aggrieved. We would
just be forced to correct the situation if we can't correct it through
negotiations, then we close down the no smoking. But I would propose to send
this as a policy out to all employees telling them what it is we're going to do
and if in any way they feel aggrieved by the smoking that would occur_ in the two
private office areas, that they would be encouraged to contact any council
members to basically get rid of the problem.
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Johnson to establish the No Smoking Policy
as recommended by the City Manager. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PROPOSAL FORMAT, CITY ATTORNEY - CITY MANAGER.
Don Ashworth: I have just given this to the City Council to be aware of the
fact that the advertisement will be going into the League of Cities for the
proposals for City Attorney. You have a copy of the proposal format. The
individual firms would not be receiving the legal service questionaire. That
was something that we're doing in house just to give us an idea as to whether or
not the services are being adequately performed or not. The bidders would be
getting everything except for the very back pages. I was just making the City
Council aware of the fact that that process is starting and is going into this
next edition of the League of Cities.
Mayor Chmiel: We don't need a motion on that?
54
MIL
— City Council Meeting - April 10, 1989 1 9 7
Don Ashworth: You've already instructed staff to do this.
Councilman Boyt: I'd like to comment on this. I think noting in here that we
have a financial advisor, I would encourage the City to consider also seeking an
insurance advisor. I think we have any number of insurance policies including
the personal health insurance and we should have some third party reviewing
that.
Don Ashworth: It's a good suggestion. We do have an insurance committee that
is established for our liability, automotive and workmen's comp lines. We do
not have a consultant established or citizens group per se on our health
insurance areas. This is an area that I'd really like to do something on.
There's cafeteria plans out there that would really benefit our employees. We
have people who are working mothers and they could make those deductions, etc..
We just simply haven't found the time to be able to go out and get somebody to
EMI help us.
Mayor Chmiel: How about a citizens group?
III Don Ashworth: That's what we have in the other insurance lines and Don Stafford
and Jim Kellian. They, in consultation with myself, work to select an agent of
record. Then once you have your agent of record on, then he can go out and
III bring in the specific proposals. That committee can look at the proposals.
Decide which one best meets the need of the City and they, as a group, then make
the recommendation. It's a great process. The health side, I haven't been able
to put together a similiar type of package but I surely would like to do that.
_y___ Mayor Chmiel: Okay, let's do that.
ICouncilman Boyt: How much is this search for a City Attorney costing the City?
Don Ashworth: I'm not sure Bill. I do not believe that there's been
I significant expense to date with this process. Once the proposals come in and
we start going through interviews, we may run up more hourly bills. I would
like to have the LaFever firm help me in that review process to narrow them down
to bring them down to you. $1,000.00?
ICouncilman Boyt: Alright, you're saying $1,000.00 would probably be the maximum
you'd have to spend in this search?
IDon Ashworth: I'm guessing, yes.
Councilman Boyt: I wonder, when the in house review service comes back and I
II think out of this whole list there might have been one person that went down and
checked goods, maybe two people, out of all the staff that reviewed it.
Everyone else said excellent. I'm not sure that it's worth $1,000.00 to go out
II and advertise for an attorney when apparently our current services are
excellent, judged by staff. So I think this has been a good exercise but I
would suggest that we stop here and save the money.
ri__ Mayor Chmiel: The balance of the Council's feelings on it.
11
55
II
ma
K
-`tiiy Counci 1 Meeting - April 10, 1989
Councilman Johnson: A lot of our staff's fairly new. They've worked under one
City Attorney. Steve's worked under several. I guess you've worked under a
couple. Gary's I think pretty much the first city job he's had other than
consulting. I think our City Attorney is excellent too but then this is the
only City Attorney I've ever been involved with. I don't think it's completely
an exercise in futility at this time. I don't think we should stop.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I'd like to see us go back to our original reason ---
for doing it. Can you refresh my memory Don?
Don Ashworth: The City Council had felt that we had not gone through a review
process for the City Attorney, in fact all of the consultant areas so you had
made a decision that you would like to take them during the course of 1989 and
hopefully as early as possible, go through a process of reviewing the various
consultant service areas. One was City Attorney, Bond Consultant and our
Auditors. And in that process to bring back proposals and this was not going to
be where we would, that we were saying that we were getting rid of any of those
firms. Maybe it would be a good idea since it's been at least 4 to 5 years on
any of them, to go through that process again.
Councilwoman Dimler: Thank you Don. I guess I would stick with that. I think
it's still a good idea to go ahead because I think it keeps them on their toes.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess I'm inclined to agree with that part of it too because I
think I was the one who sort of instigated this at the start. I would say that
my position would be to continue.
Councilman Workman: I concur. U
Mayor Chmiel: So then I would say that we should move ahead as we have.
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to adjourn the meeting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:45
p.m..
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
I
56
11
s.
. ,f
I
REGULARSMEETINGNING COMMISSION , � .,
APRIL 5, 1989
I
Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7 : 40 p.m. .
IMEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart, Steve Emmings, Annette Ellson, Jim
Wildermuth, Ladd Conrad , Brian Batzli and David Headla
I STAFF PRESENT: Steve Hanson, Planning Director; Jo Ann Olsen, Asst.
City Planner and Mark Koegler , Consultant
IAPPROVAL OF MINUTES: Wildermuth moved, Elison seconded to approve the
Minutes of the Planning Commission meetings dated March 1, 1989 and March
15, 1989. All voted in favor except David Headla who abstained for
Ithe March 1, 1989 Minutes and the motion carried .
IITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS :
Erhart : I recommend that the Planning Commission get feedback from the
I City Council whether we take up the issue of banning plastics that are non
recycleable . Similar ordinance that Minneapolis passed . I as a Planning
Commission member which is very environmentally conscience would like to
take that issue up and see this City coordinate our efforts with the City
Iof Minneapolis and try to get, ultimately try to get a statewide law.
r
(' Emmings: Does it ban the sale?
IErhart : It bans the use of plastics for use and packaging which are not
recycleable or environmentally biodegradeable. They expect that St. Paul
is going to pass such an ordinance and Hopkins has indicated that they
Iare, the Mayor of Hopkins has indicated that he is in favor of passing
such an ordinance . Essentially Minneapolis requested that the suburbs
take up the issue because they' re afraid if the State gets it first, that
Ithe lobbying is going to dilute it down so much that it won ' t be
effective. And I ' ll repeat an experience I had 3 years ago when we bought
the additional 40 acres there. Part of it was kind of crap, junky weeds
and so forth and we took it and tilled it all up and planted it in trees .
I And this was behind some houses but it was undeveloped land . I 'd say in
an area of about 4 acres we probably pulled a third of a pick-up load of
plastic and metal and junk. It was underneath the grass but it had
Iaccumulated over the years. It was just amazing. A lot of it was bags .
Conrad : That ' s a good issue . What direction would you like us to take?
IErhart: We should either express our interest. If we have interest in
it , we should go to the Council and say we 'd like to take it up as an
issue I think. It seems to me that would be the appropriate way to
Iproceed. If Council says they don ' t us to . . .
Conrad : Would you like to get the Council feedback or would you like to
have staff do some research on the issue?
F
Erhart : I really don' t have any.
I
NM
. 1
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 2 '
C
Conrad : Steve, what do you think is most appropriate? Should we just
start the process here and have you do some research on this or should we
get City Council feedback on the subject first?
Hanson: I think you could go either way. If you'd like I could get some
information from the City of Minneapolis . . . I haven ' t seen specifically
what they' ve adopted and the timeframe. I know it' s phased in over
several years but I don ' t know the specifics on it.
Conrad: Why don' t we instruct Steve to do a little bit of background so
when we send something up to the City Council , they have something, a
little bit to react to so there might be more of a chance to get them
interested in the subject .
Headla : I 'd like to see it a little more in depth to the extent that one
way or the other we end up with a public hearing. Either put in a ban or
not put in a ban but give the people of Chanhassen a chance to voice an
opinion.
Ellson : What about our current recycling? It fell through whoever we had
to do it?
Conrad : I had all my recycleables out today. And the dogs went through '
( it. I can' t believe it. Horseshoe Curve is not real pretty.
Ellson : I heard that the company that we had hired had backed out and
said they don' t want to do it anymore.
Hanson: They did. We only had gotten two bids .
Ellson: But the other one was those people that were here that wanted
that other site. Admiral? I 'd like to see them get it.
Hanson: No. They didn ' t bid. There were just two bids and the low
bidder , they had decided to award it to them and they were putting some
stuff together and we didn' t hear from them for a while and Jo Ann called
and said hey what ' s going on. Actually through the County found out that
they had decided they were going to back out because of what they said
were personal problems . The background on that . Then we contacted the
other bidder and they said that they would step in and do the service.
What it' s done is it ' s pushed it off a couple of weeks . The difference
between them as far as pick-up and that , as I recall , the present
contractor will do it every 2 weeks whereas the other contractor was twice
a month.
Conrad : What ' s the difference?
Batzli : 24 and 26.
Hanson : Yes , it ' s 2 more pick-ups during the year . There ' s always been a
question on which is easier .
1
I
Planning Commission Meeting
IIApril 5, 1989 - Page 3
z
Ilk
Ellson : Like first and third or every other or something like that.
IConrad: Is there a plan to put out little signs to remind everybody?
Hanson : Jo Ann ' s going to be here a little later .
IConrad: I think we want Jo Ann to coordinate that effort just to remind
people.
I Hanson: She can go over it with the promotional campaign and so forth for
the recycling.
Wildermuth : Are we going to have little containers like Excelsior?
IHanson: I don' t think so. Just paper bags .
IConrad : Some communities they just put little yard signs out on the curb
before the day of the pick up or a couple days before just to remind
everybody and that' s really a good idea .
IHanson: We may have to amend the sign ordinance.
Conrad : It may be temporary but that ' s really a real good way to do it .
I
`' COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE - WORKSESSION.
IMark Koegler : It ' s amazing this item isn ' t under old , old business .
We ' re on a schedule that hopefully Steve and I are going to be able to
Imeet . We have every intention of doing it . Of getting a draft of this
thing finally roped in by about the 17th of May. As a part of getting to
that step, we had a couple of different topical areas that we needed to
review with the Commission this evening. There' s really about four areas .
IThe first deals with goals and policies . The second thing we want to go
into and cover a little bit is the supply of commercial/industrial
property. The third item is some discussion of land uses and policies and
Isuch in the rural area. Fourth is to focus on corridor studies and that' s
going to lead into a more specific discussion of some land use and
alignment alternatives for TH 101 around the new TH 212 interchange. I 'd
like to start with the goals and policies section. The material is really
Inothing new in what' s been presented there. It ' s simply though, in some
cases , it' s the first times you ' ve seen some of the comments that you had
made previously over about the past, probably about the past year. Just
Ikind of wanted to bring together a composite copy of those to allow you to
look at those one last time or one other time and I don ' t certainly intend
to go through those item by item or even section by section but perhaps if
Iyou see anything there that you want the language worked over a little bit
or you want to add something or delete something, feel free to point those
out. I suggest we start with that and then move on into the other
sections of discussion .
I- Conrad : Commissioners , anything on page 1? Any comments on page 1? Page
2?
C I
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 4 '
Erhart : Yes . Under goal . I would like to see us include, where we say
protect and preserve those items that we listed above which is open space,
natural tree cover , wetlands, variable topography. In addition to protect
and preserve, I would like to also see add the word enhance.
Koegler : Where are you Tim? '
Erhart: Under goal on community development . Enhance these amenities .
Maybe even to the extent of including words like increase urban forest.
Zero lose of wetlands which is now I think a national goal . If you can
get the meaning in there, I don' t want to clutter this thing up with a
bunch of wording . You' re much better at words than I am but I guess a
little stronger on the, increase urban forest enhancing those things and
minimal environmental degregation.
Emmings: Minimal? '
Erhart: No stop environmental degregation. Something .
Conrad: Minimal ' s not bad. '
Erhart : I don ' t think we can , realistically.
Batzli : How about minimize?
Erhart : Minimize or something . That ' s my only comment . '
Headla: I don' t see that as a goal . Chanhassen is a high amenity
residential community containing large amounts of open space. To me that
isn' t a goal . I don ' t thihk it 's structured right and I don ' t know that
it should be a goal to contain large amounts of open space . Are we saying
we don' t want people to build here and there?
Batzli : I think that ' s a good goal personally.
Ellson: I think it' s defining what it' s trying to achieve. You have to
say what it is first and then you say, now this is what we' re trying to do
because of that.
Headla : It ' s a high amenity residential space. As a goal , that isn ' t a
good sentence.
Erhart : I think if you take the whole paragraph as a whole , I think the
first sentence sort of defines .
Ellson : Right . You could say it' s the City' s overall goal , these
qualities and then name the first line but it says the same thing if you
have. . .
Headla : But then I disagree. I don ' t think our goal is to contain large '
amounts of open space. If that is a goal , I 'd like to hear somebody say
that is a goal to contain large amounts of open space .
Planning Commission Meeting
IIApril 5, 1989 - Page 5
i-
lk
Batzli : I ' ll say it . I think that' s a goal of Chanhassen .
IIHeadla: Then I 'd disagree with you.
Ellson: What is the opposite of large amounts of open space? There' s
IIvery little of it.
Headla : Not large.
IIErhart : I would agree with Dave. That should not be a goal of the City
to have large amounts of open space.
I Headla : To me the only place you have large amounts of open space is the
lake and swamps. The other land , it' s going to be used .
IBatzli : Do you want parks? Parks . Backyards.
Ellson: Lakes are open space.
IIHeadla : What I 'm really asking is , and I was trying to think how can we
state that better and I don' t have a good suggestion on it but I don ' t
think the way it' s worded now is what we' re really after .
IIr Koegler: This is a fairly critical goal so we probably should try to come
to resolution about what you think you are after .
IIHeadla: Do you think I have a point there Mark?
Koegler : Dave, you always have a point .
II
Erhart: I agree entirely like you say because as we go later on, I have
another problem with another thing that kind of goes along with that
Ithat' s been added I think since the last time and that is that there' s a
goal somewhere I ' ve got it . Here it is. Discourage development in rural
wooded areas. How do you do that?
IHeadla : I ' ve got that underlined .
Erhart: I mean I don' t understand how that' s a goal .
IKoegler : It was a statement that I took out of comments that were made by
the Commission.
IWildermuth : I 'd like to do that but I don ' t know how we'd do it.
IEllson: You make it a goal and the goal is just that .
Erhart : But then the goal means , if you want to do that , then the City
I[-
has to buy that land. That' s the only way and the same with open spaces .
If you want to somehow. . .
I
OM --
I
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 6 '
C
Ellson : I would say the lake is an open space and stuff . I mean if you
were to fly over, I don' t think you need to take it literally. Like an
open space is 100 x 100 x 100 and anything smaller is a small open space .
That's spliting hairs .
Erhart : I guess I would be more comfortable with a word like a balanced
amount of open space rather than just have an open ended. It' s our goal
to have as much open space as we can. That ' s sort of what it says now.
Headla: Like we wouldn' t allow any building .
Ellson: We' re trying to give the same feel that Chanhassen has always had
when people come in here. We want to have growth but we don't want it to
feel like change from one city that had this feel to it to a city that has
a whole different feel so you ' re defining what the feel is . When people
come in now, they think of it as open space . A lot of tree cover . A lot
of wetlands. A lot of different topography. What we' re trying to achieve
in a long range plan is to get that same feeling but allow growth. That ' s
basically what I see this statement saying.
Koegler : Does it get to the point if you just simply remove the words, '
large amounts of? If you have that lead in sentence saying the City has
open space and then to the qualifier second sentence that says we ' re going
to protect, enhance and preserve that amenity. ,
Erhart : Yes , if we could get rid of the large amounts .
Emmings: But that' s already what it says. It looks to me like that first
sentence it simply says what exists . The second sentence is saying the
goal is to protect, preserve and enhance those things. I don ' t think that
first sentence is a goal . I think it' s more of a description. '
Headla: It' s a preview first.
Conrad : But it sets up the second sentence.
Emmings: I don' t really have much trouble with it myself .
Conrad : But it doesn ' t mean anything . I guess I do agree that if we
wanted to protect, if we wanted to keep open space, then we wouldn' t allow
new residential development . And I 'm wondering , are we promoting
clustered housing and we' re not. What else do we want to do to promote
open space? I think the things to do are the wetlands and the key natural
environment is what we want to preserve so I think if we do that, then
that ' s what we' re talking about . So the open space is going to be eaten
up by residential and we' re not trying to prevent that, to my knowledge .
Erhart : I think I ' d be comfortable , just take the words large amounts out
and leave we want to preserve open spaces .
Ellson : How does that sound to you Dave? '
Headla: I like that. If you delete that .
1. ,
I Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 7
IKoegler : Okay, we' ll do that.
I Hanson : But that one is an overriding premise for the ones that follow.
The ones that follow I think are trying to clarify and define that.
I Emmi.ngs: I have another one on that page. In the goal under natural
resources, it says promote rational planning which correlates growth and
the preservation of a high quality environment. And I 'd change that to
say the preservation of the natural environment simply because
II environment , like in the goal at the top of page 3, Chanhassen should
provide an environment. Sometimes environment is used broadly to include
people things and here I think we' re talking about the natural
Ienvironment.
Koegler : Yes , I think that ' s a good point .
IIConrad: Then when we get down to policies under that point, we say review
shall include but not be limited to soils, vegetation, drainageways ,
topography. In your mind Mark, does vegetation cover any kind of
Iforestation? Is that all encompassing? Okay.
Koegler : I think that' s a carry over from the ' 80 plan. Given the City' s
increased awareness in wetlands since that time, we may want to
,,y specifically add that also. That ' s certainly an item that' s key to any of
your reviews .
IIConrad : Yes , we talk about it every week. Every other week. Anything on
page 3?
IHeadla : Just one . Mark, you' ll have to help me . I think it fits in here
because we talk about things going in the water for the farms . What I 'm
trying to get in here is , I 've brought it up before. It really didn' t get
to first base but the subject is what do we do with all our wells. I ' ve
I got two wells on my place. One ' s a shallow well . One ' s a deep well .
Sooner or later those are going to leak , just like everybody else who ' s
got city water now.
Ellson: They' re going to leak?
IHeadla : They' re going to leak sooner or later and if we wait til later ,
we stand a great danger of damaging our water supplies .
IErhart : You' re saying like fertilizer would leak, go down in the well and
get into the ground water?
Headla : Right . Sooner or later it ' s going to happen . I 'd kind of like
Ito see that addressed in this thing first as goals and see what we can do
to work that . I think it ' s a time bomb problem. Just see what we can do
to work that over a period of time and maybe we can ' t work it this coming
year . We may have to do just a lot of investigating . Find out what
should be done but I would like to see that as a goal that we address .
