CC Minutes 1997 07 14CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
JULY 14, 1997
Mayor Mancino called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the
Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Mancino, Councilman Berquist, Councilman Engel,
Councilman Mason, and Councilman Senn
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Todd Gerhardt, Charles Folch, Kate Aanenson,
Sharmin A1-Jaff, and Phillip Elkin
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the
agenda as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve the
following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:
b. Resolution #97-50: Approve Construction Plans & Specifications for Walnut Grove, Project 97-13.
Approve the Granting of an Easement in Favor of Williams Brothers Pipeline over a Portion of
Outlot A, Lake Susan Hills West 9th Addition, Project 93-29.
Approve Amended Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan for Springfield 1st Addition, Project
97-14.
h. Approval of Bills.
City Council Minutes dated June 23, 1997
Planning Commission Minutes dated June 4, 1997
Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated May 20, 1997
Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated June 24, 1997
Resolution #97-51: Approve Plans & Specifications for Street and Utility Improvements in Phase I
of the North Half of Section 16 (Gateway); Authorize Ad for Bids, Project 97-1.
k. Amendment to a Portion of the Subdivision for Walnut Grove.
Approve Agreement between the City and AUSMAR Development Co., LLC, Villages on the Ponds,
Livable Communities Demonstration Account and Transit Capital Financial Assistance Grants.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER VACATION REQUEST FOR 184TM AVENUE WEST (DELL
ROAD) NORTH OF QUATTRO DRIVE, FRANK BEDDOR, JR., FILE 97-2.
Mayor Mancino: Do Council members have any questions or comments on this particular public hearing?
Okay, thank you. Then I'd like to open this for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the City
Council at this time may do so. Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing and a second.
Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Engel seconded to close the public hearing. The public
hearing was closed.
Mayor Mancino: May I please have a motion.
Councilman Senn: Move to approve.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Resolution #97-52: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Vacation of a
portion of 184th Avenue West lying north of Quattro Drive, conditioned upon the applicant providing
the City with a permanent right-of-way easement over Parcel B as denoted on Exhibit 3. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously.
REQUEST FOR REZONING OF 48.99 ACRES FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY AND PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL TO SUBDIVIDE
48.99 ACRES INTO 54 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND ONE OUTLOT; LOCATED NORTH OF
HIGHWAY 5 ON THE EAST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 41 SOUTH OF LAKE LUCY ROAD;
HIGHOVER ADDITION, JEROME CARLSON.
Mayor Mancino: And if you are in the audience and are reviewing what I just read, this is not final plat
approval. This is only preliminary plat approval. Staff report please.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Thank you. The applicant is proposing to subdivide 48.99 acres into 55 single family
lots. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential. The applicant is proposing to rezone it Residential
Single Family. The average lot size is 27,815 square feet and the gross density is 1.1 units per acre. All
the proposed lots meet the minimum requirements of the ordinance as far as area width and depth
requirements. There is one outlot proposed on the site. This outlot will contain a temporary storm water
pond. The site has a dense concentration of mature trees. The roads have been aligned to minimize impact
on trees and the majority of the homes will be custom graded. One of the issues that was raised at the
Planning Commission level was conservation easement to protect the stands of trees. The applicant
initially wanted to have some limitations as far as how far can the builder grade. The Planning
Commission favored a preservation easement unanimously. On July 8th staff met with the applicant. That
was after the Planning Commission meeting and the applicant agreed to provide the City with a
conservation easement.
Mayor Mancino: And we do that quite frequently.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Yes we do. They intend to custom grade the lots and the first thing that was something
that the applicant suggested was..., which is where we have the majority of the significant grading. They
intend to reduce the number of lots from 7 to 6.
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Mayor Mancino: So will each lot become bigger?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Right. We haven't reviewed the final plans yet but we will be... be a significant
improvement to the plat. According to the calculations that they brought back to us, they believe that they
will be saving approximately 4 acres of trees. The applicants have been cooperating with us all along this
process. We feel that the issues that we have.., will bring the conservation easement before you when final
plat... We're recommending approval of both rezoning and the preliminary plat approval.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Thank you very much. Any questions for staff at this point before the applicant?
Councilman Berquist: Where was that conservation easement located Sharmin?
Mayor Mancino: Throughout the whole.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: The specific areas.
Mayor Mancino: There's a pine, an old growth pine forest there. What was the other? Is it spruce and
pine?
Councilman Berquist: Oh, so it's scattered sites?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Yes. And staff has, in one of the conditions of approval, the lot where we believe.., along
Lots 4, 5 and 6 of Block 4... That will not be impacted by the grading. Lot 2 is where you have the
majority of... hardwoods. Again, this is the block that will be reduced to 6 versus 7 parcels.
Mayor Mancino: Sharmin, I'm assuming that as you go through and do final grading plans that any other
lot that needs to be custom graded, the applicant will do.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Their intention is to fully custom grade 90% of those parcels. We wanted to see.., we
wanted to set a standard that we can go from. And that's why you see the plans, the grading plans.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Councilman Senn, did you have some questions?
Councilman Senn: Sharmin, where's the proposed or the most recent proposed trail?
Mayor Mancino: The Highover Trail?
Councilman Senn: Yeah.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: This is the proposed trail.
Councilman Senn: Okay. And what's the issue with that as far as it's location changing or from where it
was planned originally or whatever?
Mayor Mancino: Well I can talk a little bit to that. I mean the Highover Trail, as it's planned right now
takes into account, well it's on the easement. The NSP easement. It is already right now a, what do I want
to say? It is mowed. It's a trail already. It is existing up there. And it just has never been designated as a
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
trailway. It's been designated as an NSP easement because it has the towers. And nobody has ever, the
City has not designated it as a trail before. But it's there and.
Councilman Senn: And it's staying in it's current location then?
Mayor Mancino: Yep.
Councilman Berquist: A turf trail. The proposal is not to pave it.
Mayor Mancino: So if you walk there right now, which you can and for the last 15 years. It's always been
there. And it's like you know using the 212 corridor in some other fashion. It's there and it's always been
there.
Councilman Berquist: Where was the, are you done for a moment?
Councilman Senn: Well I guess, I guess what's Lundgren Brother's issue then with the trail?
Mayor Mancino: Well I think the concern is where it goes south, if the City is adding onto it somewhere
and we haven't seen that. So I, my motion would be to leave out the trail until we've seen final plat plans
and until we get from our Park & Rec Director to see where this trail. I mean obviously the Carlson
property just has it stopping and starting on their property. We want to see the whole comprehensive,
where it actually ties into an existing Chanhassen trail and I don't know how that's done because it's not in
our packet.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, it's not in here. Okay.
Mayor Mancino: Yeah. So my thinking would be to wait until we get to final plat to approve the trail.
Councilman Berquist: ... do you know off the top whether or not it was the intent of this trail to supplant
the one that runs along TH 41 ?
Mayor Mancino: In addition to. Just because it's already there.
Councilman Senn: But you don't know whether either of those were in effect part of our trail plan or not?
Mayor Mancino: The NSP easement was not. And it's actually the landowner who's saying we will give
over the land that we own around it for a trail.
Councilman Senn: Well, it's within the easement area anyway.
Mayor Mancino: That's true.
Councilman Senn: He's not really giving it over.
Mayor Mancino: But who owns the easement? Does NSP own, well.
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Kate Aanenson: I'll let Roger speak to that. Actually the reason this came about is there.., whether it's
within the comprehensive plan or not, if the developer of the property thought to put a trail and the Park
and Rec Director recorded it, that's how...
Councilman Senn: But it's got to be a trail to or from somewhere.
Kate Aanenson: That's correct.
Mayor Mancino: Well it can always tie into Lake Lucy Road trail.
Kate Aanenson: It's still going to go somewhere. It's going to tie into TH 41 and bring you down... It's
still a place to walk. It's still going to be used. Whether it connects all the way, that's a decision you want
to decide...
Mayor Mancino: But Kate we can wait until we see the whole comprehensive trail plan from.
Kate Aanenson: Final plat, sure but I'd like Roger answer the question as far as the easement.
Roger Knutson: The basis of my knowledge is a couple letters I saw earlier this evening, but as I
understand it Mr. Carlson, at least the platters of this property own the underlying fee as to where the trail
goes, but the fee is currently encumbered with an easement to NSP. So to have a trail there we'd need
NSP's permission, as well as the underlying owner of the fee title. As long as we get permission from both
of those we're okay. But there's some correspondence which says NSP alone can't grant you the right to
put a trail there. That's obviously correct. NSP has an easement for a specified purpose which apparently
does not include public trails, which is understandable. But if you get NSP's approval as well as the
underlying fee owner's approval, then you can put your trail in. If you want.
Councilman Senn: All right.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Is the applicant here, and would you like to address the City Council now
please? State your name and address.
Donald Peterson: Yes, thank you. My name is Donald Peterson. My address is 12435 42nd Avenue North
in Plymouth and I am the development coordinator for Jerome Carlson who is the owner of the property.