Conrad : And how would you work that or what would your intent be?
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 8
C
Headla : The intent is to come up with a policy on how we handle. . .
Ellson: Like monitoring the ground water?
Headla : No . How we handle vacated wells. In my own mind , and I 'm not
that well versed on how to handle it but anytime, let' s say I came in for
a building permit for anything on the place, that then would allow the
City to come in and say hey, you've got a well here that has to be taken
care of. I
Emmings : What can they do Dave, do you know? What is a person to do to
prevent the problem?
Headla : I don' t think I have anywhere near the knowledge to say this is
the best thing to do. I know the State' s looked at it. People are
wringing their hands yet . I don' t think there' s a, this is an absolute
way to handle it. I think we should be addressing that.
Erhart : You could pull the pipes out .
Headla: You pull the casing out but you 've got to backfill . What do you
backfill it with? Is it concrete?
I( Erhart: Yes, you could just run concrete down the casing .
Headla : Maybe it ' s sand and yes , maybe you don ' t pull the casing . Like
I 've got a jet pump, maybe just pull the pipes and backfill with sand.
Jay Johnson: I 've been working on a hazardous waste problem here in the
City today. I just discovered some abandoned hazardous waste but I
overheard what you' re talking about . The State has standards on the State
and National standards on how to abandon a well . State Health Department
standards . The Health Department' s in charge of wells. Basically it' s a
bentenite concrete slurry that is pumped into the well housing .
Bentenite' s a clay that expands. Concrete shrinks when it dries so if you
pour concrete down, it shrinks and you've still got a hole so with the
bentenite mixture , it expands completely filling the hole and becomes
impermable. You put bentenite plugs in and things. Most of your well
drillers that are licensed well drillers know how to pull . Then they have
to certify it properly to the geological survey and everything. Of the
places that we have seen wells, we ' ve made them so far say you have to
abandon that well per State Standards. I didn' t get the first part of the
conversation. I just got here and heard you talking about wells . '
Headla: Like all along Minnewashta where the sewer and water went in.
They all had to hook up to city water . We all had wells. Those things
are just sitting there. Sooner or later they' re going to leak into the
ground water .
Jay Johnson : An abandoned well , what ' s going to leak into the ground ,
water?
I
Planning Commission Meeting
IIApril 5, 1989 - Page 9
0-
,
I
Ir-
Headla : The surface water .
I Jay Johnson : The main problem are septic systems too close to wells.
That the septic system leach gets to the well and leaks in. Or people
with hazardous waste that say, here ' s a convenient place to get rid of it
and down the well . Those types of problems .
IHeadla : My point is, I 'd like to see it addressed in our Comprehensive
Plan as making a policy statement for the City.
IIWildermuth: As areas become sewer and water , wells should be properly
capped or maintained.
IConrad : Does that seem like a reasonable policy statement? I don' t know
that that' s a goal statement Mark. Is it a policy?
IHeadla : Yes , I think a policy. Maybe one of the things under the policy
here.
IKoegler : Yes . I think we can insert that as a policy item. I don' t know
right at this moment where it fits the best. Whether it' s under this
section or utilities or where it goes .
IIHeadla: I went through there and I couldn' t find one. Say hey, this is
the place so I just put it under this one because you mentioned about
fertilizer for farmers .
IIConrad : I guess there ' s some ramification. It ' s easy to put some words
in here and then there' s another thing of enforcement or whatever so I
Ithink if we put it in, we should really flag it as what are we doing about
it? Are they just words or is there something that the City wants to
aggresively go after? I don' t have a cluse whether we should be. I don ' t
know that it' s a problem because I have a well on my, we converted to city
Iwater , I ' ve got a well and I haven' t done a thing and I just don' t know
what to do.
IHeadla : And I think it ' s just a time bomb that ' s all .
Erhart: In keeping the correct approach to what we have here in this Comp
IPlan , I 'd like to keep the statement more general and in terms of putting
words to the effect to say that protect ground water by strict enforcement
of standards relating to well abandonment , use of fertilizers . Make it a
more general statement as opposed to just honing in one paragraph
Ispecifically relating to wells . Let ' s just talk about ground water
protection in general in one pargraph and I think it would fit more with
the design of this document .
IIHeadla : That would cover what I think we should be looking at .
t Erhart: I have another one. I 'd like to see us , on page 3, insert it ' s
IIour goal to reforest , re-establish urban forest or reforest unused ag
areas. I do believe that that is going to become a national priority. I ' d
like to see us , and I 'm okay with the hardwoods too Dave. I think it
II
IN
,,
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 10 ,
C
ought to be a goal and I think this city is doing something that I 've been
involved now for the last 3 years in tree give away programs for Arbor
Day. I think that ' s a very, it ' s an important thing that we need to take
up and start doing because trees do balance against the pollutions that
are contributed to the air from automobiles . In fact I heard one
statistic was it only takes 250 trees to balance 1 automobile which I find
a little hard to believe but there is an amount of trees that will balance
it.
Conrad : That was the jet plane. It ' s 250 trees for a jet plane . '
Erhart: Is that what you heard?
Conrad : Yes . ,
Erhart : Well that ' s even more unbelieveable. I would think it would take
more like 10,000. '
Ellson : 250 what size trees?
Erhart : I don' t know but there is some number that the Americans could
keep driving their gas guzzlers and pollutants if they had a certain
number of trees that you could have an environmentally balanced situation.
So the solution is to find out what that is and get that many trees in the
ground .
Ellson : You'd like to see us spearheading . . . ,
Erhart: I 'd like to see it simply as a goal is to support reforestation
of unused areas . It ' s something that Europe' s been doing for years . They
have actual government programs, reforest any unused piece of land .
Conrad : But what does that mean? Now break it down into something that
would actually happen here in Chanhassen? '
Erhart : For example what we do is we give away trees at Arbor Day to
anybody that comes up to the Kenny' s .
Conrad : The City of Chanhassen would?
Erhart: We do. We do that now. We ' re going to give away 6 , 000 trees . I
Ellson: About this size?
Erhart : Well yes . We' re not going to give out 40 foot oaks . We just
take those down.
Ellson : Say it as a statement as you have it in here . '
f Erhart: Just that it' s our goal to re-establish forest in areas, unused
areas . '
II .
I Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 11
If
Conrad : Is it a policy? It' s a policy to promote the reforestation and
unused. . .
IIErhart : Ag areas and the urban forest .
IBatzli : Urban forest?
Erhart : Urban forest yes . And the last one was the zero net loss of
II wetlands. I don' t see that in here specifically. Maybe I missed it .
Koegler : No it ' s not and I noted that .
I Batzli : Speaking of wetlands, on page 3. Fourth paragraph up on page 3 .
Construction activity will be permitted in floodplains , shorelands ,
wetlands. I 'd like to reverse that so it reads, construction activity
II will not be permitted in floodplains , shorelands and wetlands unless
consistent with adopted ordinances and standards .
Emmings : And the way I wrote it , for what it ' s worth. I left it the way
IIit was and I said construction activity will be permitted in floodplains ,
shorelands and wetlands only when in strict compliance with adopted
ordinances .
I.,_ Batzli : Yes . Any one of those would be better than the way it is now.
Conrad: And the way I wrote that was, construction activity will only be
I permitted .
Batzli : The essence should be.
IIEmmi_ngs: Change your emphasize .
II Batzli : Shouldn' t be permitted unless in strict compliance . The other
one I had, the last pargraph on that page, actually two things. One, in
the goal , the needs of man . It seems kind of sexist for the 80 ' s . Maybe
persons or something. Last pargraph, urban development is appropriate .
IIs that a statement that urban development will always be appropriate in
prime agricultural areas and that you won' t have any other kind of
development? That ' s kind of like saying it ' s inevitable that this is
II going to happen?
Koegler : Perhaps it' s just a matter of how you ' re defining that term.
II think in the way this is implied and whether or not it ' s clear , you
either have agricultural development in this context or urban development .
Urban development is a homestead if you will sitting in the middle of ag
land . Suddenly it becomes more urbanized .
IBatzli : I don' t know, I always picture that as being like residential and
not urban and maybe that ' s just my own.
Koegler : Maybe the problems with the word urban because it' s intended to
mean development . Not necessarily high density. If any. .high intensity
land use.
II
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 12 1
Emmings : You could say other developments instead of urban developments .
Batzli : That just struck me when I read that that this was kind of like
inevitable like the city was going to end up concrete city blocks and we
couldn' t do anything about it.
Erhart : I think in other documents that we use frequently, the word urban
is used to describe all development.
Batzli : Do we ever define what the word means in our Comp Plan? 1
Koegler: No. Not really. Only in the context of it being used in
metropolitan urban service area . Then urban comes in to it again which
implies every intensity development as long as it has sewer .
Batzli : If it ' s a term of art that means any development other than
agricultural , I ' ll buy it. I just had a problem when I read it. If it' s
in the planning industry. It' s a term of art to mean to any development .
Koegler: That' s the intent. In this statement, there' s no problem. We
can substitute . Instead of urban development , just non-agricultural
devleopment.
Batzli : I like it better but the other commissioners didn' t seem to have
as big of a problem.
Emmings: I had a comment about the second sentence in that one . I can' t
figure out what it means.
Batzli : Urban uses? 1
Emmings: No. It just says , the conversion will be governed by the
provisions and restrictions of the Comp Plan. This is the Comp Plan and I 1
don' t know. I didn' t know what that meant .
Koegler: Really in terms of strict application, shouldn' t probably read
the Comp Plan but should read the Codes and Ordinances of the City because
that' s really the governing entity versus the policy entity.
Emmings: But couldn' t we take that for granted? Isn' t that true of 1
everything that' s on here?
Koegler : I think so. 1
Emmings: I think you could probably just knock that sentence out .
Conrad : It doesn' t mean much to me . 1
Koegler : Consider it scratched .
Conrad: Anything else on 3?
1
II
Planning Commission Meeting
IIApril 5, 1989 - Page 13
0-
II > Batzli : One other thing while we ' re talking about this stuff . We talked
a little bit about runoff and what the downstream stuff can handle .
I Lately we' ve run into a lot of situations where they' re going to take
drainage off of a roof or a parking lot and something and we talk about
putting in skimmers and traps and all that other good stuff . Do we need
to say anything in here about that? I just had a little note and I didn' t
Ireally see much about it except for the fifth paragraph up about storm
water runoff storage sites are unavailable but, I think you elude to it
when , maybe even when you talked about Dave' s preserving ground water and
IIsuch. Maybe it would best be fit into something like that. As long as
we' re encompassing handling pollutants that would enter the runoff or
something.
II Erhart : You could beef up that second paragraph under policies on page 3
there where it says water and storm drain systems should be routed and
constructed to minimize permanent damage to natural resources . You could
IIbeef that paragraph up a little bit maybe.
Koegler : Yes . Put something in there pertaining to the control of water
Iquality.
Headla : How are you going to word the fourth one up? Did we have
agreement on that?
IFBatzli : I think any one of the three .
IIKoegler: I wrote down essentially Brian' s comments and I think the theme
was the same on the other two.
Conrad: Page 4?
IEllson: I had something about recycling . Since we' re talking about using
biodegradeable, non-polluting chemicals. Did we want to say something
1 about or maybe encouraging recycling , because it seems to be in the same
vein. So let ' s put it in the plan that we want recycling .
IKoegler : Do you want that to carry forward and say, and use of
biodegradeable or recycleable products?
Erhart : That ' s what I was thinking . We could add plastics in that first
IIone. Or products. Maybe at this point products are safer .
Emmings : I had if you go down to housing and then count up 4 where it
Isays, construction plans and specs should contain provisions for adequate
on and off site protection of existing vegetation . If we wanted to be a
little more aggressive there we could add that they should also show a
Iplan for replacement of trees which are removed for construction purposes .
I knew you 'd like that. I actually thought of you as I was writing that
one .
s
it- Headla : I like that one. That would just reinforce that .
II
11
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 14 1
Emmings: Then I just had a question. On the pargraph right at the top of
the page it talks about the Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves Act and
I have no idea what that is.
Erhart : I can explain that . If you' re in ag preserve.
Emmings: Is this the green acres? ,
Erhart : No. This is another one similar to that. If you' re in that, I
think the City is required to have their zoning be consistent with that. '
Emmings: With what?
Erhart : In that you can' t develop it if you' re in the ag preserve. ,
Emmings: Oh. Okay. So it' s an election that you make if you have 40
acres . i
Erhart : Yes . I ' ve got 80 acres . It ' s in ag preserve so it has to be, I
think it has to be zoned agricultural . Until that' s not in the ag
preserve, you can ' t change it .
Wildermuth: Can you take it out at will?
Erhart : No .
Conrad : You sign a contract don ' t you.
Emmings: Do you get a tax break?
Erhart : Yes . You used to get a tax break. It ' s another trick you know.
They make you sign up for 8 years and then 3 years in they take your tax
break away but it takes you 8 years to get out of the contract .
Conrad: They didn' t do that did they?
Erhart : Yes they did.
Conrad : The point was to reduce the taxes . . .
Erhart: In exchange for a contract . I
Conrad : They didn' t increase the taxes all the way back up to where it
was? '
Erhart : This year it' s virtually back even , yes .
Conrad: That' s really tacky. I
Erhart : I was lucky thought because I put it in just for 8 years and
immediately terminated it so that I have a 8 year block so it comes out in
1991. But for the poor guy who put it in indefinitely and now he ' s stuck
with this minimum of 8 year contract and now there' s no tax benefit.
II .
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5 , 1989 - Page 15
lit
Conrad : That ' s just terrible.
IIKoegler : That' s 8 years from time of notification of the cancellation .
Conrad: Okay. Anything else on 4?
IIErhart : Were we going to do something on that replacing existing
vegetation? If we do that, I think we also have to say valuable
II vegetation . I don' t think replacing 1 inch trees and 2 inch trees , and
I don' t know what the word you choose Mark but .
Headla : I think you ' ve got to be careful on that because we had a
I forester go through and take a look at a lot of box elder and said, well
those are trash trees . Then a bulldozer comes down and scraps it clean .
If I had my choice of looking at bare ground or box elder, I ' ll take box
II elder .
Erhart : I agree .
IIEllson: So you' re concerned that they say equal value? Then people will
say, that ' s worthless according to Mr. Forester .
Erhart : My point , I wouldn' t want to see somebody go back and replace the
, prickly ash.
IIConrad : We' ve got to be careful here. You' re designing an ordinance.
You ' re really designing an ordinance here versus a policy.
IIErhart : No . That ' s why I wanted to use the real broad marketable or
valuable . If our goal is to replace existing vegetation, I don ' t think
that' s really our goal . I think our goal is to replace existing valuable
vegetation . I 'm just adding that one word . I 'm not trying to get
Ispecific.
Conrad : Any problems with that?
Emmings : It ' s just something to cause arguments .
Batzli : It is . An attorney would pick up on that like.
IIEmmings: Valuable to who?
IErhart : But all these things. All these things are broad .
Koegler : . . .enact a city ordinance somewhere down the road that clarifies
IIwhat that value is , then you ' re okay.
Erhart: There ' s nothing in here that you can . . .
lirEllson : That you can take to court .
II
. !
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 16 '
Conrad : Just so you know that if this goes through, then it' s up to you ,
to spur some kind of ordinance. Otherwise it ' s nothing .
Erhart : I think we are talking about putting ordinances. 1
Ellson: Right. For like diameter to diameter .
Batzli : We' ve got tree mapping .
Erhart : Yes . I think there' s a lot of work going on in this city right
now that' s consistent with defining what' s a valuable tree and then
requiring it to be replaced . Eden Prairie does it.
Conrad: Okay. Anything else on 4? On 5? '
Wildermuth : On the first paragraph . Existing housing within the city
should be maintained and improved. How do we do that? How do we promote
that?
Hanson: Through a couple of things. One of the things is , some of the
block grant money that the City gets , goes back into a rehabilitation
program to rehab existing homes that are below code .
Wildermuth: Do we have any block grant money? 1
Hanson: The block grant , the Council just went through the hearing on
that and they allocated for the next block grant period about $19 , 000. 00.
And the City' s done that historically over a period of time.
Wildermuth: $19, 000. 00? That ought to do a lot.
Hanson: It ' s $19, 000.00 out of a budget of about $33 , 000. 00. What
they' ve done in a lot of the homes is, the range in the cost of the
improvements to upgrade them have been from $5 , 000 . 00 to $7 , 000. 00 so
they' re looking at out of that fund maybe being able to do 3 or 4.
Ellson: So you' re saying that' s one and we' re just basically encouraging
any others that might come along .
Koegler : Just to add one other thing . There are still a few State
programs available through housing finance agencies and things based on
financial need . For weatherization and those kinds of programs so there
are some other compatible programs . They are few and far between these
days but there still are a few. ,
Ellson: Does this , by saying the City will provide adequate land for
projected housing growth, is this basically saying that if we see that
there will be a lot of people moving here and we don ' t have enough area
zoned residential we'd be forced to say then the minimum lot size should
be smaller or we should find more places? What is this encouraging us to
do? How much strong arm is it to have us , force us to find places for
people to have homes? I don' t know.
II
Planning Commission Meeting
IIApril 5, 1989 - Page 17
t
' Koegler : The reason it' s in there is it' s kind of a lead in to some of
the land use plan later on where you' re allocating various spaces in the
IIcommunity for various land uses . It ' s just saying that based upon the
City, and that' s an emphasize. The City of Chanhassen' s projections on
what will be needed , and that again is tied to what goals you want and
what type of housing you ' re after . We' ll make every effort to provide
IIthat land and then of course the caveat consistent with the regional
policies which are the folks in St. Paul .
IIErhart : Where does it say consistent with regional?
Koegler : In that sentence. Regional policies primarily is reflecting
MUSA.
IBatzli : Are all of these policies on this page?
IKoegler: Yes .
Batzli : Why did we change from should , might , could , wants to , to will ,
IIwill, will , will , will all of a sudden on this one?
Koegler : Not specific reason .
Batzli : I 'd like to soften those . Each and every one of them where it
says the City will . The City will . The City will . The City will down
further .
IIKoegler : Wills to shoulds?
Batzli : Yes . If it' s a policy. Unless we' re writing an ordinance that
we' re going to do this.
Ellson : You' ve got a little more breathing room with the word should is
IIthat what you' re saying?
Batzli : Well , soften it somehow. Maybe should isn ' t the right word but .
IIWildermuth: There are a number of shoulds in here. I think it was
literary variety.
IBatzli : Will is like a command to do something .
Ellson: That' s true. That ' s why this one probably struck me that way
Itoo . It sounded like someone could come in and say we have a commune . We
want it to be here and we want you to find a place for us. Almost makes
it seem like that so you' re right .
IIHanson: The should reads more as being an intent .
Erhart : You go through this , there' s a lot of wills .
IrBatzli : That was my overall comment when I hit this page. This is where
it started . And maybe we want a will .
II
am
1
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 18 1
C
Erhart : I ' It ' s
I 'm more comfortable with the wills. I don' t know. It s a good
question because nothing bothers me more than writers in our company when
they use these soft words. What would and could . It just drives me nuts .
I always scratch them out and say, if this is what you' re going to do than
say it.
Batzli : Well we could say, see if Chanhassen might if it feels like it .
Hanson: At some future date. '
Emmings: And a time to be determined .
Koegler: We will or we won' t . ,
Erhart : My feeling of it is , if you ' re going to spend the effort to write
it down, by goll then say you ' re going to do it or you ' re not going to do
it .
Ellson : It' s also , it can be taken from a person who comes after us too
saying, you say you will do this. I don' t see a revitalizing program that
helps me or what have you so it can work both ways .
Koegler : So what' s the consensus? Soften them?
f
Batzli : My vote is to soften .
Ellson: I like should .
Conrad : I don ' t like will but I also am not real wild about the second
and the fourth paragraphs. They make sense that we should have
residential area but I think, does that mean that we' re just flat out
going to zone everything we want into residential just so any developer
can come in here and we ' ll expand the MUSA line to put whatever? I 'm a
little bit nervous about. It says to me, no matter what, if a developer
comes in we will find land for him. That ' s what those statements tell me
and I don' t agree with that.
Erhart : I don ' t think it says that .
Ellson: Tell us why Steve . I
Hanson : I think you ' re reading it wrong and I think that ' s what Mark
eluded to. When I read the policy, what it ' s really saying is that the
City of Chanhassen in determining the land use that it wants to have
happen within the City, will provide adequate land for the housing growth
to go along with that . What I see is that gets back to is how much
residential . How much industrial . How much open space that we talked
before within the whole framework of the City do you want to have? The
( intent in my mind is not that a developer can come in and say, hey it says
you' re going to provide adequate and I 'm going to tell you what adequate
is . I think the Planning Commission and the Council are going to tell the
developer what ' s adequate through the rest of the comprehensive plan .
II .
Planning Commission Meeting
IIApril 5 , 1989 - Page 19
1
II
Emmings : It also, it' s not as if you ' re almost reading it like the City
owns all the land in Chanhassen and we have to give it to the developer
II
when he comes in and that ' s not the way it is at all . A builder who comes
in is going to have to come in in an area that' s zoned for the type of
development he wants to put in.
IIConrad : But a case could be made. . .
II Ellson : For us to change the zoning is what I was thinking when I first
read that. He' s going to come and say I want that business fringe to be
housing because you say you will provide it. And I think if I said
should, I wouldn ' t feel it quite as hard as will .
IIErhart : And I think you go down to paragraph 5 where it says plans and
ordinances for the City of Chanhassen should ensure that adequate amounts
II of land are designated to accommodate projected residential growth which
is the same as paragraph 2. I don' t know why we need both those
paragraphs . Paragraph 5 reads the best I think. I think what you' re
obligated to do has nothing to do with the builders at all but if you read
Iparagraph 5, I think that' s accurate . If the market out there, if there
are people who want to move to Chanhassen, if the market dictates , then I
think we owe it to the market to increase the residential area to allow
IVthose people to move in here. I think you ' re legally required to do that.
Ellson : I don' t agree with that .
IIConrad: I don' t agree with that.
Conrad : That could raise my taxes . Every new resident that comes to town
Ibasically is requesting more services and basically is probably costing me
money so the question is , if we ' ve allocated enough commercial , industrial
to offset the increase in the residential cost. I really do disagree. I
Iam not committed to allowing everybody who wants to out here, unless I am
convinced that taxwise it' s feasible to do that. It ' s an impact on me.
It ' s an impact on highway services . It' s an impact on utilities that we
Iprovide and I just don' t think that , at least personally I don ' t feel
obligated to allow anybody out here that wants to because it' s costing me
something . So I think the challenge to the City Council is to have this
appropriate balance where as you allow two more residential developments
Iin , we have compensated or we' ve decided that it makes sense to allow
another company. We have room for another company or 2 more employees of
a company to increase the amount of work that ' s produced and maybe the
Itaxes generated out of the community. So I have some problems with this
because I do think there is a financial impact as we promote residential
growth.
IErhart : But it can go either way. Taxes could down too with a larger
population.
r
IConrad : How? I just don ' t think it ' s ever been proven that a new
resident brings in more money to Chanhassen. It ' s costly. The only thing
that offsets a new resident is commercial/industrial . That' s the only
II
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 20 '
thing . A new resident is a net negative. It ' s an impact on your taxes ,
Tim.
Emmings: And it stays that way essentially forever . 1
Ellson: Yes, you were saying even after 30 years they haven' t paid for
themselves . I
Erhart : Then maybe that word ought to be urban growth so you do include
commercial then instead of residential there. I don ' t think it should be
driven by the developer . I think I agree with you there but I think, the
question that arises is, can you then, let' s say you don' t want any
growth . Can you just put a moratorium on growth and say you' re going to
keep the MUSA line where it is for the next 50 years? Can you do that? '
Wildermuth : You could .
Conrad: Sure you could.
Erhart : I don ' t think you could .
Wildermuth: They' re doing it in California .
Batzli : But then we've got to change our first goal back to large amounts
A of open space.
Erhart : I have a problem with a growing population to be so self centered
as to say. . .
Ellson: We ' re not saying we' re not allowing to grow but we don ' t want
them to dictate how it ' s going to grow. That ' s exactly what I was saying . '
Koegler : So is there a consensus out of this? I would agree that I think
2 and 5 maybe are too much repetitious of one another . '
Batzli : I like 5 better than 2 but I would agree with Tim to change
residential to urban if we' re going to use urban as growth. 1
Erhart : Because commercial brings in the taxes that are needed .
Koegler : Change 5, residential to urban and scratch 2? ,
Conrad : Yes . We ' ll do that . Do we want to say anything about financial
appropriateness of some of these decisions? The word financial is not
thrown in here. Maybe that doesn ' t make any difference at all .
Ellson: Aren' t you going back more to an ordinance than if you' re saying,
1 for 2 or something like that? Where it ' s just your policy is in general
and then you can spearhead that new ordinance.
�- Wildermuth : You could have a policy statement promoting a balanced growth
between commercial/industrial and residential rather than one at the
expense of the other .
II ,
Planning Commission Meeting
1April 5, 1989 - Page 21
Irk
II
Ellson : I like the word balanced nced and that interpretation of balance is
II decided by us and the City Council and the people on referendums and
things like that . So in 15 years it might be a whole different group
who ' s decided what balanced means which is fine. They' ll be the people
who are here 15 years from now.
IKoegler : Some of that is referenced later on. For example the land use.
There' s a policy that states , encourage development of additional
I commercial/industrial uses in order to balance the communities tax base .
The section we' re in now is really focused more on the residential
component . It' s under housing .
I Batzli : Well this is interesting though because this is provide housing
opportunities for all residents . That implies the people already live
here. I would assume if they already live here, they already have a
I house. What' s their housing opportunity are we providing? I 'm moving up?
Trading up?
II Ellson: You' re so good at semantics Brian . You catch these wills and
shoulds .
Batzli : Well I don' t know. I don ' t mind if we just want to improve our
own residents situation. I 'm must curious about that after re-reading the
goal when you said that .
IEllson : All residents and potential residents? So reword it Brian .
Batzli : Well I 'm not going to say all man this time.
IEllson: Mankind .
Erhart : Housing opportunity is consistent.
IBatzli : I think the reason you have the word in there where it' s for
people moving into the community and I think that ' s what you' re trying to
Isay so I think that needs to be redone somehow to reflect that .
Ellson : Do you want to say the word new residents?
IEmmings: No.
Ellson : Incoming residents?
IIErhart: Just drop for all residents .
Ellson : To provide housing opportunities for all?
IIHanson: No .
IrBatzli : Housing opportunities consistently identified .
I
..
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 22 1
Conrad : The sixth paragraph , consistent with established housing goals
the City should promote the use of applicable programs designed to reduce
land cost for developers of low and moderate income housing . We ' re not
talking about subsidized housing. We' re saying we want to promote, we
want to use programs that are there to subsidize.
Koegler: That particular policy statement is a carryover from the ' 80
plan. At that time there were more programs available for those types of
options but there certainly still is a program available in the form of
the City' s HRA. If the City ever so chose to do it, you could enact a
housing district and that through a land write down or whatever, assist in
the construction of elderly housing or low income housing or whatever it
might be. That' s a carryover from the ' 80 plan.
Conrad : Well do we want to keep that in? Do we want to promote , we
haven' t promoted it yet. It' s been there. Do we want to promote the
subsidy of low and moderate income housing? '
Batzli : As long as it' s consistent with established housing codes?
Conrad : Well we ' re probably not going to do anything about it. Does '
anybody care?
Ellson: It looks like our heart ' s in the right place I think. ,
Conrad: The trouble is, when you get a lot of policies and you don ' t do
anything and they' re kind of meaningless so it ' s nice to have real good
policies .
Ellson : Don' t people sometimes say, does your city have a policy
regarding low income housing and you go absolutely? How many do you have
is another subject .
Koegler : That ' s still a topic that ' s of great importance to the Metro
Council folks. It' s just a fact that their authority to encourage that
has diminished over the last 8 or 9 years . That used to be a requirement
of their signing off on LAWCON grants was that a city had to have made
progress towards meeting their identified housing goals. That' s no
longer a requirement. So I think their thinking is still there, they've
just lost some of the reinforcement tools.
Conrad: Okay, nobody has a problem with that one. We' ll move on. Fourth
from the bottom, the City will promote the construction of senior citizen
housing . . . Do we want to temper that with based on? I would say the City
will promote based on need the construction.
Headla : I was thinking we should make it a lot stronger .
Wildermuth: I don ' t have any problem with just as it reads . I think we
( should promote it.
Batzli : I would change will to should .
I
'I
Planning Commission Meeting
IIApril 5 , 1989 - Page 23
0-
I‘
Koegler: It ' s already been done.
I Conrad : Promote which means you want to bring it in.
Batzli : I would insert the words , consistent with established housing
goals.
IIConrad : Everybody else feels comfortable with the way it ' s worded? The
delete my comments .
IIBatzli : I was backing you.
Conrad : You were . I appreciate that Brian . The only other comment that
III have here is on construction quality.
Wildermuth : Right . There ' s nothing in here about that.
IIConrad: And that bothers me. I don' t think anything should be
sacrificed . All of these things, I think we need some kind of statement
II talking about quality construction so we ' re not talking about an urban
renewal because we' re promoting some of these low income projects . So
I think Mark, if you can find a place to talk about construction that ,
Howard Noziska would just love me if he heard me talking right now.
Headla: Couldn' t we make this consistent with something?
II Batzli : I think like on the last paragraph , notwithstanding everything we
just said, we want standards. We want quality.
Wildermuth : Consistent with the building codes and ordinances .
IBatzli : Of Edina.
1 Wildermuth : So we don' t get anymore blank, blank developments .
Conrad: Anything else on 5? On 6?
IIKoegler : The recreation ones have been reviewed by the Park Commission
and they probably would welcome your comments .
IIEllson : Did they change them or they just went through them?
Koegler: No. They have been through these a number of times. If there
II are things that you think are inconsistent with some of the land use
policies, those should be pointed out .
Emmings : You seem to have changed all of the wills to shoulds . I don ' t
IIsee any wills .
( Headla : I ' ve got some comments for the Park and Recreation. Let me tell
Iyou where I 'm coming from first. It really started, a while ago I was
swimming over in Eden Prairie where they' ve got a communcity center and
this lady lives south of Chanhassen. She'd been not too complimentary
1
i
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 24 1
about the way we operate . And she said, you know when TH 212 goes
through. Here we are in the Chaska school district . We've got a Chaska
mailing address . The highway' s dividing us . Why aren' t we not adopted by
Chaska? She we' re a totally different community. We aren' t part of
Chanhassen . Well that same thing is true with Chanhassen west of TH 41.
We aren' t part of Chanhassen so what my point is, I 'd like to see
something , and a good way to get us united is with this park and
recreation to have trails uniting us . The other thing that keyed me,
when I read all these minutes on Eckankar , people are really high on
buying this 174 acres. Give me one reason why I should put my city taxes
towards buying that property? My family, nobody around me will ever use
that. It' s too far away and the Village isn' t doing one thing to give us
any parks , recreation or trails out in our area of the City or down south.
We' re totally divorced. The City doesn' t show any interest. I would like
to see this goal , the goal here is to get an equitable distribution of
parks and trails throughout the city on a consistent priority. And if
they put in trails, I don ' t want to see first priority downtown. I think
it' s got to get out to some of the other areas where people can say, hey
we are part of Chanhassen after all . I would like to see the City, how we
can do something to better unite this city.
Conrad : So really you ' re looking for a word called equitable someplace in
one of these?
Headla : Yes .
Wildermuth : The third one from the end talks about providing a balanced
park system.
Ellson : Yes , you could say a balanced , equitable park system.
Wildermuth: Neighborhood parks, community parks , special use, etc . , all
interconnected by a linear trail network. I don ' t know what the word
linear means there. 1
Headla : You go to the Park and Recreation , they don ' t even know where
southern Chanhassen is or where. Well that isn ' t quite true. Tim' s wife
is on there . She knows where she lives .
Erhart: I might add Dave that I think there ' s some rethinking of this
whole trail plan and to reverse the priorities . I think there ' s a lot of
discussion about putting the trails along TH 101 first now.
Headla : I think that ' s healthy. Stuff like that can unite our whole
city. I think we've got to really work that one. I think it' s a major
subtle problem for Chanhassen .
Wildermuth : One of the things that bothered me as I read this part on '
recreation is that there really isn' t anyplace where we talk about whether
we ' re going to promote large regional parks or whether we' re going to
promote a number of small neighborhood parks . It has pretty dramatic ,
implications for City costs . If we' re going to have a lot of little
neighborhood parks, it' s going to be very expensive to maintain.
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
IIApril 5 , 1989 - Page 25
f
k
II Batzli : Isn ' t that the one ou just read though? Provide the a
y just g v e b lance .
IIWildermuth: Well they' re talking about a balanced system so that means
we ' re going to have both .
IIBatzli : Yes. Balanced. Whatever that means .
Wildermuth : We ' re going to have big parks and a lot of little
IIneighborhood parks. We' re going to have a pretty expensive program to
fund . I think the Council ' s going to have to think about that.
Ellson: They've basically only got like 4 or 5 more designated areas that
Ithey feel they' re park deficient in or whatever . I don' t really know that
it' s that much more that they' re looking at but I like the idea of a
neighborhood park. It just is impossible , especially with little toddlers
Iand stuff. You'd like to be able to take a stroller to a park. I think
every neighborhood should have a park. If we have to support that , then I
would because I think it ' s that big a deal . Not everyone can come into
Ithe city. It' s just should be something that' s part of your neighborhood .
Batzli : But you can have homeowners associations and developers put them
up.
IF Ellson : Well aren ' t we having developers put money toward that sort of
thing right now?
IIHanson : Yes .
Wildermuth: Park fees .
IIEllson : Right . So if a new development is going in , then these
developers are either giving land or they' re putting money towards this so
Imaybe it isn ' t as much of the City' s money. I don' t know. I guess I
don' t agree that I wouldn' t want a lot of little nieghborhood parks. I
would want a lot of them.
IWildermuth : If that ' s what we want to do, then we ought to talk about
stressing neighborhood parks . We' ve got 2 to 3 major regional parks in
the area . We ' ve got the Arboretum. The Preserve and Minnewashta Lake
II Park.
Headla : Now you want to take away all my neighborhood parks .
IWildermuth: No, I 'm just saying, if we' re going to promote neighborhood
parks then we ought to say that but I don ' t think we ought to do both.
IKoegler: The recreation text section is fairly specific and it does
advocate a balance system of all components . Typically the facilities in
a regional park do not necessarily overlap those in a city park because
Irthey' re more the large scale picnicing , camping in many of the regional
parks . Those kinds of things that you don ' t find as normal city park
facilities . Then the next scale in the recreation plan is that of
II
IMINI
1
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 26 1
community parks which are really more actively oriented plus the provision 1
of large picnic spaces. That' s what usually identifies them as a
community park. Lake Ann obviously being the example in Chanhassen . The
Plan does specifically call out continuation of the City' s policy of
providing neighborhood parks within about a half mile radius of virtually
every homestead in the city is the goal . That' s not quite achieved but
the City does have a goal of providing neighborhood parks which again is
kind of a notch down then again on the echelon of providing a play
structure for kids. Some casual open space for pick up baseball game or
whatever it might be that' s convenient to the users . You' re right, there
is more maintenance cost with that . There' s more maintenance cost with
every public improvement that ever occurs but those maintenance costs tend
to be of a less order than like Lake Ann Park where you have to have
manicured turf and fields maintained and so forth. But the recreation
section right now does advocate those full range components of the
municipal system and then certainly recognizes the value of the regional
facilities that happen to be in the community also . '
Headla: When you say neighborhood parks , are we talking something like
300 feet by 300 feet?
Koegler : No . Generally they' re about a 5 acre size because a softball
field can take up an acre. There' s usually the provision possibly for a
couple of tennis courts . In some cases there' s small parking provided for
just a few off street. Again the scale is usually low intensity. I think
the ideal is non-organized play activities but that sometimes is not
possible given the number of fields and things in developing communities .
Conrad : Can ' t you folks over there just use the Excelsior parks?
Headla: We' re into Shorewood stuff. Cathcart field and their tennis
courts and their warming house .
Conrad: Jim, do you want to pursue anything here?
Wildermuth: I think we ought to stress one or the other . Neighborhood
parks or the regional parks .
Conrad : But the regional . I guess I don ' t have a problem. Brian , any
problem?
Batzli : I 'm not saying a word after the heat I took last time.
Conrad: Steve, anything on balance or whatever? So Jim is sort of by
himself on this one?
Ellson : Sure. He doesn ' t have kids that are tiny and need to walk to
their little park.
Conrad : What is the word linear trail in that sentence mean?
Wildermuth: My road is deteriorating but by golly I ' ve got a neighborhood
park.