And I've been working with Mr. Carlson for some time to develop this property and I am experienced in
development, being in the business for about 25 years. And I'll just give you a brief overview of this
project. At the time that I was retained by Mr. Carlson to coordinator this development he had already had
two plans prepared by engineers and another plan by a planner, and at that point in time because I had done
a lot of development in Minnetonka and other areas and Mr. Carlson had seen these projects and liked what
he saw, he retained me to review these plans. We did do this and made some major changes in the plans so
they reflected more of the coordination with the grade of the land, so we reduced a number of the amount of
grading and the amount of tree removal. Also we reduced the number of lots that were on these previous
plans. At that point in time we started working with the staff after we had done basically four plans and we
worked very closely with Sharmin and the rest of the staff to try to coordinate a plan. The main goal of
Mr. Carlson in his property and me as well, is that we'd create a neighborhood. I mean a true
neighborhood. We wanted large lots with large building pads. We have a beautiful wooded area. We
wanted to leave as many trees as possible. We worked very closely with the staff to try to accomplish this
and some of the things that we were very interested in, Mr. Carlson for some time had wanted to be able to
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
have a connection for the City of Chanhassen from Lake Minnewashta Park to Lake Ann Park and this
NSP easement that runs north and south along the east border of property would allow such a connection if
we can get that connected down through the Lundgren Brothers project and the Youngquist property, which
lies directly south of us. So what we've promoted and talked to Lundgren's about and we've also talked to
the Youngquist's about, that there would probably be an easement requested by the City at the time they
develop and we are prepared to create this trail underneath the NSP easement. We have also talked to NSP
and they don't seem to have a problem with it. Originally we had proposed a bituminous trail but the Parks
and Recreation Commission reviewed this. Being that there's going to be a bituminous trail over on
Highway 41, they recommended that we make a sod trail and we have no problem with that. We did
request that there'd be some limit on the use if we were going to create a sod trail and the Park and
Recreation Commission did, in their approval, state that they did not want to see a motorized vehicles or
horses on that trail because it would tear it up pretty badly. Since the Planning Commission meeting we've
made, well prior to the Planning Commission meeting we made a major change at the request of Dave
Hempel. Our main road went farther east on our project originally and at the request of Dave Hempel and
the engineering department, we made a major change in that and brought this road from like this here and
here to revise the plans. Run the road down this way and that would better coordinate with the development
of this property to the south when they develop. Whereas that revised plan did involve quite a bit more
grading than we originally anticipated, we felt that it was a change that was acceptable and works out quite
well so we did make that change. One other change that we have done since the Planning Commission
meeting, the staff has been concerned all the way through this project with conserving trees and we have the
same goal. We've even asked for some commitment on the staff's part so we could make some tree saving
on the front yards of the homes. Reflecting on some of the concern that the staff had on that, we
volunteered to drop one lot out of Block 2. We had five lots, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 with 1, 2 fronting on Highover
Drive and we reduced that to four lots because we felt we could then place these building pads in such a
manner that we could move them around to save trees in that area. Sharmin has also requested that we get
a reduction in the front yard on the lots on this side.., wetland and have more room to the wetland on the
west side. That works out fine. This reduction in lots in this area allows us, instead of having a shared
driveway on one lot, to have private drives and we would access this lot here from off of Highover Trail
and grading works out very well for that. We originally did not desire to grant tree preservation easements.
We asked staff to allow us to do tree removal limits instead which would limit the developer and the builder
in tree removal and our reasoning for that is we felt that the homeowner has an aversion in many cases to
having a permanent easement on their property. We worked with the staff on that and the staff
recommendation that they're really talking about the rear 30 feet of the lots for these tree preservation
easements so based on that kind of a limit, we don't have a problem with that because these lots are very
large and we don't feel that that would impact the homeowners unnecessarily so we've agreed to that. We
are revising the grading plan to reduce the grading from what you see that the Planning Commission
approved. We'll have a considerable reduction in the amount of grading and therefore tree removal and
those items will be worked out before final plat. That, we expect the tree removal to go down considerably
and our tree planting also would then go down. But we are requesting that the City Council approve the
preliminary plat at this time and that we then work out these remaining issues with the staff prior to the
final plat approval. And as far as I know we don't have any major issues. There was one item that was
brought up last week at our July 8th meeting and that there was an incursion into the wetland for the storm
water ponding in this area. On July 8th our engineer met with Phil Elkin on this site and they mutually
agreed to revise that grading limit to closer to what we have on this preliminary plat. So that will be done
on the final grading plan at the time of final plat approval. Our schedule is to start grading this summer.
We want to be in there, in this particular soil. It's heavy clay and we don't want to be grading in October
and November. We'd like to be grading early this year, in the hot part of the year and so timing is of
critical importance to us and we are requesting that the Council approve this preliminary plat at this time
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
and we're about two days away from having all our plans done so we'll be right back to you with the final
plat. So with that I'd like to answer any questions that you might have and feel free to ask me anything.
Thank you.
Mayor Mancino: Any questions from Council members?
Councilman Berquist: Mr. Peterson?
Donald Peterson: Yes.
Councilman Berquist: The grading is going to diminish based on, I gather as opposed to the plan that we're
looking at. Grading is going to change. Tree removal is going to be reduced. There's a 30 foot rear yard
tree preservation easement on all the lots?
Donald Peterson: No. On specific lots that staff has recommended that those easements be placed. One of
those would be in this area in Block 2, in these two lots here and...
Councilman Berquist: What were the other modifications from what has been submitted?
Donald Peterson: We've requested a reduction in one lot in Block 2 from 7 to 6.
Councilman Berquist: Block 2, okay. That's the only, really those four items.
Donald Peterson: That's correct.
Councilman Berquist: Are those all, I didn't read the report particularly well. Are all four of those issues
addressed?
Mayor Mancino: In the conditions, yeah.
Councilman Berquist: In the conditions of approval? Are they? All right.
Mayor Mancino: Any other questions? Are you done?
Councilman Berquist: Yep, I'm done.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you very much.
Donald Peterson: Thank you.
Mayor Mancino: Anyone wishing to address the City Council on this issue?
Bill Anner: Good evening Mayor, members of the Council. My name is Bill Anner. I'm with Lundgren
Brothers, 935 East Wayzata Boulevard, Wayzata, Minnesota. I'm really here just to answer your
questions. We sent a rather lengthy letter I think regarding the trail issue. I want to reiterate, we welcome
the Highover neighborhood as an addition to the north of us. I think it will be a great neighborhood. Our
major concern is this trail. It really goes nowhere. It stops. There's a terminus right at the northern end of
the Longacres neighborhood. In 1993 when we worked with the Council, staff and Planning Commission
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
in planning the Longacres neighborhood, we used your comprehensive plan as a planning tool, which is
really what it's supposed to be I think. It's guidance. Gives you guidance as to how the City will move
forward and the trail plan is a major component of the comprehensive plan. There's trails provided for
both on Galpin Boulevard and along Highway 41. We've incorporated them into our neighborhood. Mr.
Peterson mentioned earlier they're trying to create a neighborhood. Well we have a neighborhood... Can I
answer any of your questions?
Mayor Mancino: I don't have a question but I think that we do as a Council want to see the whole trail
system as it goes from Carlson property down through Longacres. There's no question that we haven't
seen that and we will see that before we decide on it, but I also, I think that, and you can hear from other
Council members. It is something that we will very favorably look at. It is already existing. It is probably
a trail the kids will use all the time regardless. They do that now. So I mean I don't know which way we'll
vote or anything but we will take the time to look it over. Make sure that you are communicated to and
you're here when that's presented to us and can give us your thoughts then too. Any other comments?
Okay. Thank you.
Councilman Berquist: Well the only comment that I wanted to make regarding the trail is I can certainly
understand where Lundgren Brothers is coming from, and if it affects lots that they've already platted. And
I like the idea of a trail that's up, away from the highway. That's all.
Mayor Mancino: Yeah, I would suggest prior to obviously seeing the comprehensive plan, that Council
members go out there and walk it and it's high. It's wonderful. It is contiguous to the Carlson private
property too, which they are retaining. No more further ado, if anyone else wants to come up and address
the Council on this issue. Okay, bring it back to Council. Councilman Senn.
Councilman Senn: I would say not at this point pending to see all the revisions.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, Councilman Mason.
Councilman Mason: Looks good.
Mayor Mancino: Councilman Engel.
Councilman Engel: I like the concept but I would like to see an overlay of the trail and with Lundgren's
property and the affect of parcels...to give an overall.., and I'll comment more then.
Mayor Mancino: Councilman Berquist.
Councilman Berquist: Nothing additional.
Councilman Senn: Well Mayor, Mayor, if I could just one thing. When he does that overlay of the trail, it
would also be nice to understand the terms of the NSP easements so I guess to put a trail there or not put a
trail there is one issue. To put a trail there and understand that it can be ripped up any time and we're
responsible for putting it back in is kind of something that we need to understand.
Mayor Mancino: Yep, it'd be nice to know. I agree. I'd like to know the legal implications so we'd like to
see that before it comes back to final plat. I would like to, I don't know if other Council members would
want to comment on this. On the recommendations. The one that I would like to see withdrawn is 24. The
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
street width throughout the plat shall be increased to 31 feet. The applicant has asked for 28. It is in our
City Code that our urban neighborhood streets can be 28 to 32, and personally I'd like to see them stay at
28. To keep them narrower. To keep them, I think that the wider streets or what I'm finding around our
neighborhood are, what do I want to say? Traffic is going at top notch speeds on Lake Lucy Road, etc.
This is not a collector. It is a little neighborhood and in these little neighborhood streets I would like to see
us reduce the width of our blacktop and stay at the 28. Charles, is there any parking on these streets?
Councilman Senn: That's where we do run into some of the problems. Parking is totally unrestricted on a
local residential street and when you do reduce the widths down, if there is parking used frequently on both
sides, it can be difficult to pass two vehicles through. This neighborhood will probably again connect to
the south so 31 feet back to back actually has a 28 foot pavement width section. The 31 foot is a
measurement from back of curb to back of curb so your actual pavement width is only 28 feet. So if we
narrow it 3 more feet, now your pavement width is only 25 feet.
Mayor Mancino: Then why is it in our City Code that we can go from 28 to 32? Why aren't we sticking
with some of the narrower widths, because we don't do much parking on our streets because everybody
uses their driveway and having 2-3 car garages. I find it, you know that we don't do a lot of parking on
streets unless somebody has a party some night and you know they're out of the way for snowplowing, etc.
Charles Folch: We seem to get quite a few requests on, particularly the few roads that we do have
restrictions to parking, it sure seems like we get a lot of requests for parking on them for whatever reason at
times, but 31. You know I can't explain why the ranges in the code has probably been in there long before
my time here but I can tell you our standard width that we've gone with all local streets that new
construction wise is 31. I think what we've probably seen is like in some of the older neighborhoods where
we've done reconstruction projects and it really is detrimental to the neighborhood to go in. Once it's fully
developed, it's an older neighborhood of substandard widths, to go in there and actually try and build it to
city standards does more destruction to the neighborhood than it's probably the disadvantage of the
building it narrower so that's probably I'm guessing one of the reasons they allow that in the code book.