Planning Commission Meeting
• April 5, 1989 - Page 27
r-
Koegler : I think we can strike that word . Trails by nature tend to be
somewhat line like.
IIConrad : Anything else on 6 or 7? Mark, we really didn' t talk about
people movement. We talked about space but we didn' t talk about people
movement. When you get to transportation, you talk about cars .
IKoegler : We talk about, if I remember right, we talk about non-motorized
vehicles in transportation also . I hope we do because I thought I
Iremembered we did.
Erhart : Did we not say anything about trying to put safety into this
system? I 'm thinking in terms of getting the bikers off Minnewashta Blvd .
1 and TH 101 .
Headla : What do you want to do , put me in jail?
IErhart: No, I mean as far as providing alternatives .
I Ellson : You' re saying the trails are an alternatives for safety as well
as recreation.
Erhart : Yes . Do we have anything in there on safety?
'=.,. Batzli : Page 12, second paragraph down they talk about some people
movement .
IKoegler : There ' s also a couple references on 11. One of our mutliple use
of right-of-way areas for accommodating various modes of transportation of
which non-motorized is one . Then two-thirds of the way down there' s one
I of promoting increased development of bikeways and pedestrian facilities .
Then the reference on page 12 also .
IConrad: Okay, anything else on 6 or 7? On 8?
Batzli : On 8 I had one . The last policy. Right before the second goal I
Iguess. All new utilities should be placed underground . What kind of
control do we have over what they' re going to be putting along the
rerouted highways if anything? Do we have any say in that? For instance,
as they redid TH 5 and they put the superconducter wires all the way out .
IKoegler: You had something to say about that one .
IWildermuth : That ' s different . You don' t have anything to say about that .
Koegler: You picked the location .
IHanson : They did an alignment corridor study for it .
( Wildermuth: We didn' t .
I- Hanson : The City did .
I
Ell
1
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 28 '
Wildermuth : The City did? As opposed to cutting across land? 1
Koegler: Going along the new TH 212 corridor .
Batzli : And we picked TH 5? When did we do that? I wasn' t here was I?
Ellson: Before you and me Brian. 1
Conrad : I think it made sense . Didn' t it?
Emmings: At the time.
Wildermuth: What ' s the difference whether it goes along TH 5 or TH 212?
Emmings : Wasn' t there also an option to go along the railroad?
Conrad : Yes.
Batzli : It kind of jogs for a little bit there.
Ellson: So what are you getting at Brian? '
Batzli : My only question is , when we' re talking about new utilities ,
which utilities are we talking about? Do we have any control over the
public utilities? We can tell them to do certain ones underground and not
others?
Wildermuth : I think you have control over the residential utilities but
something like those major distribution lines .
Hanson: You can ' t put the major distribution, well I shouldn' t say can ' t. I
You can but it' s . . .
Emmings: It' s too expensive. We asked at the time. It just costs too
much.
Koegler : There are other cases where the only way to do it is to somehow
be able to finance it. Audubon Road is an item that comes to my mind of
an improvement project that' s coming up and I don' t know if a decision ' s
finally been made but it ' s been looked at. Underground versus leaving the
existing overheads along the east side of Audubon. This is really aimed
more towards local service type of lines for commercial , industrial or
residential .
Batzli : I was just curious about that .
Emmings: Do we insist at this time that, for example if you build a new
house , does everything have to be underground? Electric . Phone . Every
new subdivision it' s all underground? Is that right in our subdivision
ordinance or is it just something they do? Because it does cost more
every month on your bill .
i
I .
Planning Commission Meeting
IApril 5, 1989 - Page 29
4'
t
IIWildermuth : I think if you have a lot in an existing subdivision where it
is above ground, you can still have it above ground.
IEmmings : But all new subdivisions it' s underground?
Hanson: Yes .
IErhart : On goal , this is the one time I agree with Brian. I think the
goal , I think the words ought to be toned down a little bit. Where it
I says in the General Rural Use Area , Chanhassen will discourage premature
extension of the utility systems. System extension should be consistent
with the comprehensive sewer policy plan because the way it is now, it
reads like an ordinance as opposed to a goal .
IKoegler : You did say should discourage right Tim?
IErhart: Will I don' t want to get that, I ' ll just say. Discourage is soft
by itself so I think will discourage and should be concistent because I
think it reads like a law and I don' t think that' s what this is .
IEmmings : I guess I 'd ask on 8 , the first policy under that one. It says
that septic systems must be compatible which seems like awfully soft
language to me. It must comply. But still , I don ' t even know why, do we
IFwant to have as a policy compliance with ordinances? Does that make
sense?
IKoegler : Probably not in that specific of a case . I don ' t think this
exact statement but I think the tone is somewhat of a hold over and back
when it was originally drafted , the only thing in effect was that WPC40 of
the Metro Standards and the City hadn' t enacted anything yet .
IEmmings : Well we ' ve got it now.
IKoegler : But now that' s it there and in place now.
Emmings : Maybe we don' t need that . Plus the last one on that page really
Ikind of addresses the same thing. Non-urban land uses should be served by
properly constructed and operated septic and well water systems . I think
that' s okay but I think that 'd be kind of tough to do.
Erhart : Are we on page 9?
Conrad: I don' t know yet. Yes , page 9.
IErhart : I just wanted to point out that the last paragraph there , the
City will discourage expansion or construction of commercial or industrial
facilities within the General Rural Use Area and I think in the last two
Iyears I don' t think that we have done a very good job of following that
policy and hopefully we' re doing some things next meeting to change that .
li- That ' s all .
Conrad : I just philosophically think it ' s good to think about this one .
The fourth policy. Residential neighborhoods should be planned and
I
. 1
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 30 '
developed with pedestrian ways on major streets connecting to schools, '
open spaces , commercial areas, industrial centers and significant
features . I think that ' s a real important statement there and I just want
to make sure, you can make it stronger or you can make it weaker but I
think that' s a neat philosophy. David , it accomplishes some of your tie
together type of things. I believe in that one a whole lot. Page 10?
Headla : How about at the very bottom? Policy. Provide a local
transportation system? Baloney. I don' t want to be involved with
providing a transportation system.
Emmings: Encourage?
Wildermuth : Even in the goal , I think we ought to change create to '
promote.
Headla : Yes . Put in promote and encourage in both of those, that ' s fine.
But provide is rather absolute.
Conrad : Page 11? ,
Emmings: Next year we can go back and change all those shoulds to wills.
Probably change everything because we' ve done this before.
Conrad : I think Mark did it the way we told him to do it . Now we see it
in print.
Emmings: Yes . I just wonder what it was before . We' re probably just
changing everything right back to the way it was .
Koegler : I save the original copy. '
Batzli : It was way back page 9 , the second one down, continually update
the Comp Plan. We' re following that one. '
Headla : At the very bottom, the City will continue an ongoing maintenance
program in order to maximize the community' s investment in transportation
facilities . We' ve got to invest in a transportation facilities?
Ellson: The streets is basically what we' re talking about .
Headla : If you say facility, I think of a structure. If you say a road ,
I think of a road.
Ellson: So you'd like it to say road? 1
Headla: If we' re talking about roads , let ' s say roads .
Koegler : We' re talking about roads, trails , sidewalks . Anything .
Conrad: System?
Headla : If you say system, fine .
II .
Planning Commission Meeting
IIApril 5, 1989 - Page 31
I
II
Batzli. : Are we going to encourage light rail in here somewhere?
IIKoegler : The last policy on page 12 in transportation is addressing light
rail . Right above community facilities .
IIBatzli : I 'm sorry, I missed that one.
Conrad : Anything on 12?
IIEmmings: Yes . In the third paragraph down, do we mean to say timely
construction of TH 169/212 or just 212?
II Koegler : 212 .
Erhart : 169 is not in Chanhassen anymore is it? They changed TH 18 to
I169. Now doesn' t that go all the way. . .
Emmings : That ' s only in the city. They moved it over from 100 onto 18 .
Made 18 to 169.
IIErhart : Okay, but then where does it turn?
' Emmings : It turns .
r_
Erhart: At crosstown there at 169 then?
IEmmings: But here we' re talking about the construction of TH 212 .
Koegler : Old 18 to 494 now is 169 that picks up 101.
IErhart : Is it the intent when they put the 18 bridge in that 169 then
goes all the way through across the river there?
IKoegler : I don' t know.
IBatzli : They probably should have already done it if they were going to
do it to get federal funds .
Erhart : On paragraph 5, within the urban service area , Chanhassen will
Iprovide a system of hard surface streets . Within the general rural areas ,
the City will provide a transportation system consistent with the needs of
agricultural uses . What does that mean?
IEmmings : Cartways .
Koegler : That ' s a remnent from the ' 80 plan again . At that time , I think
Ithis is reflective of basically the development prohibition and at that
time the City' s position was the roads will be gravel basically.
Erhart : Will you look at that?
Koegler : Yes , that ' s come a step up since then .
•
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 32 '
Headla : How about in the middle of the page. Chanhassen supports county,
regional and state efforts to establish a light rail transit system. I
don' t think we know enough to say light rail . A transit system, yes .
Light rail , no.
Ellson : I remember talking about this . '
Conrad: We asked Mark to put it in.
Ellson : We said we definitely want something to show that we' re behind '
it. I don' t remember too many of these things but I definitely remember
this one .
Headla : When you say light rail , you' re negating any other system.
Ellson: We' re just saying, if a light rail comes up, we' re telling you
right now we' re supporting it.
Emmings: I don' t think it excludes others . '
Ellson : No , I don' t think so either .
Headla: I think that ' s too explicit . '
Conrad : Any other support for Dave' s thoughts on that?
Erhart: Could you say mass transportation? 1
Emmings : No , I think we ought to get behind light rail . Light rail and
other forms of mass transportation is you want to but I think we ought to
leave light rail in here because it' s something that ' s actually out there.
Headla: Where? ,
Conrad : Any other comments on 12? Anything on 13? Solar Access .
Erhart: I would suggest we take that whole thing out. I just don' t, I 'm
not against , I want to get it perfectly clear , I 'm not against solar
access. However , when you read this, it' s just out of date. The whole
thing and do we really, things have changed and do we really want to be in
the business of regulating shade?
Emmings : We just talked about re-establishing the urban forest and now we
want to protect. In new subdivisions they' ve got to provide restrictive
covenants which prohibit shading of adjacent properties .
Erhart: Yes , do we really want to do that? '
( Conrad : Do we see any problems with that? Are there any problems that
we anticipate in the next 5 years? '
Planning Commission Meeting
IIApril 5 , 1989 - Page 33
F
Ellson: What was the reasoning behind wanting to do it? I wasn ' t here.
There was probably some really good basis for it.
IIConrad : It was energy.
Emmings : The oil crisis .
ilEllson: He said it was required you guys .
I Koegler : No. Solar access was a required element of the Comprehensive
Plan last time around . I can ' t honestly tell you that that' s still a
requirement under Met Council ' s review procedures . I ' ll find out because
III had the same reaction. Now I took a number of statements out but a lot
of the statements were more towards the, not just the passive but the
active solar collecters and things that really have gone nowhere.
IIEllson: Or at least in Minnesota they don' t go very far .
Conrad : Does anybody see any reason for keeping anything relating to
Isolar access in here?
Ellson : If it' s required I would.
I Batzli : If a couple more Exxon ships hit the ground , you may want this
� back in here.
1 Wildermuth : I think we ought to have something . I think we ought to
maintain some of it .
IIEllson : There was probably good reason at one point . I just kind of
wish I knew more about it .
Wildermuth : That problem has not gone away.
IBatzli : It ' s gone away artificially, temporarily. It' s going to be back.
IWildermuth : It will be back. I think we ought to rethink some of these
individual policy statements in here .
Batzli : Can you imagine how forward thinking we' re going to be looking
Ilike in the year 2020 or whatever when people look back on this and they
thought, hey these guys were on top of things.
IConrad: Or they' re going to say, well they took that whole section out .
Emmings : I don ' t mind the goal . I think the policies aren ' t real
Iimportant somehow but I don' t know if it makes sense to have a goal
without some policies .
Conrad : So maybe Mark you can take a look at what ' s required and I guess
I- the sense is to keep something in there. Maybe not quite as specific .
I
MI
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5 , 1989 - Page 34 '
C
Batzli : I think we should encourage it somehow but not necessarily to
some of . . .
Erhart : Why don ' t we just encourage use of solar energy. Forget the '
shade stuff because I think you' re in an area . . .
Wildermuth : For example, the third policy statement in there . That can
certainly stand. And the fourth one could probably stand.
Batzli : And both of those are encouraging use of solar energy. I
Ellson: But when we' re getting down to regulating planting and stuff,
that sounds like pretty strong words.
Koegler : I ' ll verify requirements on that now and then we' ll rework that .
Conrad: Page 14. ,
Erhart : Yes . This one I feel we have some real work here when you look
at these numbers .
Koegler : Can I walk through some of this real quick because this is
getting out of the first discussion area and now going into the second .
You should have found on the table in front of you a page 14A that somehow
t was omitted out of copying when this thing was originally put together so
if you find that amongst all the materials that are scattered there. I ' ve
got a few extras . As kind of an orientation to all of this , you have to
keep in mind that in Chanhassen' s Comprehensive Plan it still advocates ,
as it did in 1980, the existence of two MUSA lines. One of which is only
formally recognized . The other one has been stated for policy purposes ,
if you will . The dashed line on this exhibit is the Metro Council ' s
officially recognized MUSA line or very close to that. Where the City
deviates and where it has deviated for the last 8 or 9 years comes through
this section of the community which the City has always advocated should
be in the MUSA line and is pretty much consistent with the surface area
for the Lake Ann Interceptor_ but to date that ' s not formally recognized .
In looking and introducing the topic of adequacy of commercial/industrial
lands apply, it' s interesting and we' ll get into that in a few minutes
that even with the area that Chanhassen has shown as far as the expanded
MUSA line , that really is not prime commercial/industrial property. In
all likelihood it' s a continuation of a residential pattern that ' s being
probably even more entrenched with some of the rural subdivisions that
have happened recently. Focusing on industrial first of all , at the
present time the City has about , and these are pretty close numbers , 290
plus acres of vacant industrial land. Over the last 10 years, on average
the city has absorbed about 27 acres per year of industrial property. As
I point out in some of the text , just looking at that average is somewhat
misleading because the growth trend was fairly slow through the first part
of the decade and picked up substantially over the last 5 years or so. In
the early part of that time period you had the Chan Lakes Business Park
and the Park One areas established south of TH 5 and on the east end
respectively. You had a lot of the small machine shop businesses and
things that came in at that time and there were 30, 000 square foot
1
II
Planning Commission Meeting
IIApril 5, 1989 - Page 35
1 buildings here and there. That pattern has changed quite a bit with some
of the developments . Oh the Instant Webb facilities and the related
I businesses there . The Rosemounts . The McGlynn Bakeries coming in. Some
of those that are a lot larger facilities and a lot larger land users. If
even the average that ' s occurred over the last 10 years continues to the
year 2000, this city would need about 324 acres of property just to
IImaintain that pace . Obviously there' s not quite that supply left at the
present time. Factoring in some of the large users that I just
referenced , I think leads you quickly to at least have a level of concern
II as to whether or not the city has additional or has enough industrial
property zoned at the present time or available. The same thing is true ,
and I don 't know if we should stop and talk about industrial or maybe just
introduce commercial also and then go back and discuss both of them
II because they perhaps come somewhat interrelated. The same thing is
somewhat evident in the commercial land that ' s left . The numbers that are
in these little circle incidentally are vacant acres that are remaining .
IIEmmings : Not the number of acres in the circle but the vacant?
I Koegler : The vacant acres remaining, yes. At the present time the
commercial land supply that ' s available is 52. Of that total , 16 is
within the circle that ' s in the center there which really is downtown
Chanhassen if you will . It ' s the area that ' s received the most focus of
IV the redevelopment effort over the last 10 or 12 years . Then there' s 20
acres immediately west of that which is still to some degree certainly
associated with downtown so the predominant availability certainly is in
IIthe downtown area . In addition to that the only other two areas of any
commercial concentration at all are the very limited area up at TH 7 and
TH 41 and then the business fringe area down in the southern part of the
city. Obviously neither the north piece nor the south piece have much
IIpotential to provide future expansion of commercial so it gets back to the
downtown area. The concern that this I think brings to light is that
pieces of property such as what I ' ve referenced in the report as the
IHigh Path Farm which also is Eckankar, it ' s the same piece. One is the
historic name and one is the current name. That piece has always been
looked at as kind of a reliever for the City of Chanhassen. That' s had
Iquite a variety of zonings that have been applied to it over the years
depending on really who had interest in it to be honest with you. A
number of years ago Minnetonka Inc. was hot to build a new corporate
facility there and suddenly we rewrote the ordinance. Rewrote the
IComp Plan and put in this campus business category because that ' s what
they wanted and it would have been a beautiful facility but it didn' t
happen . So then the zoning reverted back to something else. So that ' s
Ibeen kind of all over the board but at least it' s been a large vacant
parcel , some of which may have had long term commercial possibilities . At
the present time with that being developed as a church site, I don' t know
what that does to that but perhaps that ' s a public , semi-public land use
now instead of commercial or a housing site or whatever it might have
been . The key point though is that there really is no land available for
irany large users. We ' re not trying to define what large users are.
Whether they' re Cub stores or K-Marts or whatever because that ' s not the
issue. But the issue is whether it ' s a shopping center or land intensive
user , there are no alternatives that exist outside of really seriously
M
. 1
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 36 1
C
going to another community. So we' re really just bringing into discussion 1
this evening as to whether or not that should be addressed in the
Comp Plan and if so, how we' d want to do that . I referenced a minute ago
that the MUSA lines don' t really provide any assistance. Graphic evidence
of this is the only place that we really address the future expansion of
commercial and industrial property to any degree is in these corridor
studies that were done for the various areas and those were looking at
long term land uses . They didn' t have any time frame attached to them.
That ' s the one that was put together for the western portion of TH 5. The
dotted line that runs through there is the City's MUSA line so everything
to the north of that line, if you will , is what the City was advocating
should be serviced prior to 1990. I think you can see that any parcel
that we ever looked at as maybe having some long term potential in
commercial or industrial is outside of that line still so that ' s not
something really that we can point to and say, well here ' s where it should
go to next because that is really much longer term. Future land use kind
of thinking . What this has led to is Steve and I have kicked this around
quite a bit and are of the opinion that it ' s probably in the City' s best
interest to look at the designation of land use for the entire city of
Chanhassen. Previous efforts from the Comprehensive Plan have really
focused only on the area that' s encompassed within the MUSA lines . Plural .