But all new construction we've maintained 31 feet for a local street, and again that's a back of curb to back
of curb measurement so your pavement width is 28.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, yes Mr. Peterson?
Donald Peterson: ... we did request a 28 foot street, back to back and then reviewing the Lundgren
Brothers project, they're all 31 with a 28 foot bituminous surface. Actually 27 foot bituminous surface.
And we did request this 28 and the engineering department did not agree to our request so we took another
look at it. We've met with Dave Hempel and we've requested that in some cases where we have a heavily
treed area, that we be allowed to grade to a 50 foot width rather than the 60 foot right-of-way. That gives
us an extra 10 feet, or 5 feet on each side and in the case where we might impact some trees, and he said
they'd work that out at the time of final plan approvals. And so we are incorporating that. That would still
give us a 9 ½ foot boulevard on each side instead of 14 ½. And with those provisions where we can grade
to a narrower point, where we're impacting trees or slopes, we feel that that 31 foot street would work
okay. So it's not a big issue to us. We prefer 28 foot streets but I know that Chanhassen has always done
31 or recently and we don't have a problem with that.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Good, so we'll have that flexibility. May I have a motion please.
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Councilman Berquist: I would move approval of the preliminary plat. Approve rezoning No. 97-2,
property zoned Rural Residential to Residential Single Family, Highover Addition as substantially shown
on the plans dated June 6th with the conditions as outlined in the staff report.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. May I have a second on that motion? May I have a second on the rezoning
motion please?
Councilman Engel: Second.
Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve Rezoning #97-2 for property
zoned RR to RSF for Highover Addition as shown on the plans dated June 6, 1997, and subject to the
following conditions:
1. The applicant shall enter into a development contract containing all of the conditions of approval for
this project and shall submit all required financial guarantees. The development contract shall be
recorded against the property.
2. The applicant shall meet all conditions of the Subdivision #97-1.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Mancino: The second motion on preliminary plat please.
Councilman Berquist: I would recommend approval of Preliminary Plat for Subdivision #97-1 for
Highover Addition of 55 lots, 54 lots. Would it be 54 or 55 with the deletion of one lot in Block 2?
54 lots.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: ...that's the proposal...
Councilman Berquist: I can. Well then is my, I don't see anything in here regarding grading changes. I
see the condition regarding the 30 yard setback on some of the lots. 54 is fine. Okay. So I will make the
motion contingent on 54 lots and as another condition number 29. That the resubmitted grading plan prior
to final approval shows a diminished grading to be done to the site. And tree removal as indicated to also
be reviewed.
Mayor Mancino: Or the outline of conservation easements?
Councilman Berquist: Yeah but that's in there.
Mayor Mancino: Is that in there?
Councilman Berquist: That's in here. That's in here... And deal with the deletion of the indicated
Hightower, Highover trail until discussion and decisions can be made at staff and City Council levels.
Kate Aanenson: Can I get a clarification? I don't think we want to delete it but we can.., out at final plat.
Councilman Berquist: Hold it.
10
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Kate Aanenson: Pardon me?
Councilman Berquist: Delay it. Defer it.
Well you can still give it conceptual or preliminary at this point and then take it out at
Kate Aanenson:
final.
Roger Knutson: Are you talking about the trail?
Councilman Engel: The trail, yeah.
Roger Knutson: You could just say something vague like, and resolving the trail issue before final plat.
Councilman Berquist: Bingo.
Councilman Engel: What Roger said.
Councilman Berquist: Resolving the trail issue before final plat.
Mayor Mancino: Great, second please.
Councilman Engel: Second.
Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve preliminary plat for
Subdivision/t97-1 for Highover Addition for 54 lots and one outlot as shown on the plans received
June 6, 1997, and subject to the following conditions:
1. Submit tree survey showing all trees 30 inches and larger with overlay of proposed development and
grading. Establish tree preservation easements on appropriate lots (Lots 1-3, Block 1, Lots 1-7,
Block 2, Lots 7-10, and Lots 16-27, Block 3 and Lots 1-6 and 12-15, Block 4). Penalty for
encroachment into preservation easement is established at a rate of 2 to 1 diameter inch. A tree
protection fence shall be placed along the edge of the grading limits prior to grading. The applicant
shall provide the City with a legal description of the preservation easement.
2. Building Department conditions:
a. Revise the preliminary grading plan to show the location of proposed dwelling pads, using
standard designations and indicate the lowest level floor, entry level floor and garage floor
elevations. This should be done prior to final plat approval.
b. Obtain demolition permits. This should be done prior to any grading on the property.
3. Fire Marshal conditions:
a. A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, shrubs,
bushes, NSP, US West, Cable TV, and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants
can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City
Ordinance 9-1.
11
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
10.
11.
12.
13.
b. No burning permits for trees will be issued. Any downed trees will have to be chipped on site or
hauled off site.
Park and Recreation conditions:
Payment of full park and trail fees in lieu of parkland dedication or trail construction. One third
of the fees shall be paid prior to recording of the plat. The remaining two thirds shall be paid at
the time of building permit as identified by city ordinance.
Lots 15, 16, and 17, Block 4 shall maintain a 20 foot front yard setback.
The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's
Best Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water Management Plan requirements for new
developments. The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and formal approval. Type I
erosion control fence shall be installed around the downstream side of the construction limits. Rock
construction entrances shall be employed and maintained at all access points until the street has been
paved with a bituminous surface.
All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and
disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in
accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook.
The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10 year and 100 year storm events
and provide ponding calculations for stormwater ponds in accordance with the City's SWMP for the
City Engineer to review and approve prior to final plat approval. The applicant shall provide
detailed pre-developed and post developed stormwater calculations for 100 year storm events.
Individual storm sewer calculations between each catch basin segment will also be required to
determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized.
The proposed single family residential development of 39.39 net developable acres is responsible for
a water quality connection charge of $31,512 and a water quantity fee of $77,992.00. The water
quality fee will be waived upon the applicant meeting NURP design for on site runoff. These fees
are payable to the City prior to the City filing the final plat.
Prior to final plan approval, the applicant shall submit detailed construction plans and specifications
in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates for staff
review and formal approval by City Council in conjunction with final plat approval. Plans and
specifications shall be submitted three weeks prior to the City Council meeting. As-built
construction drawings will be required upon completion of the utility and street improvements.
All custom-graded lots shall provide a detailed grading, drainage, tree removal and erosion control
plan in conjunction with building permit application for City review and approval.
Lot 1, Block 2 shall be designated as a custom graded lot on the grading plan.
Cross-access driveway easements 30 feet in width shall be provided for Lot 1, Block 2 across Lot 2,
Block 2 and Lot 4, Block 2 over Lots 5 and 6, Block 2.
12
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
14. The street construction plans shall include a drain tile system behind the curbs to convey sump pump
discharge from those lots which are not adjacent to a wetland or storm drainage pond.
15. All storm water ponds shall be designed with 3:1 side slopes with a 10:1 bench at the normal water
level from the first one foot of depth of water or 4:1 slopes overall.
16.
The storm sewer proposed along the rear lots of 24 through 28, Block 3 shall be relocated along
Highover Way to Highway Drive and connected to the proposed storm sewer through Lot 28, Block
3.
17. The existing well and septic system will need to be abandoned per City and State of Minnesota
Health codes.
18. Parking shall be prohibited on Highover Court North and South adjacent to the landscaped cul-de-
sac islands. The City shall sign these streets accordingly.
19.
The developer may plat Lots 1 through 3, Block 4 and Lots 27 and 28, Block 3 contingent upon the
developer installing and maintaining a temporary lift station at the end of Highover Drive. The
developer shall also be responsible for the abandonment and removal of the lift station with the
extension of service of gravity sanitary sewer for these lots or the developer may plat these 5 lots as
an outlot until future sewer service is available.
20.
The developer shall install a 12 inch watermain along Highover Drive, Highover Way and Highover
Court South. The developer will be entitled to credits against their utility hook-up charges for the
cost difference between a 6 inch and 12 inch watermain.
21.
The developer shall loop the water line system in Highover Court South along the common lot line of
Lots 19 and 20, Block 3 for future connection with the Lundgren subdivision, The Woods at
Longacres.
22. The erosion control fence along Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 4 and Lot 28, Block 3 shall be Type II.
23.
Temporary cul-de-sacs will be required at the ends of Highover Drive and Highover Trail. Traffic
barricades shall also be installed with a sign indicating ~This street shall be extended in the future."
A condition will also be placed in the development contract to notify future property owners of the
street extension.
24. The street widths throughout the plat shall be increased to 31 feet back to back of curb.
25.
The driveway access to Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1 shall be restricted to the eyebrow area of Lake Lucy
Road. Direct access onto Trunk Highway 41 shall be prohibited from all lots in the subdivision.
The existing driveway access from Trunk Highway 41 shall be eliminated in conjunction with site
grading.
26. The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide a financial security
in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee with the terms of final plat approval.
13
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
27.
Drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated on the final plat for public improvements which lie
outside the street right-of-way. The exact easement width will be determined in conjunction with
final construction plan review. The minimum utility and drainage easement width shall be 20 feet.
Drainage and utility easements shall also be dedicated over all wetlands and storm water ponds up to
the elevation of a 100 year storm event.
28. All existing structures on the site (house and stable) shall be removed prior to recording of the plat.
29. Submit revised tree removal plans and grading plans which show diminished grading on the site prior
to final plat.