The City' s and Met Council ' s. THe overlays that are here simply put on the
land use that ' s been talked about previously as part of these corridor
r studies and suddenly you end up with really only a few isolated areas that
� we haven' t discussed what the long term land use should be. We' re
thinking that probably we should look at land use as a whole for the city
and then discuss the timing aspect of that related to the provision of the
Metropolitan Services. Specifically where the MUSA line is now. Where it
will be in 2000. Where it will be potentially beyond that . As I indicate
in some of the narrative, the MUSA line is really a growth management tool
that' s used on a regional basis . It' s a control that' s here and now but
it ' s not something that 50 years from now may make a lot of difference to
Chanhassen. The development pattern will occur . It' s just a question of
when . Our thinking is if we have some concept of future land uses , that ,
perhaps the City is in a better position that if the commercial supply or
industrial supply appears to be getting seriously deficient by the year
2000, that there' s a stronger argument that can be built to say here' s
where we think the next area should be. Here' s how we can serve it . We
need to get Metropolitan approval to do it. So that' s some of a brief
overview of the rationale and the introduction of this topic as to whether
or not there ' s enough commercial/industrial land and if not , how should
the comprehensive plan approach that .
Conrad : What we' re looking at on that overlay is based on the study that
was done, the long range study.
Koegler : What' s on that plan right now is the land use element that has
been consistently offered to date as part of this plan. Then the overlay
sections incorporate the land use that was part of the corridor studies
that are in the packet. Now I should indicate there will be some changes
to those and one of the items we' re going to discuss later is some of the
changes to the TH 101 area but that in essence was what was reviewed as a
part of the corridor study process .
mit
1
II ,
I Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 37
r
Conrad : And basically the biggest increase in that plan for commercial
Iindustrial use was at the intersection of TH 41 and TH 5.
Koegler : It was envisioning some commercial expansion. . . Again, we' ll
get into that a little bit later but we had talked about some commercial
II expansion then in a couple of areas along TH 5. The thrust of that was
that the business fringe area was, at least in a shorter term context, was
non-conforming land uses by and large and would remain so but that there
II would not be any expansion of that area until much longer term. But again
that' s part of the language that if we take an approach of looking at land
use as a whole, we' ll need to build into the plan. We' ll need qualifiers
IIin there saying that this is not going to happen by the year 1993 or the
year 2000. That this is long term but it ' s intent to indicate the City' s
thinking . Subject to change over that period of time too based on market
conditions and so forth.
IWildermuth : What is PS?
I Koegler : Public and Semi-Public. Things like the Arboretum. Legion
clubs . Any number of uses that are not private nor totally public.
Conrad : Mark, your opinion is we don ' t have enough, based on your
IF calculations and they' re all based on assumptions and whatever but we
don ' t have enough industrial land based on your comments .
I Koegler: Those feelings really weren' t probably specifically spelled out
in this report . This report is more just a statement of here' s the facts
and here' s what' s happened and here' s what ' s happened and here' s what we
got. I think though you summarized my concern is that the supply of
I industrial land and possibly, I think again back to large scale commercial
land , is very limited . Under certain growth scenarios , it certainly may
be adequate but it very well may not be. That may not sound like it is a
I position on the issue but I think it is because I think we need a fallback
to be looking at if the supply is inadequate, where are we logically going
next. The City has a rather specific agreement in the sewer agreement
II over the Lake Ann interceptor and I don' t know if that will actually stay
in place until the year 2000 or not . If it ' s enforced the way it' s
written it will . But after you get out to say 1996 or 1997, things may
look quite a bit different than they do today and I think this plan needs
I to be in place to be advocating where are we going from here and I don ' t
think we' re really quite there yet. We' ve taken a quick shot through
these corridor studies of long term land use and I 'm not sure that even
Ithose designations are appropriate. What we would like to do is spend a
little more time putting some background material together on a scenario
for the entire community and bring that back.
IIErhart : You calculated that there are only 52 acres left designated for
commercial .
li- Koegler : There ' s 293 vacant acres of industrial .
Erhart: That ' s the one. I disagree with that entirely. If you look at
IIthis map here , that ' s the industrial one right? That whole 109 acres ,
---
Planning Commission Meeting ,
April 5, 1989 - Page 38
17
that' s e
complet ly used up.
Ellson : You ' re saying it should be less? I
Erhart: I think it' s only 50 to 60 acres. The 109, ' that' s gone.
Ellson : For anything that could go in there?
Erhart: Well between Rosemount, Empak and our firm, that 's completely
gone.
Koegler : With any comp plan efforts , it ' s as of a point in time and these
numbers were current as of August of 1988 . ,
Erhart : That 109 acres is gone.
Conrad: What about the Ward property?
Erhart : You' re right . There might be a little bit on the east . A few 11 acres on the east side. The Ward property there.
Koegler : The point is valid though Tim because we' re going to get into a
discussion in a little while on some of the land use in and around the
Ward property that may suggest that portions of that are not industrial
any longer.
Emmings : If anything the problem is worse than it' s characterized in ,
this.
Koegler : It may compound the industrial problem. It may relieve the I
commercial problem a little bit .
Erhart : That 100 acres that you show there, essentially everything north
of that railroad , most of those lots north of the railroad currently have
something on them or are under construction so I think you' re only talking
about 30 acres there. Maybe 20 acres on that 109 and over on the 31,
doesn ' t the old CPT building take up most of that? Where' s the CPT
building?
Hanson : I think that ' s taken out of that . ,
Erhart: Okay, so it' s 31 acres left. And that 25, of course that ' s gone.
Mostly gone with McGlynn . I
Koegler : That ' s 25 remaining . That takes McGlynn out of it.
Ellson: But the Empak isn' t taken out and the Rosemount isn' t taken out?
Koegler : As of August of last year when the survey was done , there were
100 acres of vacant property within the confines of that line. '
Erhart : Okay, so it' s somewhat less than the 200 but not more than what I
was calculating.
II
1 Planning Commission Meeting
April 5 , 1989 - Page 39
I'
1I-
11 Emmings : But it ' s certainly less though even just with Rosemount would
have a significant impact on that number .
IIErhart: I ' d say there ' s at least 100 acres less .
Koegler: Rosemount is factored out of that 109 also. That' s the one that
I had a site plan on and I knew the specific acreage of that one. That
1 one was deducted. That and McGlynn and the other one that I happened to
know were the updates if you will . So the numbers we' re speaking in
approximate ranges but I think the impact is at least the degree to what
Iwe' re talking about and possibly a little more severe .
Wildermuth: What are you proposing Mark?
II Koegler : I guess we' re advocating to the commission that the plan should
take a little different tact than what it has. You ' ll find really is only
focused on land use in the MUSA line . Everything outside of that we ' ve
IIbeen treating as the "rural area" . . .
Wildermuth : So now we should refocus outside the MUSA line as well?
1_' Koegler : We need to have more focus on that and we need to qualify that
that may or may not happen prior to the year 2000 but we need some orderly
progressions to how that' s going to occur so that I think the City' s in a
I better position to argue, if it so chooses down the road , when the land
supply becomes even tighter that we need some expansions .
I Erhart : Also with the freeway now, that is going to be, that ' s coming on .
The official mapping process is going to happen here real shortly isn' t it
so we now have to consider that in any land use issues that come before
IIus . Is that correct Mark?
Koegler : And that ' s a factor certainly in the planning . That ' s to a
certain degree , I don ' t want to say that ' s what we' ve been waiting for but
1 we kind of have been. Knowing what the TH 101/212 interchange is likely
to be like has an impact on how land uses relate . Again , you' ll see that
in a few minutes.
IEmmings : You said before , what do we need to do tonight? I 'm not quite
clear on what we should do.
1 Koegler : The item tonight was really to bring this if you will to your
attention. That we don' t think this has been treated heavily enough in
the plan to date . We think we need to departure from that course that we
II were on and look more specifically at future future, if you will , land use
which may be sooner than we think.
Ellson : And you want our okay to go ahead and do that? To continue
research.
Koegler : Yes . That that ' s the policy direction the Plan should go in. I
IIthink that ' s the key question.
sli
Planning Commission Meeting 1
April 5, 1989 - Page 40
17
Emmings: Identify areas for future growth . Gosh , I think we' ve just got
to do it. I don' t know how we could ignore it.
Conrad : But the Comprehensive Plan is to take us up to the year 2000.
That' s the point of the plan right? ,
Koegler : And in some cases beyond . Certain elements of the plan now go
beyond the year 2000. The sewer element for example has always been a
long term, full growth item because it' s looked at , not only at the
staging of development but it' s looked at maximum capacity of the system
and various areas of the community which has run literally border to
border so there are elements of the plan right now that go beyond 2000 and
there always have been . So in that respect , it ' s not new ground . It ' s
just that we haven' t really looked at land use in that regard. Corridor
studies kind of opens the door to that and if you recall , there was a
certain level of controversy as to whether or not we should do that. And
it went to the Council and the Council said yes , that seemed like a good
idea. Why don' t you do that and they were put together . ,
Emmings : We' ve got that work and it really provides an opportunity to
fold the comp plan and the corridor studies together . The basic work has
already been done . It ' s just a matter of kind of updating it . I think
> it' s a real good idea .
Conrad : But it doesn' t and I don ' t have a problem with that. I do have a
problem with between now and the year 2000. Do we have enough commercial
industrial land right now to take us? If we fill in the residential areas
that we've got, one, do we have enough commercial/industrial and you can' t
just have the absolute amount . You have to have extra because you need
more because things got to fit. So my biggest concern right now, I think
that ' s nice . . .
Ellson : Solving long term but also short term.
Conrad: But I 've never known that things beyond 10 years come to pass .
I 'm not sure what the benefit of that , to be very honest . I 'm not sure
what the benefit is. I am very concerned with what ' s happening in the
next 10 years . Do we have enough, consistent gross for financial so that
we keep this balance between residential and industrial . I 'm more
concerned with that . Does the Eckankar parcel , taking that out of
circulation, does that put us in a bad situation in the next 10 years?
I 'm real interested in those types of comments more than beyond the year
2000.
Erhart : I think the point Mark' s making , realistically if that freeway
goes in, even if it doesn' t go in I think the possibility of the MUSA line
moving before the year 2000 is gaining probability every year as it fills
( in. I think what I 'm hearing you say is I think we ought to start looking
�'- at some of these things in the event that pressure is there to move that
MUSA line and in fact it does so we have some pre-planning done.
Wildermuth : We ' ve got to be looking within the MUSA line too . I
II
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
April 5 , 1989 - Page 41
't 3
IConrad : I 'm saying I 'm more concerned right now than I am 10 years from
now. That' s my point.
Koegler : Ladd , my comments have focused more on the long term and I don' t
IImean to imply that we ' re going to ignore the time period between now and
the year 2000 because that' s not the position the plan would be taking
either . What the intent would be, to update these numbers which is not
1 difficult to do , I think as was pointed out the information is available
and to really get an up to date look at what the supply situation looks
like and then to certainly focus on between now and the year 2000 to
within the confines of what we have to work with. There are some
II
alternatives . It ' s just that realistically maybe some of them don' t make
very good market sense until things like TH 212 happen. The City has land
that it could designate as commercial within the MUSA line . It just so
IIhappens it ends up down around the 212/101 intersection because that' s the
only area that ' s in the MUSA line . It doesn' t necessarily make the most
sense from a market sense where people are going to be and where
concentrations of people are going to be moving .
Wildermuth: But I think now is the time to start looking at zoning .
k r Emmings : I think this is scarier_ than scary because you know a year_ ago
we didn't know anything about Rosemount. They came in and what is the
size of their site?
IIKoegler : It' s just under 60 acres .
Emmings : If we were lucky enough to have a couple of other developments
11 like that, we 'd be exhausted at which point anybody looking for a place,
Chanhassen will simply be thought of as a place where you might as well
not even look because they' re filled up. Their industrial acreage is
Ifilled up . That is frightening . It could happen real fast . This is
really a small amount.
IIConrad : Then the point is, if you don ' t have access to sewer , you can' t
have it anyway.
Emmings : Right . But I think you ' ve got to look at both.
IIConrad: That' s a real economic situation. It stops development .
IEmmings : It stops the development you want . We' ve just been talking
about the fact that residential development doesn ' t pay for itself where
commercial and industrial . . . .
IEllson: Have to support the rest .
Ir( Emmings : So you want some of it .
Conrad : I 'm really interested in knowing , and I don ' t know what I 'm
asking here but I 'm really interested in knowing, as residential folks
IIfill in here , if we have enough. I do believe we have enough commercial
me
I
Planning Commission Meeting 1
April 5 , 1989 - Page 42
property for the short run. If we can' t lure a supermarket in right away,
we don' t have a problem there but I 'm kind of concerned as more and more
reisdenti.al moves in. Are we going to be restricting? Is that going to
harm us economically in the next 10 years . I 'm real intrigued with that.
That' s one of those things that it would make a case to go to , well I
don't know if it would make a case to go to Met Council to change the
MUSA line . I 'm not sure what the leverage is .
Hanson: I think where we' re talking about heading is consistent with what
you' re saying . It ' s trying to strike where that balance is within the
service area. As the community develops, where some of the shortcomings
may be and I think the other thing to keep in mind , 2000 ' s not that far
away. We' re getting a lot of calls now in anticipation if you will of the
MUSA line being amended down the road . 10 years , if it ' s not amended
before that, it 's still not that long. I would venture to say it ' s
amended before that . I
Conrad : Who ' s the biggest benefactor of saying here' s where we' re going
to be in the year 2000? If we do this type of planning for the
comprehensive plan and we have these globs of districts , who benefits?
Hanson: I think everybody does .
k Conrad : Landowners benefit because they kind of have an idea of where
we' re going to go. Developers have an idea of where they can start
messing around and getting their paws in , or at least their feelers in .
What else. What other benefits are there?
Hanson : Some benefits to the city is it allows you to start programming
for the capital improvements that are going to have to occur along with
that development rather than reacting to it when it comes in on day 1. It
allows you to start scheduling those. If you' re looking and you want
trail systems out in that area, it allows you to determine that now. It
allows you to determine the park needs that you ' re going to have. It also
allows you to be able to do the projections on the water and sewer
services that you' re going to need for that area. Right now if you were
to ask that question, it ' s agricultural . We don' t need . You don' t have
anything that' s telling you what kind of service you ' re going to need for
that area .
Conrad : I 'm saying a lot of this stuff makes sense and that ' s what we ' re
around here to do is do some planning. In terms of economics and hiring
Mark to do that , what kind of approval . Do you take this type of request
to the City Council? Is this a big deal to do some of this updating or
are we talking about a small deal?
Koegler : It ' s minor . It ' s just a departure in focus and policy from what
we' ve done . The actual work to do it is not si_gni.fi cant .
L Conrad: And as part of that you ' re going to try to help us decide in the
next 10 years whether we have enough space , based on some kind of ratios
and guesswork. Might that impact in any way the Eckankar parcel , just out
of curiousity? I
II
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
ill p
April 5, 1989 - Page 43
II
Ellson : Making it commercial you mean?
IIConrad: Yes. Looking at it for other uses . Commercial/industrial .
IIHanson : I would venture to say. . .
Koegler : That really is a continuation of, as I referenced , what has
II happened historically. That parcel has bounced back and forth and has
been envisioned as all kinds of uses and it just so happens it has high
density zoning now, I think on the south end and it gets lighter as you go
north but it ' s been looked at as being a commercial piece . An industrial
IIpiece. Not the entire thing but perhaps the south end so I think it' s
fair to say that it would be looked at to see how it fit the land use
scheme of the city.
IIConrad : Any disagreement with the direction? So to do that , what ' s the
timing to come back? It'd really be nice to get this stuff shot up to
City Council . What was the timing , May 17th?
IIKoegler: We ' re looking to have a draft available to you for the meeting
on the 17th of May. Depending upon your availability of agenda time
between now and then, we may try to come back for another review session
on this topic . I would like to do that if it can be accommodated .
IIHeadla: We' ve always agreed with whatever you ' ve written.
Conrad : I think it is worthwhile . I think it ' s real important because
there' s so many issues that are affecting this . Mark, what else do you
IIwant us to talk about?
Koegler : There ' s two more areas that we need to address . One is the land
IIuse in the rural area. The second one is kind of a follow up on some of
the corridor study information. Specifically focusing on TH 101 and I
would suggest maybe we reverse the sequence of those, since we' ve just
IIbeen talking about land use , and talk a little bit about land use and the
TH 101 corridor specifically at the TH 101-new TH 212 interchange. Fred
is here this evening and I think we' re going to kind of turn things over
to him because he' s put some material together as part of the broadened
Istudy area and the three of us have met and reviewed and feel it fits with
the context of the Comp Plan .
IFred Hoisington : We have been commissioned by the City to address a
couple of concerns having to do with the TH 101 alignment on the first
hand and secondly one that was precipitated by this body indicating some
concern for aesthetics of that roadway as a south entrance to downtown
IIChanhassen . So what we did after we were here probably two months ago and
after some discussions with Gary Warren and Don Ashworth and so forth ,
concluded that we should try to pool all of those concerns into a single
lirstudy. Really it ' s turned into a land use study as well and feeding into
the comprehensive plan. Some of the things I 'm going to be talking to
you about tonight about land use, think of them in terms of potential for
land , various kinds of land uses . Not necessarily want you would or will
II
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 44
A
11
consider as you put together the land use plan. Mark has to deal with
land use in the sense, and you do in a sense, what do you need between now
and the year 2000. What we' re going to show you tonight are some of the
land uses that seem to make some sense here given the new roadway system.
Now the total study area eventually that we' ll be asking you to look at
includes TH 5 as well so this whole study includes all of this corridor .
It ' s just that in order to respond to another concern yet and that is the
official mapping of TH 212, we had to concentrate on the south end of the
study area rather than deal with the TH 5 portion of it right now. We' ll
get back to you later but for the time being we are really primarily
dealing with the area between TH 212 and between the Ward property. So
kind of looking at this central portion but it gives us an opportunity to
talk about the Ward piece and the kind of land uses that might occur there
and the land uses to the south further. Now what we've done is look at
three different alignment alternatives for TH 101. What we would like
from the Planning Commission tonight or the 19th, as soon as you can, is a
recommendation as to which alignment you prefer because we are going to
hold a hearing on the 24th with the City Council and they would like some
input from the Planning Commission before we get to that point . This
alternative is one that would bring TH 101 just to the east of present TH
101 which is located here. What it would involve would be only about
250-280 feet of separation between the two and would bring TH 101 almost
directly into the interchange that MnDot presently proposed the loops here
and the on and off ramps located here. Of course that interchange has all
of it ' s ramps, the way it' s presently designed, on the east side. For
spacing reasons , the spacing being between TH 101 and CR 17 so MnDot was
relunctant to put any of the ramps on the other side. Some of the
advantages of this alternative are that it doesn ' t disrupt existing land
use. For example the Bart' s property and a house and barn and so forth. . .
and detaches however the road from the residences that are on Lake Susan
and that was one of the reason that this whole study was begun. Barbara
started it and Mark started it quite some time ago trying to find an
alternative alignment for it. One that would take the traffic off from
present TH 101 and satisfy the concerns of those who live on Lake Susan.