30. Resolve the trail issue prior to final plat.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
REQUEST FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW AMENDMENT FOR A 14,610 SQ. FT. ADDITION TO
AN EXISTING BUILDING, STATE BANK OF CHANHASSEN, 600 WEST 78TM STREET, HTG
ARCHITECTS.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: This request is for the construction of a 14,610 square foot addition to the existing State
Bank of Chanhassen. The addition will be located to the west of the existing building. The site is currently
zoned Central Business District. A bank building is a permitted use in that district. Access to the site will
remain the same. The building is proposed to utilize identical materials to those currently used on the
building. The architecture is of a high quality. Face brick, granite panels and pre-finished metal flashing is
used on... The addition will be 31 foot high, which is the same height of the existing building. Parking for
vehicles is added along the north portion of the property. Total parking spaces required by ordinance is 98
spaces. The applicant is providing 71 spaces. On June 18th the item appeared before the Planning
Commission. Before I get to that, there is an agreement between the State Bank of Chanhassen and the
City that basically states the parcel located to the south of City Hall, that originally was owned by the State
Bank of Chanhassen, there's an agreement with the City that parking be provided on that parcel. There are
other places where the 27 spaces could be located. When this item appeared before June 18th, before the
Planning Commission we had requested that the applicant provide those extra spaces now and there is a
clause in the city ordinances that basically allows for.., parking. If it was demonstrated that this parking is
not needed and they can go forward with 71 parking spaces if it was.., when they will be required to
provide them.
Mayor Mancino: And they'll go underground?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Yes.
Kate Aanenson: ... that's not being finished. At this time as part of the proof of parking. They don't
believe that...there are options that they will be off site. So what we believe right now.., as Sharmin
indicated with the City of Chanhassen and the Bank. How that parking. So right now we're saying.., all
parking can be accomplished on the bank. That's how the Planning Commission... As you know as part of
the downtown we are trying not to park.., we believe it's adequate...
Sharmin A1-Jaff: With that we recommend approval with conditions outlined in the staff report.
14
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any questions for staff? Is the applicant here and would you like to present
to the City Council please. Boy I tell you, that marble underground parking lot just sounds great.
Jeff Pflipsen: I'm Jeff Pflipsen. I'm with HTG Architects. Mayor, Council members and staff. Kevin
McShane with the bank is here with me tonight and we're just here to answer questions. We agree with the
findings that the staff has put together. We knew the parking was going to be a slight issue, and at the
Planning Commission meeting we did talk about it. That usually as architects we come to Councils and
beg for variances on less parking. You know we want less parking but in this scenario we may, the bank
wants to make sure that that agreement, that standing agreement, that if they do need to find that once the
bank's open, the addition is put in and they do need the additional parking spaces. They find that their
parking lot is full, then at that point is when they would probably come in and talk and try to work out a
mutual agreement with the City on where can we put this overflow of parking. Whether it's to the east or
the west of the site. There were some talks about potentially putting it on the north side of the site where
the post office is moving their operations. But that's an agreement that you'll work out with Mr. Kevin
McShane from the bank so, basically I'm here then to just answer questions.
Mayor Mancino: Any questions? So with the addition is the bank, which I think is architectural asset to
our city, on our main street. I don't call it West 78th. I can it main street. Would this addition, will it
enhance the architectural features?
Jeff Pflipsen: All the materials will be exactly the same. There will be the unique entrance right now with
the bank will have, the new entrance will be very similar. It will have angles. In talking with Kevin, Kevin
doesn't want all the angles but as an architect we put them in there anyway.
Mayor Mancino: He doesn't want to pay for that dead space.
Jeff Pflipsen: So it's going to be nice. So we had some fun with that one but the entrance, the new
entrance will be very similar in character to what you see now. The two steel columns that are there, that's
what we'll have at the entrance. It will be a two story atrium, entry space so there will be a lot of
similarities.
Mayor Mancino: Do you have any renderings?
Jeff Pflipsen: Well we have some.., if I can point them out. This would be the south, or the west entry.
The main entrance door is right here. Here's the two similar columns that are already there. The lighter
band here is the granite and it matches the existing building. Everything else is virtually, this would be the
brick. This view is more from the west looking at the... This line here represents the existing drive up
canopy. This signage and this portion of the building.., again would be the granite band... I think the
design of the addition will be an asset to the overall building.
Mayor Mancino: Any questions or comments architecturally?
Councilman Engel: Oh no.
Mayor Mancino: Why are you looking at me? Thank you.
Jeff Pflipsen: All right, thanks.
15
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Mayor Mancino: Turn it over to council. Comments. Mr. Berquist.
Councilman Berquist: Well, the only comment that I was going to make was answered by the elevation that
showed the building from looking at it from the west. I was afraid it was going to take an interesting
architectural structure and a real eye catcher on main street and turn it into something less interesting. And
while that may happen a little bit, it also, that elevation that, other elevation. It looks very nice. I don't, in
my mind's eye I had something a little, it didn't look like that so...
Councilman Mason: And that's why he's an architect.
Councilman Engel: And you're not.
Councilman Berquist: That's right.
Councilman Mason: I couldn't resist.
Mayor Mancino: Now wait a minute. Councilman Engel. Any comments?
Councilman Engel: Looks good to me.
Mayor Mancino: Councilman Mason.
Councilman Mason: None.
Mayor Mancino: Councilman Senn.
Councilman Senn: No.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. I don't have any. The only thing I want to make very sure, and Kevin if you
could come up for a minute. And that is that if there is a parking problem that we do, as your business and
as a city work together to resolve that and give each other some time to negotiate whatever needs to be
done. That there is good communication and trust level there.
Kevin McShane: Well the original agreement that was signed in '95, a lot of work went into that. It went
on for quite some time and the spirit of that I think was that we want to do what's mutually beneficial and
if the City, as the City looks to develop that, this front area, the idea was that we'd be incorporated into
that. Our move happened a little sooner. We've had tremendous growth the last couple years, which is our
need to expand has happened a little sooner than we anticipated. Which is a good thing from a business
standpoint. But we'd certainly work out any parking as the City develops off site here.
Councilman Senn: If you're doing that well, why don't you guys build the parking lot?
Kevin McShane: We have to per the agreement so.
Mayor Mancino: You know we're growing too as a City but nobody wants us to expand City Hall so
anyway, thank you. I just wanted to hear that from you. Thank you. May I have a motion please?
Councilman Senn: Move approval.
16
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Councilman Mason: Second.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Site Plan Review #97-7 as shown
on the site plan dated Received May 16, 1997, subject to the following conditions:
The applicant needs to prepare an erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best
Management Practice Handbook and be submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of a
building permit.
The site plan shall be revised to include water and sewer service to the new addition and extension
of the storm sewer lines to convey storm water runoff from the northwesterly portion of the parking
lot and eliminate the existing concrete spillway onto Market Boulevard.
3. All drive aisle widths shall be 24 feet wide per City Ordinance.
The applicant shall supply the City with detailed storm drainage calculations for a 1 O-year 24-hour
storm event to each catch basin segment.
The applicant's contractor should inspect the City boulevards adjacent to the construction for any
damage to the sidewalk or curbing prior to commencement of site work. The contractor will be
held responsible upon final inspection for any damages to the City's sidewalk, curbs or boulevard.
The proposed retaining wall on the easterly portion of the site should be revised to not exceed 30
inches in height.
The applicant will be responsible for additional sewer and water hookup charges calculated on the
number of additional SAC units being charged.
8. All roof top equipment shall be screened from views.
9. All HVAC equipment placed on the ground must be screened with landscaping.
10.
The applicant shall increase landscape plan to include 5 additional trees. The applicant shall also
provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in calculating the required
financial guarantees. These guarantees must be posted prior to issuance of a building permit.
11.
Show location of trash enclosure. The materials used to screen the trash enclosure shall be the
same type of brick used on the building.
12.
The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. Provide a detailed
sign plan for review and approval.
13.
The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the city and provide the necessary
financial securities as required for landscaping.
14.
Concurrent with the building permit, a detailed lighting plan meeting city standards shall be
submitted.
17
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
15. Building Official's conditions:
a. The new addition and existing building must comply with Minnesota State Building Code
Chapter 1306.
b. Water service sizing should be analyzed to determine it's correct required size.
c. Meet with the Building Official as early as possible to discuss commercial building permit
requirements.
d. Provide recycling space as required by Minnesota State Building Code 1300.4700.
Demonstration of compliance may be provided on construction documents.
16.
Approval of the site plan is contingent upon parking requirements being met. The current plan is
deficient 27 parking spaces. The spaces may be accommodated off site in a location agreeable to
both the City and the Bank. Proof of parking is an acceptable alternative. The applicant will be
required to provide the deficient 27 parking spaces if the need arises.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW OF A 9.680 SQ. FT. MULTI-TENANT RETAIL
BUILDING WITH THE MAJOR TENANT BEING VIDEO UPDATE; LOCATED ON LOT 1,
BLOCK 1~ SEVEN AND FORTY-ONE CROSSING~ SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE
INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 7 & 41~ R & A RETAIL CENTER~ MARK A. DAVIS AND
ASSOCIATES.
Mayor Mancino: Before I give this over to staff report I just want to make sure that the materials are here
to be seen. Good, thank you. I didn't want to go forward if they weren't here. Thank you. Staff report
please.
Councilman Senn: A question first. Now when you say materials here to be seen, you mean
representation?
Mayor Mancino: Yes.
Councilman Senn: Okay. How about, I mean the more fundamental or basic issue. I mean have they
resolved their access and all that sort of thing or why are we even talking about this?
Mayor Mancino: Well let's discuss that during staff report and see if there's new news and then we'll turn
it over to Roger to ask him. Thank you.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: The applicant is requesting a site plan approval for construction of approximately 10,000
square foot multi-tenant retail building with the major tenant being Video Update. The lot area is 1.2 acres.
It is currently zoned Neighborhood Business. A retail building is a permitted use in the BN District.
Access to the site is proposed via Highway 7 and 41 across an existing parking lot for the...for the subject
site. The one issue that complicates this proposal is legal access to the site. When this subdivision took
place, it was always the intent that all three parcels, by that we mean the SuperAmerica site, the strip mall,
18
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
as well as the subject site be forced to share access. Unfortunately this access was not recorded. This is a
private issue.
Mayor Mancino: And when you say private, can you expand on that a little bit more? You mean that we
can go ahead and give preliminary plat approval with knowing that they will have to figure it out before it
comes to final plat?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Actually what we have before us is site plan approval only and what we've done was
make it contingent upon access being provided to the site.
Mayor Mancino: And Roger does that put us into any box, giving the site plan approval?
Roger Knutson: No. The owners of the various properties have a private dispute about what access rights
they have or don't have. We can't resolve those issues for them. We don't, we lack that jurisdiction. It
take the Court or their private agreement to resolve that .... job to make sure that they meet the
requirements of our ordinances and if appropriate we can attach conditions such as you have to have access
onto a public street before you build a building and frankly I think that almost doesn't need to be said. No
one's going to build or finance a building if you can't get to it. So that will have to be resolved, but they
will have to resolve it.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Senn, did you have?
Kate Aanenson: ... completed an application. You have to process it.
Councilman Senn: Well I understand that. We need to process an application but we can also just simply
deny it until it's worked out and say come back but the thing that bothers me a little bit about just simply
saying access, it has access.
Roger Knutson: Access satisfactory to.
Mayor Mancino: To the City.
Roger Knutson: However, whatever you say is satisfactory access.
Mayor Mancino: So our satisfactory access would be using the drive that is already there on TH 7 and for
them getting a cross access agreement instead of creating a new driveway off TH 7. Because that's how it
was always planned.
Councilman Senn: Okay.
Roger Knutson: Various arguments may be able to be advanced by the owner of that lot that they have
some sort of an implied easements. I'm not going to make those arguments for them. Whether they'll be
successful or not is something for someone else to decide.
Councilman Senn: So if we effectively approve the site plan review contingent upon an access acceptable
to the City.
Roger Knutson: Or that the access has to be...
19
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Councilman Senn: And these met all our timing requirements.
Roger Knutson: Right.
Councilman Senn: Yet they simply have to still go resolve it before we're going to go anywhere anyway?
Roger Knutson: Correct, but they don't have to come back here and get, resolve it. Which comes first, the
chicken or the egg? As far as the City ordinances are concerned, as long as you, there's been satisfied or
you've attached appropriate conditions to make sure they're satisfied, then we've done our job and it's up
to them to resolve their issues.
Councilman Senn: Okay.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you Roger. Go ahead.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: The other thing is, we will not go issue a building permit unless they show us proof that
they have...
Councilman Senn: The access we'd like. Okay. All right.
Mayor Mancino: Okay?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: The site plan is really well developed. The building is proposed to utilize face brick on
the east elevation. A combination of face brick and rock face block along the north and south elevations.
And rock face block on the west elevation. There are two horizontal bands that wrap around all four
elevations of the site.., the east half of the site. One thing we need to mention about the setback of the
parking lot from Highway 7. The applicant is showing a 10 foot setback. The ordinance allows 10 feet
only if the parking lot is screened. Otherwise it has to meet a 25 foot setback. When this appeared before
the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission had some concern as far as blocking off the views of
the strip mall.
Mayor Mancino: The mall or this building?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: The strip mall is.
Mayor Mancino: Is behind it. South of it.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Right. And if they met ordinance requirements, a berm plus landscaping at
approximately 5 feet high.
Mayor Mancino: But there's going to be a building there too.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: There's a potential.., of the strip mall located south of the proposed building. So the
Planning Commission's concern with that is... blocked of the strip mall and they wanted staff to look at this
issue...
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you.
20
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Sharmin A1-Jaff: When we were writing the staff report the applicant was still evaluating this issue. We
haven't seen any site plan. We believe we can work out this parking lot... Staff is recommending approval
with conditions outlined in the staff report.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Questions for staff at this point. Councilman Senn.
Councilman Senn: The existing buildings out there. What are, I'm trying to remember what materials we
had on those. Well I mean on the existing building. I thought it was all brick, wasn't it?
Kate Aanenson: No.
Mayor Mancino: It's concrete with exposed I-beams. Kind of a burgundy.
Councilman Senn: And it's just brick on the faces then? Okay. How, how do I say this? If you're going
to go for the lesser setback, the way the ordinance reads, it has to be 100% screening. How are you going
to accomplish that and maintain it?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: You could provide screening on the one side and berm.., with landscaping of evergreen
landscaping. That's something that the applicant will have to... Redmond's has that type. They do have a
reduced setback...
Mayor Mancino: Arborvitae to act as the 100% screen year round. Actually it's quite effective.
Councilman Senn: Well it's effective but I guess it then tums around and puts the onus on us to make sure
it stays there, right?
Mayor Mancino: Councilman Berquist, do you have any questions?
Councilman Berquist: I had that exact question.
Mayor Mancino: My question is, how close on the western boundary are the homeowners? Is there a home
right to?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: No, there isn't. There's actually a park area.
Mayor Mancino: Let me see where it says west. RSF single family but it is single family zoned. Oh, so
there's a lot right there. Okay. Okay, that helps.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: It's fairly wooded.
Mayor Mancino: But it could be built. I was just looking at the west landscaping and thinking about
lighting because that strip mall to the south of the strip mall and the back of the strip mall faces single
family, just is atrocious. So I wanted to make sure that we did not do that again for this building to the
single family to the west of it. I want to make very sure that it doesn't end up looking like that. Okay,
great. Is the applicant here and would you like to address the City Council please.
21
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Tom Barbow: How do you do. My name is Tom Barbow. I'm here representing Dick Heise, HRMA
Architects from St. Paul and I'm here to give you a little rundown on the proposed materials for the
shopping center and answer questions that you may have of an architectural nature that I can help you
with. First of all I did bring out, I saw some of the elevations. We have all the way through here, it doesn't
show up terribly well. I also have some samples. This is the brick that is proposed that is on the east
elevation and used as substantial accents on the other three elevations. It is the closest available match that
we have to the shopping center. This firm was involved in the design of the shopping center and we feel
that this is a pretty compatible building of compatible product as well. It's a handsome building. It's a
simple, classic retail stand alone retail building. When it's referred to a multi-tenant, that's true. There
would be video update and one other tenant. It's not a multi tenant in the sense that there are going to be a
lot of different tenants. Just two. The use of this brick I think is going to be particularly effective in that
it's going to frame the parking lot, both this parking lot and the parking lot of the shopping center and
really create an ensemble effect. I think architecturally it's going to be very significant and a real boost to
the aesthetics of the area. The other materials that we have the rock face block, we've selected I guess
what I can only call really premium kind of rock face block. I have a sample here. If you'd like, I can pass
it around. It's a little heavy and awkward but I think.
Mayor Mancino: Just point to it.
Tom Barbow: This is the one right here. This is reflected on the south elevation, west elevation and north
elevation. The brick of course is used at the comers. You can see here, here, here and here and then it
wraps the back of the building.., as mentioned by staff. One-third of the building projects out. Just a very
classic architectural treatment for a very simple, modest and... Are there any questions?
Mayor Mancino: I have a couple. As I look at the elevations, if this is a multi tenant, where does the other
tenant enter? Is this just one building?
Tom Barbow: This is one building.
Mayor Mancino: And it's going to have multi tenants in it?
Tom Barbow: Yes, two tenants.
Mayor Mancino: Video Update and?
Tom Barbow: And a tenant.
Mayor Mancino: And a tenant. An unknown tenant? Mancino Shoe Supple or something. Anyway.
Tom Barbow: This is the area that the other tenant would occupy.
Mayor Mancino: Oh, on the left side.
Tom Barbow: Yes. You can see the door which is centered.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. I have a concern about the south elevation and that is, is that that faces the rest of
the strip mall and architecturally it is not very inviting so that it creates the square of the parking lot with
the other strip mall. I would like to see a landscaping or something added to the foundation in front of that
22
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
south elevation where it's plain after you, from what I can see the east side of it has the glass and you've
got some architectural element going there and then it's, the rest of it, three-quarters of it's pretty plain so I
would like to see some additional landscaping there to kind of fill in because I don't think it necessarily
brings and ambiance to the rest of the shopping center. Right there. Any concerns with that?
Tom Barbow: Well I think that's a reasonable request. Something with a little bit more height.
Mayor Mancino: Height.
Tom Barbow: Yes.
Mayor Mancino: To just kind of give some detail to that area.
Tom Barbow: I think we can work with staff to find a solution to that.
Mayor Mancino: I'm sure you can. What are painted islands?
Tom Barbow: Painted islands.
Mayor Mancino: Scary.
Tom Barbow: What we have proposed is that, given the fact that this is a self contained parking lot and a
very small one at that. That in order to facilitate getting in and out of the parking lot and to facilitate
plowing obviously, is that the islands would be striped. Striped out rather than built out of concrete.
Kate Aanenson: No landscaping in the island.
Mayor Mancino: Oh you mean you just paint an island on the asphalt? Excuse me, this is an island.
Tom Barbow: There was another concern that it is a very small lot and the islands, should they be made
out of concrete would become beat up and damaged so we're, not that we're trying to avoid landscaping by
any means. It's more a matter of, it's a small parking lot and the scale of the lot is such that it just seems
out of place.
Mayor Mancino: Well does our landscaping ordinance for parking lots have a minimum size?
Kate Aanenson: We didn't agree to it. That's at their request...
Mayor Mancino: But then this does not meet our parking lot ordinance?
Kate Aanenson: ... conditions.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Okay. But if we're not going to have islands, then we don't paint it, don't do
anything.
Tom Barbow: If we didn't have islands, then what? Maybe there aren't any islands.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: ... it's city ordinance.
23
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Mayor Mancino: And you can put day lilies in them or something. Okay. Any other questions?
Councilman Berquist: I have to understand that, silly as it may sound. You have to have an island, it's
city ordinance but it doesn't matter if it's painted or raised?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: It matters. It has to be a planted island.
Councilman Berquist: So we are, I misunderstood. We are in violation. We do not meet ordinance in the
parking lot?