You begin to put together some land use around that, what you end up with
is residences backing up to the future TH 101. Now remember TH 101
probably won' t be built in 10 years or at least until such time as 212 is
ready to be built. Then you would have single family along present TH 101
all facing into it and creating , have a neat cluster of single family and
rather divorcing it from the traffic that will be on this highway. The
other side, we have a rather substantial piece of the Bart' s property and
a portion of the Klingelhutz property that have to interface with the
residences on these large lots further to the east so we have a chance to
create a transitional zone, single family. Some multi family
possibilities. Medium density and we have obviously, with this
interchange going in here , some potential for commercial at virtually all
the quadrants where visibility is good and access ability is also good .
At the north end , just for the purpose of discussion , this is Market Blvd .
f and this is kind of a done deal . This will be built this summer down to
the Rosemount entrance and then we have a phasing in of a temporary
connection to TH 101 at a later date but still undetermined when that will
be and then a future alignment . But what we would have again would be a
roadway coming off from TH 101 and having single family interfacing with
II
II Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 45
IC
single family. Office for the property' s zoned for that presently.
II Perhaps multi-family but it could be an office devlepoment on the lake or
just off the lake and then one of the best sites in the City of Chanhassen
for commercial is that which would be located north of future Lake Drive .
Now Lake Drive presently comes in in this fashion on the north side of
II Rosemount. There would be a separation of an off-setting of Lake Drive.
Then it would pick up and be continuous throughout the rest of the City
all the way over to 184th. I don ' t remember if we've ever discussed, we
II have that off-set have we not in the plans? One of the things that we
looked at was trying to get a bigger site in here no matter whether it was
commercial , industrial or office . We just felt it was important to get a
bigger site in here and if we ran Lake Drive straight through, we would
IIend up with a little area that would be ideal for fast food restaurants or
probably several of them and we decided maybe that wasn't the most
appropriate use there. At least we ought to have flexibility in that we
IIcould have other bigger things occur at that location. In addition,
because of the turning movements that would occur at this intersection , we
felt that the detachment would help immensely in getting people into that
Iside without having to have them come in and immediately make a left ,
which is one of the things we experienced at a number of the intersections
along TH 5 and will continue to do so but we' ll have to live with some of
them. We' ve corrected some but we' re leaving some. We think there' s a
L lot of potential for that site . It ' s about 20 acres and something
at least you should be considering as you continue to look at land use
here . The second alternative is one that is more in conformance with what
IIwe originally intended this stretch of Market Blvd. to do if it were to be
continued and then connect down to the interchange here. In order to get
the right geometrics, all the right curves and all the right super and so
forth , it requires quite a sweeping roadway and what it does is , if you
Irecall , what it looks like down here, this is all open space or should be
committed to open space . It ' s marshy. Wetland areas but there' s a knob
or a hill that sticks up right in the middle of it and it ' s wooded . It ' s
IIquite attractive but this one would propose that the road would swing to
the east side of that avoiding it by putting about this much of road in
the wetland and a fairly valuable wetland. I have some real hang-ups with
IIalternative. To say nothing of the sweeping curves , it would have missed
Bart's property. It would detach the traffic from the Lake Susan
residents again but would get it closer to the residents here . It would
create a peculiar piece of land, a triangular piece of land in this area
IIthat will be very difficult to use . Not impossible but difficult to use.
It will change minimally the configuration of the interchange. Really
only change these areas here as far as alignment of the ramps and so forth
IIis concerned. Would leave a connection for existing TH 101 to the future
or new TH 101 at the north end and you can see then the land use pattern
would be to again have a cluster of residential . The open space. Probably
Imore multi-family in this concept because none of the dimensions work very
well with the single family in these zones between the two, the present
highway and the future highway. A very small triangular piece of land
( that could be used for single family probably connecting the cul-de-sac
Ithat ' s at the end of 86th and bringing it back down through, not
absolutely essential but quite probably to get good circulation there.
Some commercial potential here. Excellent commercial potential and very
ilgood commercial potential in this location as well . This multi-family
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5 , 1989 - Page 46
r
r
would have to have access back through this area . There would be no other
way or it would have to have access directly up to this extension of the
ramps as such.
Headla : Fred , on the very northern part of the multi housing , just down
one color , how would the people there get out to TH 101? r
Fred Hoisington : That ' s a good point . We are showing all of the accesses
that would ever be provided onto TH 101 on these drawings. On these
scenarios . In other words, this would be an intersection. This would be
an intersection. This would be an intersection and there would be no
others so the people that were to live here would have access to this road
here and would have no access to TH 101. Everything would have to be to
this roadway inbetween .
Headla : Is there room there for a road going down the center of that
multi. housing?
Fred Hoisington: Yes . I 'm not sure you want to do that exactly. It 11 would not be a road probably. It would be an internal driveway system
that they would simply link up so that everything connected back to this
south end. This one is sort of an intermediate concept and it' s purpose
was to try to divide the Bart' s piece up into two parcels that were more
easily developed and perhaps more easily developed into single family.
Especially as we interfaced with this area further to the east at the end
of 86th. What it does through is it goes right through this hill ,
demolishes it . It stays out of the wetland a little better than the one
that swept further to the east. It eliminates at whatever time this is
built, the Bart ' s property has to go. It does not under the other two
alternatives . What we found from this was the dimensions come our rather
peculiarly and it also suggests more multi-family than the first
alternative in this case. What it does do is it pulls the ramps out of
this quandrant and it puts them on the other side of the highway, of TH
101. A rather strange thing though because what it does , it does allow
you to come and go necessarily with the same pattern . It ' s a rather
strange sort of pattern. It makes it a little more difficult to get
downtown because when you come off, you have to make additional turns in
order to be able to get down there and that ' s always been one of the
concerns we' ve had in that case . If you pull the ramps out of this
quadrant, as you know, this is all a wetland that the interchange is going
to go in. You would want to protect the remainder of the wetland that
would be outside of the highway right-of-way itself as open space. What
you see in this concept then is very much the same residential cluster on
both sides of existing TH 101 and in this scheme and in this scheme,
pulling TH 101 or the existing TH 101 back so that it does not use the
present alignment. So what you would have would be houses backing up to
houses back here rather than having these have a roadway directly behind
them. It would just create more of a neighborhood kind of feel in this
t particular case . What you end up with is a rather peculiar piece here and
11.- only used for multi-family and that will make the problem more difficult
than it will be in this because you have a narrower piece of land to
serve. Not that you can' t cluster and do with your up to 8 units per
acre . You can cluster everything near the south end and probably do it
II
II Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 47
i
anyway. I mean you can do it there without too much difficulty but the
I dimensions are not ideal . Multi-family here. Multi-family again on the
south side of 86th . Then we show some commercial . This would be a good
commercial site on the west side of the ramps. This commercial site I 'm a
little concerned about because this road is low and the grades are high so
II you'd have to really have some rather severe grades to go up that slope.
So I 'm having some difficulty and that ' s why we' re saying that it could
either be commercial or it could be multi-family. It probably would be
I multi-family. Would have an extension of this down in this fashion .
Where I 'm after some considerable evaluation or looking at this, I 'm
tending more towards alternative 1 than I am towards alternatives 2 and 3
for a lot of reasons . Because I think we can interface better with the
I residential areas that are there. Because we can accomplish I think
everything we need to accomplish by providing some additional commercial .
We' re just coming now to the point where we think this probably works
I better from a land use standpoint than the other alternatives . One of the
things it does for us as well is provide us with the possibility of an
expanded right-of-way concept here. Getting more right-of-way than we
IIreally need . Based on the geometrics of this alignment, we can either
build or have lots that would come all the way back to the right-of-way,
future right-of-way of TH 101 backing to it or we could leave some
openings in there where the City could be involved or the County or
Iwhoever builds the road , with landscaping and so forth within those
expanded right-of-way areas. It reminds me a little of Hwy. 100 in Edina
where we did an expanded right-of-way plan 20 years ago. Where MnDot , in
IIthat case, had a great deal of interest in having that look good and would
allow the city to provide additional landscaping and so forth. It could
well mean a greater commitment of dollars on the part of the City in a
IIcase like this . . .MnDot will have in this roadway at the time it ' s likely
to be built but there' s some implications here. One of the things I
especially want to talk about with you tonight is the whole issue or
question of a landscape median. The same thing we talked about last time
II was here . This roadway will be designed now as one that can accommodate
speeds of 55 mph. At the time it ' s built, if there isn' t a great deal of,
in other words, if it were to be built today, you would in fact be able to
Itravel 55 mph on that roadway. I 'm quite sure in my mind about that. If
it were to be built 10 years from now and a lot of the development that
you see here has alr_eady occurred or is about to occur , at the point that
it has occurred substantially, this roadway will no longer function at 55 .
IIt will probably function at 45. It would be important to the City not to
try to make it function at a lower speed than 45. This road will be
extremely important as a link through here and one that you have to
Imaintain a certain level of speed on. You have no choice but to do that .
One of the things we' re trying to explore, that we were exploring was ,
whether at the time it' s built we could reduce the speed enough that we
IIcould in fact do more landscaping there. One of the reasons we can do it
downtown is that the speeds are low enough and the road is straight
enough, with the exception of the one curve, that the clear zones adjacent
( to the curbs don ' t need to exist . Minor clear zones in that case , at 30
mph. At 45 mph, the speed below which we would not want to go ever on
this roadway, you have to have for a median a clear zone on the side of
the curb that the person could lose it into the median. You have to have
IIa clear zone of 37 feet from the travel lane . The inside travel lane .
... - --
. 1
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 48
C
Now you could take, if it happens to be an urban section, a curb section
here, then you've got to figure 37 feet and then on the other side, you
don ' t have to have 37 feet. Let' s say you have to have half of that.
You'd have to have a median at least of 50, 60, maybe 70 feet wide in
order to accomodate the trees in a median of such . You can always have
shurbs there but it would be very difficult to put trees in the median
under any scenario . I guess what we' re beginning to think here is if
you' re going to do some landscaping and want this to be kind of a very
pleasing entrance, you have to look for other ways to do that. One of the
ways you can do that is to expand the right-of-way concept. Another way
you can do that is to have some areas along the road . For example in
front of Rosemount where we know we' re going to have some additional
right-of-way anyway. Where you can create pockets of landscaping . Kind
of frame a roadway and make it attractive. Other areas where you can do
that are up the slopes for example where you have steep cuts because the
answer in point that a car can' t travel anyway so there are things that
you can do about those where you 'd have major cuts in the way of
landscaping with trees and not shurb material . In fills , you have another
problem because those slopes have to be flatter so you have some rather
significant clearance zones in fill areas that mean you ' re very limited in
what you can do landscaping wise close to the roadway and such. What I 'm
telling you is we can continue to look, we must continue to look at what
will create or establish a pleasing entrance into downtown Chanhassen ,
along this roadway but probably trees in the median are not one of the
things that you ' re going to be able to do unless you were to reduce the
speed to considerably below what we think the speed limit must be on this
road to carry the traffic that will be necessary in the year 2000, 2005 or
2010. So with that I ' ll just open it up to questions . We would like
some suggestions or recommendations from the Planning Commission as to
which of the alternatives you would like the City Council to consider .
You will get future shots because it does have to come back for official
land use.
Headla : Before he gave the pitch , I favored 2 and I had all sorts of
reasons . I think he gave some very convincing reasons why it should be 1.
Right now, with everything he said, I would go with 1. Just one thing ,
that line of sight , did you say that had to be like almost 60 feet?
Hoisington: The clear zones, that line would be . . .
Headla : What is a clear zone? Is that line of sight?
Hoisington: No. The clear zone is the distance between the travel lane
and the nearest fixed objects which are things that a car could hit and do
damage or a driver being injured substantially. So when I talk about 60
feet , I 'm talking about , in the median area , when I talk about the clear
zones on the edges, you only have one exposure and that ' s the car on the
outside lane . So in those cases , your clear zones are only let ' s say the
37 feet from the traveled edge. Where the curves I believe are 4 . . . 30
minutes . So in the median you 'd have to almost double it . '
Wildermuth: I really favor alternative 1. I like the creation of large
commercial zone in that area to the north there that Fred was talking
I
IPlanning Commission Meeting
April 5 , 1989 - Page 49
,k
about . The potential for an office building or some other commercial use.
IIThat could be a really prime piece of property out there. Has minimal
impact on the wetlands and the topography.
Hoisington: Just a couple of points. This of course would be the same for
IIall three alternatives . There would be no difference there. Each one of
the alternatives does have, and I don' t want to suggest to you that it
doesn ' t have a wetland impact . I think this one has by far the greatest
IIwetland impact because we had such a major exposure there to the wetland .
Wildermuth : Well 1 seems to have the least wetland impact.
IIHoisington: I think you' re probably right but nonetheless, the creek does
exist in here and it kind of winds down before it comes out at Lake Susan.
What would happen under this scenario is you probably have to put, you 'd
Istraighten it out and bring it across the street and put it under in one
place. So you would lose that, you can' t help that. Unless you leave the
road where it is, you ' re going to have a wetland impact .
IIConrad: What about to the south Fred? The wetland at the TH 212
intersection.
Hoisington : That ' s a real concern. Under any of the scenarios , you' re
going to have just a major impact on that wetland.
IIConrad : Is it an A and a B wetland?
Hanson: I think it' s an A.
IIHoisington : I 'm sure it ' s an A. And just because we' re able to save a
portion of it here, there' s still a lot of it lost. There' s going to be
an interchange there. There isn' t much way you can avoid it . The only
IIthing I can think of is to, and MnDot is relunctant to do this, is to plot
this whole interchange on the other side and you just about can ' t do it
now because of the subdivision that have already occurred further to the
Iwest . That option is precluded . I guess in the whole scheme of things,
in looking at all the alternatives that MnDot has looked at for that
roadway, they are coming to the conclusion , at least I think the EIS is
coming to the conclusion that this represents the lesser of the total
IIimpacts of the other , south Riley and the other alternatives that would be
considered. No matter whether you have the interchange or not, you have
to go through a wetland . That ' s just where it ' s going to go.
IIBatzli : Three minutes ago I would have said I like option 3 because we
save part of the wetland . I don' t think I like 2. Number 1 on the other
IIhand to me, it seems like we have a lot of single families abutting TH 101
there don ' t we? If that ' s a 55 mph road , I don' t know that that ' s really
the kind of use that' s going to go in there or would be appropriate. I
I don ' t know that a lot of people want to be up against TH 7 kind of
It- arrangement if they knew about it in advance. That ' s going to be a
heavily traveled road . That would be the drawback that I see on 1 besides
the fact that we' re going to put the interchange in the wetland. But of
IIthe three , I think that might be the most realistic .
11
Planning Commission Meeting 1
April 5 , 1989 - Page 50
C
Ellson : Isn ' t it true that you can actually like move a wetland? I hate
the idea. We just a thing in our comprehensive plan, we are not going to
do anything to wetland and here we are not even 2 hours later saying how
we' re going right through one. We' re just so inconsistent. Maybe we'd
have to give up some residential medium density but can' t you like '
literally move a wetland and put it somewhere else? I 've heard of that
sort of thing and I 'm just saying , I hate the thought of doing that .
We' re basically trying not to , in any way we can , so I 'm saying if we have
to can we move it and forfeit some of this other zoning in order to put a
wetland there or something . But as far as the three alternatives , I would
go along with 1.
Hoisington : Annette , let me just say that MnDot , if and when it builds TH
212 here, will have to consider mitigating loss of the wetland. One of
the alternatives is to put it someplace else. It ' s never obviously quite
the same as where it is but it would function in the same manner that it
does here . One of the things they are talking about though, and I 'm not
sure how effective that would be, is in their concepts they do, which is
really this concept right now, they are talking about ponding in all of
the quadrants in this interchange. So there is going to be an effort to
either retain as much of it as they can or if there is some loss , they' ll
try to figure out ways to mitigate that loss so that ' s required that they
_ address that in the EIS .
Erhart : I 'd like to emphasize that I like, if we can ' t have a central
median which wasn' t really the point of my last discussion as it is just
to make it a very aesthetically pleasing entrance to Chanhassen . If the
way to do it is to expand the right-of-way, I think that ' s a great idea . 11 So I fully support that . In addition , I had the same problem that Brian
had with backing lots up to a private street or even up to TH 101. I have
a concern with that . I 'm glad to see you changed that drawing from the
one we had out here because that was one of my points on the old one. I
wanted to cut it off there so we don' t have that . I think one of the
things you can do is you can combine this landscaping to also make it a
barrier between those lots that back up to TH 101. In fact I think in the
long run, I think if we would have done some of that on some of our
freeways here , we could have saved a lot of money and have a lower
maintenance cost, sound barrier than we have with these wood and concrete
things that are all starting to get cockeyed and tipping over and really
question how long that' s going to work. I don ' t like number 2 at all . I
think it makes the distance further that you have to travel . For number
1, from a person who lives in the south, it' s really exciting to see that
someday we' ll have a decent way to get into town. Otherwise I 'm going to
Chaska too. It' s really exciting to see something like this on paper
anyway. Item 2 just goes against , I think the benefit is that now you ' re
back in fairly sharp turns. Going way out of your way to get from Point B
so I would like to see that one rejected somewhat out of hand . Again , it
( does adversely affect the wetland. My question relating , and I like 1
best of the alternatives , but why when traffic comes down this way and if
you want to go west, and essentially you' re going in somewhat in the same
direction , why do we have a guy in the left turn to go right? The
intersection I think about, and I use it frequently is the intersection on
II .
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
April 5 , 1989 - Page 51
Ilf
II
all around the Eden P ra irie Ce nter . It is so ridiculous . All the turns
II and lights and things you ' ve got to do just to get from downtown, down
Pioneer Trail . It' s so ridiculous . You' ve got make left turns to make a
right turn and I don' t understand why in either of these, particular in
this one here , you ' re coming down, why can' t you just have the entrance
Igoing west just basically go off? And the same here. It would take
almost zero space and this in fact is not developed . I 'm talking about
just a gradual lane going down there. If you did that, then you could
Ibring this one into here and out of the wetlands and reduce the whole side
of this intersection. It would make it less expensive and I think a lot
more handy for people to use .