Kate Aanenson: ... conditions of approval.
Councilman Berquist: Ah! But does the architect understand that?
Tom Barbow: He does now.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Okay, thank you.
Tom Barbow: Say I have one other question, as long as we're talking about the parking lot and maybe
staff can help me on this one. We have, you've seen two site plans. One has 50 cars, one has 51 cars.
Our understanding is that we need to provide one handicap space per 25, yet we have in the report it's been
determined that we need to have three handicap spaces for a parking lot of 50 cars. We have looked at this
and we're puzzled because in order to achieve these, the three handicap spaces, we would actually have to
subtract one space, giving us 49 spaces and three of which would be handicap accessible. Now can
someone help me with this because it doesn't seem that we're getting to the end point that we think we
ought to.
Mayor Mancino: We'll get it here.
Kate Aanenson: No, I can't answer that. It's a building code issue. We can get it resolved...
Mayor Mancino: We'll resolve it.
Tom Barbow: All right. Catch-22.
Mayor Mancino: Yes, yes.
Councilman Mason: That's it.
Mayor Mancino: Instead of taking 45 minutes, we'll resolve it.
Tom Barbow: Great, thank you. Any further questions?
Mayor Mancino: No.
Tom Barbow: Thank you.
24
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Mayor Mancino: Thank you very much. Is there anyone here tonight wishing to address the City Council
on this issue?
Councilman Berquist: We have not formally adopted the new... It came before us. As far as I remember
we did not.
Mayor Mancino: You did. I was here as a Planning Commission member I think. Excuse us. We were
just.
Councilman Berquist: I don't think we have.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: City Council did not vote to approve that ordinance.
Mayor Mancino: Oh!
Councilman Berquist: Right.
Mayor Mancino: But it's State law anyway. It's State law and it supersedes.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: City requirements.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Excuse us.
Mark Simpson: Hello. My name is Mark Simpson. I'm from the law firm of Leonard, Street and Dinard.
I'm here tonight representing the owner of the parcel, the shopping center parcel. I believe you've all
received a letter from my partner, Tim Welch. It is our position that the approval of the site plan should be
denied at this point in time simply because the party who has come forward here seeking approval does not
have access to this parcel. As shown on this drawing, he's proposing to get access.., and there have been,
as far as we can tell, there have been no plans so far to acquire access over my client's property. We made
a proposal to offer to sell an easement of access but have received no response to that proposal. We don't
think that it's appropriate that there be a condition put on at this point in time. You don't know what's
going to happen in the future. You don't know what type of access this developer might wind up with.
Whether it be through a court proceeding or through a private easement agreement. It's a lot cleaner and
simpler just at this point in time to deny the application. Make it be without prejudice so that they come
back before you at some point in time, if they do in fact have an easement over our property. But until they
do in fact have an easement, we don't think it's appropriate for you to approve their site plan, and we don't
want that to convey any impression to the outside world that there is in fact or will be in fact some
easement in the future when we don't know if that is in fact or has in fact, will in fact occur. So that's our
position and we would ask that you deny the site plan that is before you tonight.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you Mark. And I think we've already heard from our counsel that.
Roger Knutson: You've already heard from me.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to address the City Council on this issue? The only
unresolved, Tom I'm not sure if you spoke to this, was the berming versus the 10 feet versus the 25 feet.
You've not heard back from the applicant so again we can put that as a condition that you will work with
the applicant to resolve it. Okay?
25
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Mark Simpson: That is correct.
Mayor Mancino: Good. You don't have any option you want to show us tonight at this point. But we will
see it before final plat?
Councilman Senn: No, this is it. You have to understand that. There's a lot of holes in this.
Mayor Mancino: Oh. So.
Kate Aanenson: If you look on your site plan, it shows how far the right-of-way is from Highway 7. How
far the parking lot is back.., but if you look on one of your exhibits that shows...
Councilman Senn: But I mean what do you think about the, I mean I think there's a legitimate concern at
the same time that depending on how it's resolved and dealt with, that it could have an affect on the
visibility of the neighboring property, which I'm not sure is just simply fair to say as long as it's occurring
out there and meeting requirements it should be allowed to happen when really what's causing this is
effectively over utilization of the site. I'm just curious.
Mayor Mancino: I'm sorry.
Councilman Berquist: Excuse me, where are you making that interpretation from?
Councilman Senn: Well essentially if you have to screen that parking lot 100%, as the ordinance says,
okay not knowing how that's going to be done but just simply envisioning many different ways in which it
could be done, many of those could effectively totally screen the abutting property, at least coming from
that direction.
Mayor Mancino: No they couldn't. Not if it's only, you know we could say 4 feet tall. You're not going
to screen the buildings in the back. You absolutely won't.
Councilman Senn: But Nancy, only 4 feet tall is a big assumption.
Kate Aanenson: I think we're qualified to put, to look at it to get the right size height of the landscaping...
We do it all the time. Circumstances of the situation at Market Square, the buildings which are much...
Mayor Mancino: And we do have it on other buildings. Mark, are you concerned that it will screen the
shopping center in the back?
Councilman Senn: No. I'm concerned that it's going to screen effectively everything else that's happening
beyond it and around it. If that screen affect truly is 100%.
Mayor Mancino: And that's just density, it's not height. When you can say, we can put.
Councilman Senn: Well density and height because that height has to exceed, you know effectively the
view of the cars. So I mean once you're talking about that, I mean you're talking about a height that's
probably got to exceed at least 6 feet. Maybe 8.
26
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Mayor Mancino: Now, then we get into what kind of car and you know.
Councilman Senn: I know. I mean again if you're asking for 100% screening.
Councilman Engel: ... required to screen the north side?
Mayor Mancino: So you're talking about just this area right here is what needs to be screened, right there.
Not here. Well there's going to be a building but not, are you talking about here?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: No.
Mayor Mancino: Just right here.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Councilman Senn: So nothing over towards the building where the lot will be visible from or nothing over
towards the driveway.
Kate Aanenson: ...parking lot.
Councilman Senn: Nothing over towards the driveway?
Kate Aanenson: No.
Mayor Mancino: And there is landscaping out here in front of SuperAmerica too.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Mancino: Tall landscaping.
Councilman Senn: Yeah.
Mayor Mancino: Yeah.
Councilman Berquist: But you can sure see the cars sitting at SuperAmerica.
Councilman Senn: But it's not 100% and we haven't given them a reduced a setback.
Mayor Mancino: I mean we can certainly say that we'd rather see the 25 feet instead of the 100% reduced
setback.
Kate Aanenson: Get one big parking lot and that's...
Mayor Mancino: Okay. But we can certainly make that condition and guide staff and the applicant decide
that. Unless we want to see it again.
Councilman Senn: Well, I don't know. It just, you know from my standpoint I just, I have I guess
problems looking at this and saying yeah, it seems okay contingent upon. Because I mean to me there's a
27
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
huge leap of faith from here to the point that you're saying the contingent upon. You know how this sits
lays out. How it can be developed. How it can be orientated. Everything is going to depend more upon
access. How it access and how it relates to the neighboring properties, which is a totally unresolved
issue...
Mayor Mancino: But it can come back to us if it doesn't follow this existing plan. And not access the way
it, if they don't get an agreement between the two parties as to the way it's laid out right now, it has to
come back to us if anything changes. Now, I'm concerned that the applicant didn't figure out the berming
or the screening before tonight and came to us with the way they wanted to go.
Mark Davis: May I address that?
Mayor Mancino: Yes.
Mark Davis: Mark Davis, Mark Davis Associates. The developer for the project. In the Planning
Commission the issue was relative to the potential blocking of the view of the back mall. We're more than
willing to do, Planning Commission I think suggested a 5, or a 3 foot, or a 3 foot berm or hedge. We're
willing to do whatever staff and Council wants us to do to accomplish the ordinance so if you'd like a 3
foot berm, if you'd like some scattered plantings that accomplishes part of the 100% screening, it doesn't
really matter to us. We don't want to block the view of the back, of the mall in the back but we want to
meet the ordinance so whatever you decide is appropriate, I'm sure we can work with staff to work out
something that's acceptable to all.
Mayor Mancino: So you would be fine with the regular 25 foot setback?
Mark Davis: We can't make the 25 foot setback. We can do the 10% and do the planting or the berm or
whatever you'd like in that regard.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. You can do the 10 foot setback, thank you. Councilman Senn, did you want to
add anything else?
Councilman Senn: At least as it's laid out in design now and from what I've seen, I'm not real happy with
the other elevations other than the front.
Mayor Mancino: And what would you like to see changed? And I'm assuming that you're saying east
elevation?
Councilman Senn: Well I'm going to say east. I'm going to say south. I mean I don't know. I really
despise playing architects but I mean effectively those walls have absolutely nothing to them at all other
than concrete block. I mean I don't see much relief there one way or another and I don't know. You know
again, if it's attached to or part of the center, that's one thing. When it's a pad, I mean I think it needs to
address those issues. And it also needs to address the issues as they relate to or are visible from other
parcels too outside the development.
Mayor Mancino: You know I can say I agree with that too. I mean because it's a stand alone pad, it has
several fronts. It has the front on Highway 7 and it certainly has the front inside the shopping center that I
think some more architectural relief could be added to the building.
28
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Councilman Senn: Yeah, and I don't know. The other part that I guess bothers me about the parking
situation is, if in fact the answer to our ordinance is to effectively require the screening along only the north
face of the parking lot leaving effectively fairly significant gaps between the building and the north row and
the driveway in the north row, I wonder what we're accomplishing myself.
Kate Aanenson: There's landscaping along there.
Councilman Senn: Well but again, you're not, it's landscaping but it's not again meeting the 100%
screening requirements.., mm around and saying we're supposed to put in effect because of the setback
issue. Right? Or maybe that's the problem. I mean I'm still not really understanding how you're going to
achieve this 100% .... Well Redmond's a good example but it's the only one I can think of.
Sharmin A1-Jaff made a statement that was not picked up by the microphone.
Mayor Mancino: You can cut them to any size you want. Councilman Mason.
Councilman Mason: The access issue concerns me but I'm assured by our counsel that it doesn't need to at
this point so it won't. I know that the Planning Commission voted unanimously in favor on this and it
carried so it seems to me they're comfortable with the plan and assuming everything else gets worked out,
that's okay.
Mayor Mancino: Councilman Engel.
Councilman Engel: I'd just like the applicant and the parties to work out their access agreement,
disagreements on their own. Planning was okay with it. I have nothing more to add.
Mayor Mancino: Councilman Berquist.
Councilman Berquist: I'm looking in the staff report and it's probably in there and I cannot find it.
Access off of Highway 7 coming in, going into SuperAmerica. You take the right in and then you
immediately take a left... Why isn't, why wouldn't there be something similar to access the parking on this
site?
Kate Aanenson: ...a separate access...
Councilman Berquist: No, not a separate.., coming off of TH 7, if you went left, you go into the SA lot. If
you go right you'd go in.
Kate Aanenson: Yes there is. Actually Dave modified that... I thought Dave modified it. We had gone out
and looked at it again. He thought that that setback was... SuperAmerica and concerned about the flow off
of, whether or not that lane's wide enough for...access. He felt that there was a...road coming in. I
thought that had been modified.
Councilman Berquist: That at least provides the site with a right-in/right-out.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Councilman Berquist: Accessibility.
29
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Kate Aanenson: Come back.., onto TH 41.
Councilman Senn: Well you don't have right out onto TH 7. I mean there's not a right, I mean that's
incorrectly stating it. It cannot be a right out. All you have is a right in.
Mayor Mancino: You can do a right out on TH 41.
Councilman Senn: Where do you go from there? That's one of the problems.
Kate Aanenson: You come off TH 41. That's what we said.
Councilman Senn: How do you come out to TH 41 ?
Councilman Berquist: That's the easement issue. Okay. I think the question really was one of
accessibility off of that lane from Highway 7. Why it hadn't been, why it wasn't part of the plan. I mean I
think from a parking lot point of view, it would be easy to access that. Or easier. If I'm a client and I'm
coming in there and I'm coming off of TH 7, I'm certainly going to want to go there as opposed to go all
the way around and up. Well, that was one question I had. Really the only one I think, we do not have an
option regarding tabling. This has to be acted on by the 17th of July or it automatically receives approval
through non-action. So we either approve or deny this evening, right? Or meet the night of the 17th.
Mayor Mancino: Well there are some thing's like to see addressed I guess. I don't have I think the legal
issue of access is private and leave it that way. But I would like to see the circulation addressed this way.
I'd like to see the actual berming and what's going to go on it. I want to see real plans to it and how that's
going to work. The 100% screening. I'd like to see the south and north elevations with either architectural
refinements or something going on there because those are huge wall expanses and they're facing TH 7 and
they're facing inside the shopping center. And that can be architecturally or landscaping wise. I'd like to
see how that's going to be done. So I personally would like to see it back again. May I have a motion
please?
Councilman Berquist: You'd like to see it back again?
Mayor Mancino: Yes. I'd like to see those things addressed, because they haven't been.
Roger Knutson: Mayor? Just so we're clear. Unless you want to have a special meeting, you have to
either approve or deny it tonight. You can attach.
Mayor Mancino: But so if we deny it.
Councilman Berquist: Then I'll move to deny.
Roger Knutson: But you can attach reasonable conditions to approval. Such as, I'm not putting words in
your mouth. If you want to see the berm showing complete screening, you can say we want to approve it
subject to having plans prepared for the berm showing complete screening which is required by the
ordinance. That that comes back to us to satisfy ourselves that that condition has been approved before it
gets built.
30
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Mayor Mancino: Okay.
Councilman Senn: I'll second the motion on the table.
Mayor Mancino: And that was a motion to deny.
Roger Knutson: If we are going to deny it, we need a follow up motion to direct us to prepare Findings of
Fact to bring back to your next meeting explaining the ordinance basis for denial. Since we don't have time
to prepare the Findings in advance, you could make a motion to deny it, if that's what you think is
appropriate. A follow up motion to prepare Findings explaining where in the ordinance, what ordinance
provisions are deficient.
Councilman Berquist: Well let me take a whack at it. I will move to deny the application and predicated
on issues of accessibility to the site in meeting the ordinances of the City of Chanhassen. Berming and
landscaping of the parking area. Strike my motion.
Mayor Mancino: Well, we've had the motion. We've had a second. You complete it and then we'll vote.
Councilman Berquist: All right.
Councilman Senn: Well we still have the first motion, don't we?
Councilman Berquist: Well yeah, can we fly with the first motion and then delineate conditions of denial?
Mayor Mancino: Yes.
Councilman Senn: Well I think what we should do is we should pass, we should go ahead and vote on the
first motion. Decide what we're going to do. If the motion passes on denial, then what we should do is
direct the City Attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and bring them back to our next meeting.
Mayor Mancino: Councilman Mason.
Councilman Mason: I also heard that we have a choice to either deny this or approve it with conditions.
I'm not quite sure why we're going to move to deny it and spend all the time and effort and money involved
in those decisions, etc., etc. when we can move to approve it with conditions which will essentially in my
mind accomplish the same thing. So therefore I will be voting against denial.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Let's go ahead for the vote then.
Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Senn seconded to deny the Site Plan Review #97-4 as
shown on the site plan Received March 17, 1997. Councilman Berquist and Councilman Senn voted
in favor. Mayor Mancino, Councilman Mason and Councilman Engel voted in opposition. The
motion failed with a vote of 2 to 3.
Mayor Mancino: The motion does not carry. Is there a second motion?
Councilman Mason: You have the ability to float a motion as Mayor. I think you stated the concerns
fairly well. Why don't you make the motion, if that's all right with you.
31
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Mayor Mancino: I would love to make the motion. I will make the motion that we go ahead and approve
Site Plan Review #97-4 as shown on the site plan received March 17, 1997 subject to the following
conditions, 1 through 15. 16 being that we would like to see it come back with number one, revisions to the
north and south elevation with additional architectural elements. 17. That we see it come back with a
landscape plan for the berming exactly as specified how it will be done and materials used and maximum
height of those materials and berming. 18. That we see it come back as far as circulation and entering the
parking lot from the east. And 19, and it's I'm sure on here but I want to make it very clear that the only
acceptable entry and leaving for this site off TH 41, or excuse me, off of TH 7 is the driveway that is there
right now. And that we will not accept a new entrance off TH 7. Or TH 41. Well they can't because they
don't own TH 41.
Councilman Engel: I'll second that.
Mayor Mancino: All those in favor signify by saying aye?
Councilman Senn: Quick clarification.
Mayor Mancino: Sure.
Councilman Senn: In your motion now you just said that the only acceptable ingress/egress is the existing
one for Highway 7 you said.
Mayor Mancino: Yes.
Councilman Senn: So you are not making your motion contingent upon them working out an access across
the existing driveway of the neighboring property, correct? Because the motion as you've now worded it
does not include that.
Mayor Mancino: Well that's exactly the intent of the motion.
Councilman Senn: But your motion did not say that.
Mayor Mancino: Yes it did. It's 9. So Mark the existing ingress off of TH 7 is to be used for right-in off
TH 7. And that's it.
Councilman Senn: For access only.
Mayor Mancino: Access only. That there cannot be another access off of TH 7. If they wanted to turn the
building and put it on the east side and put the parking lot on the west side and enter off TH 7, 100 feet to
the west, they cannot do that. I'm only allowing the ingress where it is right now. So they'll have to get a
cross access agreement. Is that understandable? Second to the motion please.
Councilman Engel: It's already been seconded.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Discussion.
32
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Councilman Berquist: In your motion where you said and come back. Do you want Council to have to see
all this stuff?
Mayor Mancino: I would prefer that. Yes, absolutely. Any other questions or discussion?
Councilman Berquist: No.
Mayor Mancino moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve Site Plan Review #97-4 as shown on
the site plan received March 17, 1997, subject to the following conditions:
The materials used to screen the trash enclosure shall be the same type of brick used on the
building.
The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. Provide a detailed
sign plan for review and approval. The signage shall comply with the ordinance requirements.
Brick shall be used on the base of the ground low profile sign. If a neon band was incorporated
onto the exterior of the building, it shall be limited to the east elevation only.
The applicant shall either provide a meandering berm with landscaping along the north perimeter of
the site to provide screening of the parking lot or increase the parking setback to 25 feet.
Ornamentals planted along highway 7 should be salt tolerant. Replace crabapples with Japanese
tree lilac or other such salt tolerant species. To ensure that grading does not impact the existing
trees along the west portion of the site, the applicant must install a tree protection fence before
grading on the site begins. The applicant shall also provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of
landscaping to be used in calculating the required financial guarantees. These guarantees must be
posted prior to issuance of a building permit. Also that the staff would review the berming to
ensure that it's not prohibiting a decent view of the shopping center itself.
The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the city and provide the necessary
financial securities as required for landscaping.
5. Fire Marshal conditions (Refer to attachment #2 for detailed policies):
a. A post indicator valve is needed on water main to building. See plan.
Provide an additional hydrant at entrance to parking lot. See plan. Minnesota
Uniform Fire Code 1991 Section 10.403.
c. Fire department connection will be needed on the front of the building at
time of sprinkler installation. NFPA 13 1991 A-4-6.2.1
d. A lock-box will need to be provided on building above fire department
connection. See plan. Minnesota Uniform Fire Code 1991 Section 10.302.
6. The applicant shall provide details on material colors used on the building for review and approval.
Concurrent with the building permit, a detailed lighting plan meeting city standards shall be
submitted.
33
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
8. Building Official's conditions:
a. Revise Site Plan and/or Paving and Dimensional Plan to match.
b. Revise accessible parking stalls to comply with Minnesota State Building Code,
Chapter 1340.
c. Meet with the Building Official as early as possible to discuss commercial
building permit requirements.
d. Provide recycling space as required by Minnesota State Building Code 1300.4700.