IHoisington : They would still Tim bring this one out . What they could
avoid, if they were to do that of course , would be that they wouldn' t have
to build whatever barrier within the wetland , back here but they will have
IIto build this . . .
Erhart : Yes , that would be fine but it would be bring it out of the
wetland and that would be great.
IIHoisington : But what they' re concerned about is the spacing of the end of
this ramp to the beginning of the CR 17 ramp. That' s the reason they use
IIthis folded diamond concept . My understanding is that they originally
considered a number of alternatives here. Their conclusion was that the
spacing was just not adequate .
IIErhart : I guess probably the major reason why I don' t like this plan , if
someone coming off. They have to make a right turn. Stop. Then a left
turn to get into town. It ' s real cumbersome although I think it solves
IIsome of the problems with getting some of the intermediate zones between
the highway. I think you need to have the exits . What is OS?
IIHoisington : Open space .
Erhart : Maybe you could have the exit coming up here.
IIHoisington: You could. The only disadvantage of that is that for the
most part people who , what MnDot like to do is they like to bring people
off and then get them back on basically at the same point if they can.
IErhart : So they don ' t get lost .
IHoisington : Exactly. That' s the reason . So that ' s a possibility but one
that we don ' t think they would look up to right away.
Erhart : I guess I would favor 1. If the left turns are unavoidable, then
II
I guess that' s . . . I think we ought to emphasize too to MnDot is the zero
net loss of wetlands. That they try to mitigate as much as possible.
t
ItConrad: Fred, I don' t have anything new to add . I think 1 is the best
alternative . It ' s great on the upper part for sure . My only comment is I
think we should be talking to MnDot about minimal impact on the wetland at
IIthe interchange. Whatever that access method is , that ' s the one we should
m.
. �
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 52
C
use . But it' s got to be an easy access for downtown Chanhassen period .
Number 3 does not do it the way it' s designed. We just can' t have that .
That ' s not an alternative at all . So it' s got to be an easy right hand
for westerly bound traffic and that' s real important .
Hoisington : We will be holding a public information meeting on the 17th
so if you don' t have enough meetings to attend now, please feel free to
come out and spend some time .
Conrad: Okay, thanks Fred. Mark, you' re back on. ,
Koegler : Okay. We have essentially one last component of the plan
discussion and that deals with land use in the rural area. When the 1980
plan was put together , as I think I ' ve stated earlier tonight , it was a
very easy task because at that time there was an ordinance essentially
prohibiting development without sewer . As you know that didn ' t exactly
stand the test of time so now this plan needs to take a little different
approach and the only approach that ' s been really taken to date , outside
of the discussion we just got through a little while ago on looking at
long , long term land uses , is really from a policy standpoint . Goal and
policy standpoint and some of those you reviewed earlier dealing with the
general rural use area and how that' s going to be handled. There have
been discussions in the past as to whether or not that approach which is
kind of more passive and to just let those statements dictate what the
policy is along with the existing ordinances . If that ' s the right
approach or if it ' s appropriate to take a more active approach in looking
at land use . Some time ago Tim is the author of this map. There was a
reduced version of that in the packet but what this did was identify
various types of uses in the southern part of the community. Agriculture.
Wooded. Existing residential development. Wetlands and so forth and
there was discussion at that time as to whether or not that kind of
thinking should be expanded through the entire rural area and then should
we be looking at land uses , either permanent land uses or interim land
uses that were compatible with those various types of use areas . The
Planning Commission , according to my notes , even considered at one time
should we be designating areas for "pure" agriculture versus hobby farm
areas . Were there areas where the agricultural quality were not
necessarily suitable to the highest level of production of rural crops or
whatever . Should we be looking at hobby farms in some of those kinds of
areas as being more of a permitted use? Again, this item is brought back
to you tonight for your thoughts and kind of policy direction. Where do
you want to go with talking about the between now and 2000 use of the
general rural use area . How specific do we want to get? We have a number
of policies in part of the plan right now that basically say development
only in conformance with ordinances . No expansion of the commercial ,
industrial and so forth. Is that sufficient or do we need to go further?
Conrad : Well Tim, why don' t you start us off .
-- Erhart: Okay. This item 2, discourage development in the rural wooded
areas . I remember that now. What I thought I communicated was to
discourage agricultural development of wooded areas . In other words ,
going in and cutting down all the trees and converting it to crop land . ,
II -
I Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 53
' That' s what I meant to say that time because wooded areas is the most
valuable, as Dave will know, most valuable area you can get for future
I residential use . Maybe this is someone elses idea but if this was my idea
then that' s what I meant by it. Was discourage conversion of wood lots to
agricultural use in the rural area .
IIHeadla: I 've got the same thing circled.
Erhart: Is everybody okay with that one? Item 1, identify pure
I agricultural areas vs. areas suitable for expansion. The first part of
that, I tend to think that the area west of that freeway will be pure
agriculture for quite some time unless it gets adopted by Chaska. I think
I it will be agricultural for some time . There are some people there that
want to stay farming . Essentially if you look at the map here, on the
northwest part of that TH 212. I 'm looking at this item number 1.
II Identify pure agricultural areas vs . areas suitable for expansion. I
don ' t think, was that my idea too?
Koegler : I can ' t tell you who . It was just a comment that was discussed
Ibriefly.
Conrad : It had to be yours .
F, Erhart : I don ' t remember that one . I guess in looking at that , I would
just go back to what we do and identify pure long term agricultural vs .
II transitional areas I guess which is what we' ve said previously already in
this document. From what' s happened in the area down there by me, that' s
almost all lots are wooded at this point . So it seems to me that' s not a
transitional area, then I don' t know what a transitional area is .
1 Koegler : That proliferation of residential that ' s occurred over the last
several years needs to be called out in the plan and discussed as being
Ithe existing situation. I guess that ' s kind of the direction that I was
assuming we would probably go. A brief discussion then of what' s left
that is "agricultural" . The fact that the slat of the plantings preserve
Ithat, at least what, as long as practical? If it is productive farmland ,
to allow it to remain that and not go into a great deal more comment on
it. Let that kind of narrative and the policies basically portray the
City' s policy in the general rural use area .
IConrad: Tim, I don' t understand your map. Now why did you do that? You
had some reason for drawing that map and are we paying attention to those
Ireasons?
Erhart : I ' ve done a number of these maps over my 3 years on the Planning
Commission . I think one of the frustrating things is just like up on TH
I41 and TH 7. To me that ' s just an area that I really don' t have a vision
for . So many times we' ve talked about south Chanhassen and everybody
thinks of it in terms of it' s just farmland. I was trying to get people
to communicate that hey, it ' s not just farmland . In fact I think there' s
two distinct separate areas in south Chanhassen. One is rural residential
as we call it, which is that area essentially, at this point everything
IIeast of extended CR 17 is really rural residential . Then everything west
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 54
of that is really still agricultural . I think in doing planning , you've
got deal with data. Real facts and that' s the real facts and that' s why I
did that .
Conrad : So it makes sense to me what you ' re talking about . The
agricultural being to the west but do you think we should be treating the
land to the east that is hobby farmish or bigger , do we need to do
anything?
Erhart : Well yes. For example when we talked about contractor ' s yards, 1
it' s still up in the air whether we want to just separate south Chanhassen
and allow contractor ' s yards out in the ag area . That' s still going to
come up. As opposed to allowing contractor 's yards east of the extended ,
CR 17 . I don' t care , we can either eliminate them completely which is
fine with me. On the other hand, if there' s a sentiment that somebody
owns 100 acres out there and he wants to be in the contracting business ,
then if he' s in that agricultural area, then maybe he ought to be allowed
to have a contracting business . I really don' t care as long as we don' t
have these industrial sites in the middle of which is now a rural
residential area with really expensive homes . In fact , I think that ' s the
reason why I drew this map the last time was to communicate the fact that
it ' s not just as simple as it' s just a bunch of farms out there. There ' s
really two distinct separate areas and I think in our terms of planning ,
we' ve got to at least start thinking of it that way. Hobby farms , to me a
hobby farm is somebody who wants, has got 10 acres. You can have a hobby
farm. I don ' t know where that came from. I don' t remember that I brought
that up and don' t know that it has to be in there. Does that answer your
question?
Conrad : Mark 's comment on the bottom of page 20. Another alternative is
to take a more active approach in specifically address land uses in
southern Chanhassen. Listing of existing land use types and natural
conditions and the corresponding statement of appropriate use in those
areas. Tim, you would not feel we needed to do that?
Erhart : Say that again.
Conrad: Read the bottom paragraph on page 20.
Erhart : Are you suggesting you do that by micro areas or macro? '
Koegler: There was discussion in the past about a more micro approach. I
think my thoughts and what I think I 'm hearing this evening is really, if
you want to use the term more macro in that we've got a couple of distinct
areas with different characteristics and those need to be recognized .
We've got agricultural and we've got rural "urban" land use. We' ve got
housing and so forth and they do set up two distinct zones and just
coincidentally, virtually almost bisected by the TH 212 alignment .
Erhart : Yes . Your map corresponds a lot with what already exists . '
Koegler: That' s the approach that I would suggest we take. Right now
we' ve got a blank spot in the plan where it says that' s to be filled in
'I
II Planning Commission Meeting
April 5 , 1989 - Page 55
Ir
and I think that ' s the way we should fill it in .
Erhart: I think we should proceed along with what you are proposing there
which deals with the identifying long term ag on a macro basis . I think
that' s what you' ve got on your map.
IConrad : Any disagreement with that?
I Headla : I was questioning this very last sentence . All development would
be discouraged. How do you discourage?
Koegler : This is only really speaking in a policy context because if your
Iordinances allow development at a certain density, which they do, that is
permissible .
IWildermuth : Couldn' t stop it right?
Koegler : No . Short of going to another density category which given the
I amount of land that' s remaining is probably not in the City' s best
interest . But just from a policy standpoint , to preserve that
agricultural useage as long as is practical and until such time in the
future as sewer and so forth comes in and the property ultimately
II develops .
Wildermuth : It ' s pretty restricted now with the 1 unit per 10 acre
Irequirement. I guess the only comment I would have is I don' t see any
need to identify pure agricultural areas vs. hobby farms . I think the
economics in the situation, soil types and that sort of thing dictate what
goes where.
IErhart : I guess I assumed we were taking this paragraph out in exchange
for what Mark is proposing to do .
IIKoegler : The macro approach just looks at agriculture period . It doesn ' t
categorize.
II Conrad : This point number 3, for rural subdivisions require ghost plats .
It kind of makes sense.
IIKoegler : That certainly could be a valid concern in any number of areas
and maybe now in light of what has happened in recent history with zoning ,
it ' s not as critical as it might have been January a few years ago when
Isuddenly these developments came in. But the area that' s of most concern
to me in that regard is the area north of TH 5 between the two MUSA lines .
That 's kind of really the transitional area because that ' s the next area
Ithat according to the sewer plan will be serviced . That ' s the area where
it ' s most critical in at least the shorter term that the development
pattern that goes in fits some long term scenario as to how properties
, ultimately could be redivided. That same concern is evident in the south
IFalso. It ' s just potentially a little further down the road . But perhaps
the passage of time now and the ordinance that ' s in effect with the 1 per
10 standard , that ' s maybe not as critical as it was with the 2 1/2 acre .
I
a
Planning Commission Meeting I
April 5, 1989 - Page 56
Conrad : I don ' t know. Steve, you've got to tell us . You ' re the one that
has to deal with all this junk. You divide it into 1 per 10 and then
pretty soon you divide it to 15,000 square feet . It ' s more of a planner
problem.
Hanson : I guess I see part of it as determining what , again that' s why I
go back to the land use, that land use ultimately is . . . interim steps . . .
The decision has to be made for larger lots in 2 1/2 acres or . . . I think
that northern area would have a fair amount of that has gone 2 1/2 acre
lots and now we' re faced with an area . . . On the other hand, if you' ve got
an area that' s developing along a different character . . . I don' t have a
feel for that . I 'm not sure if I answered your question or not .
Conrad: Well , some of this stuff, we literally don' t know. We ' re kind of
trying to help provide orderly planning because the reality is, there will
be resubdivisions and previous city planners have gotten real concerned
about some of this . So if ghost platting is important to do, because we
know there' s going to be a sequence, then we should be working some of
this into policies or ordinances . As Mark says , he' s not real concerned
because maybe the changes recently in the 1 per 10 and whatever and maybe
we don ' t have a problem there and I guess I don' t have a real sense . I
don' t know.
Koegler : Ladd , my level of concern is still there. It ' s just I don ' t
think you ' re going to see as many cases now where this is going to become
an opportunity to do that as you would have a couple of years ago when the
door was open to all these rural subdivisions that came in. I think just
simply the numbers of these things over the next few years are going to be
pretty minimal with the 1 per 10 standard in effect.
Conrad : Then my sense is to leave it alone and not deal with it.
Erhart: Let me ask you this . Let' s say on Riley Lake south there, let' s
say sewer was extended into there , would you actually go in and put that
sewer in on all those 2 1/2 acre lots and force those landowners to hook
up when their septic systems are working?
Hanson: I can' t imagine that you would.
Erhart : I can' t either . I can' t imagine that. '
Hanson: The cost of that would be too great. On the other hand, if you
have a lot of failing septic systems then that situation changes . My
understanding of that area is that has pretty well gone under the new
regulations that they got two sites and so forth so I wouldn' t see that
that' s going to be the case. That you ' re going to have a lot of failures .
Erhart : Let ' s say sewer comes by on TH 101 , who ' s going to pay for it to
( run it into that whole subdivision when there' s no urgency to do it? I
'-- would just find it, unless things are failing , I just can' t imagine that
ever being subdivided. Maybe someday but boy, not for a long time. I
have a theoretical question. What is our position today realizing , I
think as we do, the 2 1/2 acre lots are really uneconomic from the '
II
II Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 57
IC
standpoint of providing services .
Streets and so forth and everything . If
we had this guy in here who wanted to hook in from the north end of town .
II Who wanted to hook in and could hook in in a gravity flow even though he
was outside the MUSA line, I 've got to believe you' re going to see some
more of those coming in here. First place, he' s close to a wetland . The
I second thing, if you did allow him to hook in instead of having some more
2 1/2 acre lots , you could have maybe you could 15, 000 lots or maybe 1
acre lots . Something. But we keep forcing more 2 1/2 acre lots when in
I fact the sewer is right across the street from the guy or something . What
ought to be our position in those cases? Realizing that Met Council ' s
going to say no today but what ought to be our , if we had our wish, what
would it be? Do we want to encourage the City to try to get Met Council
I to give us some flexibility, to be more flexible so that we can do what we
think is, in my opinion, better planning? If you don' t have to put a lift
station in and the guy' s got some lots there , to force him to keep some
I more 2 1/2 acre lots, to me that' s just poor planning. I think you guys
are already doing something . I guess I 'd like to see the Planning
Commission encourage the staff to try to get some flexibility out of Met
I Council to stop this propagation of 2 1/2 acre lots . Even to go to the
extent that we'd actually put a statement in our comp plan to say, have
flexibility or something or try to minimize additional 2 1/2 acre lots in
those cases where gravity sewer would serve an area .
1 _ Conrad : You don ' t like 2 1/2 acre lots because they' re uneconomical?
IErhart: Waste land.
Wildermuth : But you can ' t have any more can you? I mean it ' s 1 unit per
10 acre density. I think the 2 1/2 acre lot is pretty well ruled out.
IIConrad : Even though it' s 1 per 10, you can have on a 40 acre . . .
IHanson: Yes, if you have 40 acres , you could cluster them. You could
have four 2 1/2 acre sites clustered and have 30. . .
IWildermuth: But you use up the allotment for. the balance of land?
Hanson : Yes .
IWildermuth : The only thing that ' s going to happen there is when they do
come in with sewer, boy it ' s really going to be expensive for that sewer
and water . I ' d hate to bring sewer and water into Hesse Farm for example .
IThose big lots .
Erhart : There you wouldn ' t but let ' s say a buy' s got 40 acres and he
IIwants to put 4 lots in. This guy had 4 lots didn ' t he. I don ' t remember
the whole circumstances .
! Koegler : I don ' t know what guy you' re specifically talking about .
Hanson: Are you talking about Carrico?
IErhart : Yes .
Planning Commission Meeting
April 5, 1989 - Page 58
Koegler : Okay, the flexibility thing seems to have been lost over time .
I don' t know how that occurred but in the late 70' s and early 80' s , the
arguments between the City and the Met Council , the City' s position was
that the MUSA line was a flexible line within certain parameters. The way
the line occurred is that Met Council originally gave the City a rough
alignment and it literally was a graphic swath that went up through the
city. That was refined largely by the City based upon gravity sanitary
sewer. But the thing you have to bear in mind was the decisions on
gravity sewer were made on 10 foot contours . USGS information was all
that was available and is all still that' s available at this time for
certain parts of the community and that ' s not real definitive.
Consequently you had pieces of property that came in that were right next
to this new hardline that was drawn that people could demonstrate that
they really were serviceable. The City' s intent back at that time was
that those should be included in the MUSA line because that was the
foundation, that it was gravity sewer service and anything that was not
was outside the MUSA line . Somehow that flexibility seems to have gotten
lost. I don ' t know how that has occurred and maybe that 's not totally a
dim topic because in that same time period the Metropolitan Council seems
to have gotten a little bit more flexible now with changes to the MUSA
line .
Erhart : More recently?
Koegler : More recently. So maybe the pendelum is swinging back the other
way but the concept that you bring up Tim is nothing really that wasn' t
expressed some time ago. the City went through a lot of discussions and a
lot of heated , very heated debates with Met Council when the MUSA line was
being drafted . My predecessor back in the ' 76 timeframe or so was heavily
involved in that . That was pretty well ironed out by the time I was
involved.
Erhart : Then I guess I would ask the Commission to consider to put some '
words in here that basically reinforces trying to get some flexibility
back into this thing .
Koegler : Back in those days sewer allocation was a dirty word . Nobody
ever said that. Now more recently they speak of allocation. Number of
units . Number of connections and things so it has gotten a lot more
specific and that ' s to a large degree why the line has become more firm
and there ' s been less flexibility maybe in saying this guy' s right next to
the line and he really should be in. Well no, because Chanhassen only has
x sewer capacity and you' ve already used up the capacity or whatever the
argument might be.
Erhart : That ' s also a thing that kind of burns me that you' ve got one guy
on one side of the line and one guy on the other side of the line, there' s
no economic reason why one guy is treated different than the other . Where
it' s gravity flow, that' s something you can stand on.
Conrad : I don ' t disagree with what you' re saying Tim. I don' t know where
we take it but I don' t disagree. Steve, do you have any opinion on
Mk
'I
IPlanning Commission Meeting
f-
April 5, 1989 - Page 59
I 4'
this? Mark can work it in.
II Hanson : Well why don' t you let us give it a shot and try to come up with
something. Met Council did, last time there was an adjustment made they
indicated that there was some flexibility to adjust that but they didn' t
II want to see 10 acres here and 5 acres there. That the City, we'd identify
those . Part of the reason we haven ' t proceeded with that , Carrico . . .
negotiations on that as far as the park site. That' s one of the reason
II haven' t pursued that further until that issue has been settled .
Conrad: Are we through Mark?
I Koegler : Yes . You' ve given us direction I think on all the topics that
we needed.
II Jo Ann Olsen updated the Planning Commission on the recycling program.
IWildermuth moved, Batzli seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in
favor and the motion carried . The meeting was adjourned at 10: 50 p.m. .
II Submitted by Steve Hanson
Planning Director
1 Prepared by Nann Opheim
II
II
I
II
II
I
e
if
1
r.
. ,
„„
. .
! '' ..-''A.
I CITY COUNCIL AND
. ' ' ' "TIE
PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING
IMARCH 27 , 1989
ICOUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel , Councilman Boyt, Councilman
Workman, Councilwoman Dimler and Councilman Johnson
PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Jim Mady, Sue Boyt , Ed Hasek,
ILarry Schroers, Dawne Erhart and Curt Robinson
STAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema , Park and Rec Coordinator
IJim Mady: We want to kind of make sure we' re kind of oi .
g Ong in the same
direction . We ' ve got the trail going in this spring hopefully on Laredo
I and Carver Beach Road and that was probably the top two priorities. The
third top priority is Minnewashta Parkway. We ' ll be discussing that
tomorrow night and by the sounds of the comments from the Council meeting,
Ithat ' s a priority for you also I think but we want to find out kind of
your thoughts on the process and then kind of how we' re going to pay for
all of these before we even start looking .
ICouncilman Johnson: One thing about Minnewashta Blvd. is it' s up on
engineering ' s timetable in 2 years for improvement with State Aid funds ,
if the State Aid funds are still around. That is the time period, while
I everything ' s torn up for rebuilding the street , widening the street , that
would be the time period that you could most economically put the trails
in . We ' ve got all the heavy equipment out there etc . . I want to try to
I push that particular project up because of all the streets that need State
Aid funds, that ' s one of our higher priority streets personally.
I Councilman Boyt: Do we have any money? State Aid. I thought we'd
exhausted our State Aid .
Councilman Johnson : Not for this year . Next year we have some.
ILori. Sietsema : I talked to Gary about that and he said that they'd have
Bluff Creek paid off and another one paid off so there would be more money
Iavailable and 1991 was his schedule for Minnewashta Parkway.
Councilman Johnson : They' ve had a couple of other streets in front of it
for 1990 which I didn' t think. I think there was something on Audubon
I South of the railroad bridge and a few things like that that may be moved
to 1991 and backwards . But that' s something else to look at .
I Councilman Workman : I talked to , if I can jump in because I think the
funding, a lot of the funding , if we had all the money in the world , we
wouldn ' t have a problem in the world . All of us would probably be at
home. I talked to Gary today. I had a lot of questions for Gary about
Ilike the packet for City Council so I just came in and I kind of asked
him, there were some questions about the funding for Lake Lucy Road .
Bluff Creek and all that other that was kind of goofy and I wanted
Iclarification on it was all going to pan out and if we had lost any money
or what the problems were .
I
MI
City Council/Park and Rec Joint Meeting
March 27, 1989 - Page 2
Councilman Johnson: Yes , and the State did some goofy things.
Councilman Workman: They process these projects differently so it looked
like Lake Lucy Road really wasn' t paid for in it ' s final payment or
something. But anyway, he clarified everything for me but what I said
was , and what kind of my point that I wanted to give to him and maybe I
want to give it to the commission here, is that I see the City and maybe
I 'm wrong and Gary kind of settled me down a little bit , that we' re always
buying off the future a little bit. How can we get a trail today by sort
of taking tomorrow' s money a little bit? I told Gary that ' s not just
trails , that' s how we do a lot of things, it appears with the City and I 'm
trying to get a better handle on that . That ' s something that worries me a
little bit particularly in the economic climate that we might be entering
in. Who knows . We want all sorts of money to try and take care of
possibly an Eckankar size issue but we really don' t have it for a
community center but our money isn ' t there and like with the task force
Jim, in all honesty, I think a community center ' s a great idea . I 've
expressed that to you. One of my problems I had was that the bonding
limit, you kept saying well next year we can do more and then the next
year we can do more and the next year we can do more . It would be much
easier if we could say we could do it all next year but we' re kind of
looking 6 years down the road at the bonding limit and to me that kind of
said, we' re going to spend right up and that kind of worried me. Not that
the community center problem worries me , because I think a lot of people
believe that we should have that kind of thing but the funding is the
underlying worry that I have. I expressed that at the last council
meeting that in the memo, there was a $25,000. 00 estimate on Carver Beach
Road and it was now $83, 000. 00 and not have anything to do with the
eventual problem because I think it' s a needed trail but it'd be nice to
get a better handle on these kinds of funds . We ' re not sure where all the
funds are coming for to pay for it and it ' s a big mess and that' s what we
have to sit down and iron out .
Jim Mady: On Laredo Trail , that would have been a $25 , 000. 00 trail had we
been able to put in a 6 foot strip of blacktop and not had to do anything
to the streets with the sewers and that . The residents wanted concrete .
That doubled the price right there.
Councilman Workman: Yes , but the funding is my biggest worry and Bill and
I have talked after the council meeting basically stating I 'm more
conservative with spending and Bill maybe isn ' t as conservative. Neither
being right or wrong but I just get a little more nervous that way and
that' s why I maybe the reflex a little differently and that ' s what made me
see, and that' s a tough thing to change.
Councilman Johnson : One thing that I ' ve learned over the last 2 years is
that Don is conservative. He' s also squirreling a little bit away that he
doesn ' t quite tell you about . When he ' s going to tell you that he thinks
he' s going to have so much money, historically he' s always had more which
is the way I want it to be. That ' s why I have a little better feeling
about the financial side of things because it ' s always been working out .
We' ve always been underestimating our revenues .
City Council/Park and Rec Joint Meeting
March 27, 1989 - Page 3
Councilman Boyt : Can we take this and maybe you can pull this together in
house? Impacts the trail system. The two things that I heard you guys
wanted to hear about is the trail system and parks .
Sue Boyt: One of the questions I think we had was, will you support us if
we recommend the trails be put in a development?
Councilman Boyt: On new developments?
Sue Boyt : In a new development .
Councilman Workman: In any development?
Mayor Chmiel : I might have some problems with that .
Sue Boyt: That' s what we'd like to hear .
Mayor Chmiel : . . .curbs on TH 101. I can see us supporting a trail system
along TH 101 because I think that really is a needed area and I ' ve
mentioned this before. Minnewashta Parkway. Powers Blvd . . The main
areas where there' s a lot of activity on the roads and providing a safe
place for the people. Kurvers Point of TH 101 , I think that . . .to
I thought it was fine. But then to develop a trail system through that
new area , I think it just didn' t sit too well with me. And I ' ll tell you
why. Some of those people when they buy homes within a developments , they
buy them for peace and serenity is what they see . If people want to walk
through there, that ' s . . . You can' t stop them from doing that. But to put
a specific trail through that area , I guess I don ' t see that particular
need. I think what we ' re looking at is trying to serve a system that
would one, bring people into the downtown areas . Which TH 101 , Powers
Blvd . . Minnewashta Parkway of course wouldn ' t because that' s at the far
side. . .and I think that by planning those kinds of trails , and that ' s all
the ones I really support. Putting sidewalks through residential areas ,
if the Park and Rec . . . to put that money into something as you did with
these last two, I think that ' s fine. But I can' t see us spending the
dollars for putting in sidewalks or assessing the property owners unless
those people really want that kind of trail or that kind of sidewalk. The
sidewalk situation also leads me as to who really has that jurisdiction.
Does the Planning Commission have it or does the Park and Rec Commission?
IJim Mady: I think we' ve been told in the past on that question is that if
Park and Rec doesn' t. . . trails, the Planning Commission will . Maybe their
thoughts have changed in the last 6 months but that ' s what we ' ve always
Ibeen told. To address Kurver ' s Point . . .
Sue Boyt : I don ' t think we need to debate . We can just exchange ideas
and listen to points of view.
Lori Sietsema : Could I interject here. I think that , we only have an
hour . I think basically what the Park and Recreation Commission is
Ilooking for , do you support , the referendum failed to fund what was
proposed in the trail system and that ' s what ' s been approved but generally
do you support what ' s in the trail system or do we need to scale it back?
I
City Council/Park and Rec Joint Meeting
March 27, 1989 - Page 6
listening to them, knowing what they want and one part of the plan that
was developed by the Park and Rec was saying we would consult with the
individual people to see what their likings are, what their dislikes are.
Some of those cases, you' ve done that.
Sue Boyt : We won' t always respond to the needs of one small group.
Mayor Chmiel : No, I 'm not saying that. But we have to be listeners .
Sue Boyt : Sure. That' s what we ' re here to do .
Mayor Chmiel : We' re a sounder, every one of us here.
Councilwoman Dimler : I think you should respond to the extent that you
can respond.
Jim Mady: That' s basically how we handled the Lake Lucy Road thing. This
is all well and good and fine but dollarwise we just can' t . $80, 000. 00. . .
Mayor Chmiel : And I feel the City doesn ' t have the $80 , 000. 00 to do it
either. You ' re right.
Sue Boyt : Speaking of open communications , this might be a good time for
you to talk to us about rotating chair . I think you have some concerns
about that .
Mayor Chmiel : Yes I did and I still do. My concerns are normally in
accordance with Robert' s Rules of Order . You have a chair and a vice
chair and each within each of their commissions has specifics spelled out
as to what you do and how you set it up. My major concern is that, if you
have a chair one week and that particular item is carried over to the next
week or it might be carried over to two, you then reappoint another chair
person for the next meeting . To me there isn' t consistency when we do
that. I think we should stick with a chair or the vice chair, if that
chair is not there . Because it just sometimes will confuse people to come
back into those particular meetings and see sometime else sitting there
and that opinion might not be the same as what the previous chair .
Sue Boyt: So you ' re saying that the chair has more power over what' s
happening with that subject or that topic?
Mayor Chmiel : No. I guess what I 'm saying is that there' s consistency
and that same kind of. . . is there.
Sue Boyt : So we could , if we had rotating chair and we were going to
continue an issue, continue that chair to the next meeting. We don' t
continue that much.
Councilman Johnson: I kind of like rotating chair personally. In that it
gives experience to people who otherwise, getting into the City business .
A lot of times they may be moving on and eventually they may be running
for council or mayor and whatever if they want. There' s a lot of things
but it ' s also helps their own personal skills and helps I think training
I
City Council/Park and Rec Joint Meeting
March 27, 1989 - Page 7
Ipeople to attempt this chore . What I ' ve seen of it , it ' s worked very well
in the meetings I ' ve seen and various people have done it. I think it' s a
Igood idea personally. Just from a training aspect of the people and the
better person they will be for having that experience. I don' t think it
will work on the Council level .
I Councilwoman Dimler : Does the chair have other responsibilities then all
the other commissioners do? Are there added responsibilities?
ISue Boyt: Outside of our meetings?
Jim Mady: No. We just run the meeting .
IMayor Chmiel : Outside attending the City Council meetings that you come
to.
IJim Mady: No , that ' s not a responsibility. That ' s just something I do.
The chair ' s position in our group is simply there to run the meeting .
ICouncilman Boyt : I don ' t think that would have to change Ursula . I think
we clearly want the commissions to have a chair , an official chair .
Sometimes I suspect that staff would probably talk to the chair about the
agenda .
ISue Boyt : And Jim is our official chair .
ICouncilwoman Dimler : And does the chair ever make decisions in an
emergency that is not . . .
IJim Mady: No. We ' ve never had that . Lori ' s called me up from time to
time and said, what are your thoughts on this but it wasn ' t. . .
Lori Sietsema : On whether the weather was bad enough that we should
Icancel the meeting.
Jim Mady: That' s the extent of it .
ICouncilwoman Dimler : I can see the point of continuity but I can also see
Jay' s point of giving everyone experience. But in my own experience I 've
found that if I 'm leading a meeting , it takes me about a year to really
get comfortable with it and to know what ' s going on and then to pass it on
to somebody else.
IJim Mady: How this all came about is last year I attended a couple
Planning Commission meetings and I don ' t usually go to those and Steve was
running the meeting . I asked Ladd about it , I saw him about a month
Ilater . He said they do it from time to time. It seems to work well .
Ladd was able to sit back instead of making sure this person , that person .
He was able to sit back and just operate as a commissioner and listen to
things and keep just what he wanted on his mind and not have to make sure
Ithat everything happened. Then I started thinking about it and we talked
about it on the Commission , would you like to do this because it gives
each individual an opportunity to run the meeting and . . . so it' s been nice
1
J
City Council/Park and Rec Joint Meeting
March 27 , 1989 - Page 10
Sue Boyt : Everything we say? I '.
Councilwoman Dimler : No . But if that ' s the way Jim felt, I really felt I
that' s what you were saying. Is that really what you meant before I go to
the next meeting?
Councilman Johnson: It seemed pretty straight forward to me. Just take
down the signs. That means there' s no trail .
Councilwoman Dimler : No, the bike trail stays .
Councilman Johnson: It can' t .
Councilwoman Dimler : Why not?
Councilman Boyt: Legally it can' t .
Jim Mady: Now it' s just another regular street. III
Councilman Workman: What I was getting at, to maybe wrap it up, and maybe I
this is what Ursula is getting at . You don' t like to be sitting on the
Council and say that the meeting before, we meet tonight . Tomorrow night
you guys meet and maybe react to what we' ve done tonight . You don' t like
getting tossed back up into the. . .and again this was something that was
said that I looked at twice one. Did you know that they' re going to get
rid of your trails on Lake Lucy Road? There' s a certain group of people
who are adamant and then they organize and then they get all over backs I
because, did you hear they' re going to remove the trails .
Sue Boyt : . . . speak about what you spoke about the night before . You are
a public meeting , open to the public. It' s alright if we bring up issues I ',
that you brought up the night before and that ' s not . . .
Councilman Workman: But again, that ' s going to create animosity.
Sue Boyt : If we bring up subjects that you discuss Monday night , if we
bring them up Tuesday night, it will create animosity?
Councilman Workman : If in fact a councilmember feels that it was
improperly. . .
Councilwoman Dimler : It ' s in the tone and stuff .
Sue Boyt: You weren' t there.
Larry Schroers : We need to talk about parks yet .
Councilwoman Dimler : I think that first we have to get these feelings out ' '
of the way.
Councilman Johnson: This is also carried over from the previous council
and the council before that. Park and Rec has never really had a very
good relationship with Council as long as I ' ve been associated , even
L
I
City Council/Park and Rec Joint Meeting
March 27 , 1989 - Page 11
before . Long before and I think the commissions need to stay blue sky.
They' re making the recommendations for Park and Rec, what is the best
possible. The Council then has to put that into the perspective of the
real world. I like the commissions to stay blue sky and this is the best .
This is our issue . We' re not looking at business issues . We' re not
looking at planning issues or water issues, we' re looking at park issues .
Other people look at other issues and then we get all the issues and put
them together and sometimes override the common sense issues that you
brought up and that has created animosity in the past . You work real
hard to get something you think is just perfect and then the Council with
14 other issues coming in at us , overrides you and says , no it' s not going
to work in this case. That has been a sore point for years but I do think
we have to get to discussing pack acquisition and park deficient
neighborhoods and what do we think about that. I think that' s on the
agenda .
Dawne Erhart: That ' s the one that ' s kind of near and dear to my heart .
Specifically the one in the southern part of Chanhassen that people voted
in the referendum. To go ahead and sell bonds. $300, 000. 00. Where do
you people sit on that? Is that something you 'd like to see a couple
years wait on because I don' t think we have it?
Councilman Johnson: If we wait 2 years , we' re going to buy 10 acres .
Councilman Boyt : I can tell you that the referendum was approved and that
money should be allocated. We ' re doing the community, in my opinion,
we ' re doing them a disservice to basically veto that by not spending the
money.
Councilman Johnson: I really liked Al ' s presentation he made at Park and
Rec last week on those issues .
Dawne Erhart : He' s the one that ' s making us nervous . Telling us land
IIvalues are going up and there' s not much out there.
Councilman Boyt : I don' t know why we couldn ' t take out , make some sort of
IIcommitment on the ability to buy the property i.f you guy would just
identity the property. I guess I 'm pretty disappointed that over a year
ago the referendum passed and you have, in my opinion, done nothing .
II Councilman Johnson: The day after that referendum we should have been
pushing. Land prices in this town are only soaring .
IILarry Schroers : Basically when you ' re talking parks , you ' re talking
acquisition. That' s the key. If you don ' t get the acquisition, you' re
not going to have a park so that is definitely the first step and the
IIbiggest , most important thing . The system that I work for, it' s a big
system and their focus for the first 20 years was acquisition and then
it ' s development after that. We wouldn ' t have nearly the system that we
have right now if they would have been acquire and then develop, then
IIacquire, then develop. You ' ve got to get it now while it' s there.
Councilman Workman : How about the Carrico site?
I '
LB
I
City Council/Park and Rec Joint Meeting
March 27, 1989 - Page 14 I
I
Mayor Chmiel : Your meetings are?
Lori Sietsema: The second and fourth Tuesday. I
Mayor Chmiel : My suggestion would be that probably your next Tuesday
meeting. What does that agenda look like? Do you have any idea? I
Lori Sietsema: It' s starting to fill up . I think the Lake Lucy issue
will be on the meeting after that and I will have figures from the
feasibility done by then .
Mayor Chmiel : Maybe what we can do is start that meeting prior to your
meeting by an hour and if it goes beyond that, then you can open your
meeting and consider discussion.
Lori Sietsema: On the 11th then?
Mayor Chmiel : On the 11th. Will you send notices?
1
The meeting was adjourned at 7 : 30 p.m. .
Submitted by Lori Sietsema
Park and Rec Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim
I I
I I
I I
I
1
I
I
I