Demonstration of compliance may be provided on construction documents.
9. The applicant shall provide the City with a recorded copy of a cross access agreement or such
other evidences as acceptable to staff to establish adequate ingress and egress between Lot 1, Block
1, and Lot 2, Block 1, Seven and Forty-one Crossing.
10. Approval of this site plan is contingent upon the City and the Metropolitan Council approving a
minor comprehensive plan amendment from residential medium density to commercial.
11. At time of building permit issuance, the site will be subject to the appropriate number of sewer and
water hookup charges based on SAC units.
12. The interior landscaped islands in the parking lot shall also have concrete curb and gutter.
13. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and
disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in
accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. All catch basins shall be
protected with silt fence or hay bales until the parking lot is paved.
14. All rooftop equipment shall be screened from views."
15. The applicant shall extend the proposed sidewalk to the southerly lot line of the parcel.
16. The applicant shall bring back to Council for review revisions to the north and south elevation with
additional architectural elements.
17. The applicant shall bring back to Council for review a landscape plan for the berming, materials
used and maximum height of those materials and berming.
18. The applicant shall prepare a traffic circulation plan for the parking lot from the east.
19. The only acceptable entrance off of Highway 7 is the existing entrance. No additional entrance off
of Highway 7 will allowed.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
34
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT AND SUBURBAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY
APPOINTMENTS~ MAYOR MANCINO.
Mayor Mancino: We have a Council member resigning, Councilman Engel so do we have a Council
member that would like to volunteer or be nominated to replace Councilman Engel on the Southwest Metro
Transit and Suburban Transit Authority? Is there a volunteer?
Councilman Senn: Sure, I'll do it.
Mayor Mancino: Councilman Senn. Okay, any discussion? Anyone else who'd like to volunteer?
Councilman Berquist: I've got to ask a question Mark. A while back you were talking about being
involved in development rights for the Hub Center. Is that?
Councilman Senn: No. No, I never pursued that.
Mayor Mancino nominated Councilman Senn to the Southwest Metro Transit and Suburban Transit
Authority. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
A. CITY POLICY REGARDING EURASIAN MILFOIL, WATER RESOURCES
COORDINATOR.
Phil Elkin: The reason I'm here tonight, for the past three years the City has been contributing to an
Association, Lake Minnewashta Preservation Association in aiding them for their fight against Eurasian
Water Milfoil. Essentially what we've done is given matched funds that have been set aside from the
Department of Natural Resources. This money is used for herbicide.., of Lake Minnewashta for milfoil.
As you recall, earlier in the year when I came with my proposal for 1997 Surface Water Management
Project, I made the decision that since all the projects from on the Lake Minnewashta Watershed, that we
would not be making a contribution to this fund this year, which was fine until the members of the
Association found out about it and then demanded to know who made the decision and I guess my only
response was me, so that was inadequate. So what I've, you know, whatever. So what I've done, I've tried
to come here tonight to ask for some, which direction that you want to go. I put a couple suggestions
together. Just outlined the issues here. In addition to Lake Minnewashta, this year I've also heard from
Lotus Lake, Christmas Lake and representations from Lake Riley who are also looking for assistance. In
going back and researching this I found that the City has no formal policy. The only thing I can find at the
beginning of this would be the memo to Council from Diane Desotelle, the former Water Resource
Coordinator, outlining what, when that started, the initial plan to contribute funds. In that memo she stated
goals had been established for short and long term management of the plan... I've not been able to find
what the goals were as far as both short term and long term. Just a little background. What happened is
the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the jurisdiction governing.., over 10 acres or more and
every year they send out people looking for milfoil. Looking for milfoil, Eurasian Water Milfoil on all the
lakes. Once they find it, it's been detected in a lake, their best efforts to eradicate it but once it reaches a
certain point, approximately 10% of the lake, they put their hands up. You know they can't do anything
more with it and then just let the weeds take it's course. And for lakes that have been... Eurasian Water
Milfoil, what you do then is... on your boating license that goes into the general fund and then is distributed
to each of the lakes that are infested with milfoil and that money is set aside for milfoil management.
35
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
However, it's just open for whoever wants to apply for it and managing it however way is acceptable by
the DNR. Most of the time it is... herbicide Aquaclean 24-D and I guess, I think this brought the matter to
a head of not giving to this Association this year but I think you have to look at the long term. How we're
going to deal with this issue. Are we going to give, are we going to match DNR funds from here until you
know, whenever. Or are we going to put a limit on how much money we're going to spend on this.
Attempts to treat Eurasian Water Milfoil... short term that basically make the lake accessible for summers.
The treatments are done twice a year but it hasn't, the trend, the long term trend has not shown that it can
eradicate milfoil on a lake. So I guess what I'm concerned about is we're looking at a money pit if you will
here of when are we going to, how long you contribute. What, making a cut-off of when you should stop
putting your money into the fund.., or just go along with the way we have been going. But there are
representatives from the Lake Minnewashta Preservation Association here to speak .... wanted to give them
a chance to...
Mayor Mancino: Yeah, just a minute please.
Phil Elkin: Okay, but that's you know, it's easy for me to get up here and say let's stop spending money on
it but I don't live on it. I know it's very nasty. There's not a lot of compassion either way from my point
so I thought I'd let the...
Mayor Mancino: Sure. No, but you do have a passion about the value of the lakes in our City...
Phil Elkin: Yes I do. Yeah, I mean.
Mayor Mancino: I don't live on, personally on a lake either but.
Phil Elkin: Yeah, I mean there are some inconsistencies. The City tried to discontinue the use of herbicides
in our storm water treatment plan. Or storm water plan. Storm water NURP ponds. Trying and there
seemed to be a lot of support for that and contributing in the fund which in fact puts herbicides in the lake
seems to contradict that action.
Mayor Mancino: Well the herbicide doesn't seem to be a real, it's not the panacea for the milfoil problem.
Phil Elkin: Right.
Mayor Mancino: It is on a year to year, it kind of eradicates it from certain areas, from what you said here.
But it does come back the next year.
Phil Elkin: Right.
Mayor Mancino: Okay.
Phil Elkin: And the other issue is, as more lakes gets infested, DNR's money and contributions.., because
you have to divide the money up into different lakes. And there are problem 7 lakes in the city that would
in the future, somewhere down the line ask for money for this.
Mayor Mancino: Sure, or something else. And we can't import more micro organisms from someplace
and ship them in and have it.
36
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Phil Elkin: No. There's no easy solution at this point. There are some that if you put it in a fish tank with
nothing but milfoil, they'll eat milfoil but.
Mayor Mancino: Otherwise they get.
Phil Elkin: Otherwise they prefer the native species.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Councilman Senn.
Councilman Senn: Are there any permanent treatments?
Phil Elkin: No. In the past Sonar has been tried which basically kills everything in the lake with the idea
that only native plants will come back but that has not worked.
Councilman Engel: Kills fish too?
Phil Elkin: Well if the fish don't have anything to eat, then they go somewhere else. Fish heaven.
Councilman Senn: In relationship to this discussion, back when we approved the targeting of the surface
water management utility funds for this, I had asked that we be given a history at that point, or a history be
prepared so we know historically where those funds had been going to treat what areas in what lakes since
it's inception. And I think that type of information would be valuable in kind of looking forward in terms
of what we're going to do, both in relationship to that and also historically what we have been spending
from a city's perspective at what lakes in relationship to milfoil control because that's.
Mayor Mancino: It sounds like it's only been for the last 3 years. Is that true? Has that been longer?
Councilman Senn: I don't think that's true. I think it's been longer than that, at least as far as I remember
and, but I don't remember amounts and what lakes or whatever but I guess I'd like to see that information
and understand it in relationship to a discussion going forward on what we may look at from a city
perspective budget wise or otherwise in terms of funding.
Mayor Mancino: Phillip, is that something you can pull for us?
Phil Elkin: I looked for, this is what I could find. I can dig deeper for what I can find.
Kate Aanenson: As far as budget, sure we can.
Mayor Mancino: Yeah, pull numbers for us.
Kate Aanenson: We combine budgets on lake management. Lake management plans when the budget
started maybe 2-3 years ago.., but we are doing lake management plans...
Mayor Mancino: But Councilman Senn, you're asking to pull out specifically milfoil?
Councilman Senn: Both in terms of the lake, in terms of the surface water management utility funds, okay.
I'd like a history on where those funds have gone, for what projects, what lakes. I would also like, from a
milfoil funding perspective, where we have funded milfoil treatments. Again, when and what lakes.
37
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Mayor Mancino: Yeah, that would be helpful. So those of you that are going to speak to us tonight, we
may not have a decision tonight. We may wait until we get some costs and see exactly what we have for a
budget obviously and what we can afford. And we will certainly invite you and let you know when we'll
have that discussion next and you'll get all that information that we get also. So we'd love to hear from
you, come on up and state your name and address. Oh, I'm sorry. There's one more question.
Councilman Engel: Are there any instances of totally bombing a lake? Killing everything and bringing it
back 2 years later. One year later. Whatever it takes with no milfoil.
Phil Elkin: With no, no.
Councilman Engel: No, no milfoil?
Phil Elkin: I mean that milfoil did not come back. Lake Zumbra was tried but milfoil, eventually it can be
reintroduced. The way milfoil is introduced is through, either it could be rope, propeller or you know...
so it doesn't, it's just a problem but the DNR is trying education right now to prevent it from spreading to
lakes that don't have it but that, every year there are more lakes. And another thing to that is, the next
thing coming will be the zebra mussel.
Councilman Engel: ... and there is no panacea ordinance in this stuff?
Phil Elkin: Right. Not right now.
Bill Howe: Good evening. My name is Bill Howe. I live on 3727 South Cedar Drive on the south side of
Red Cedar Point on Lake Minnewashta. I'm here speaking for the Lake Minnewashta Preservation
Association Management Team. Kind of a four headed monster but I'll be the head that speaks tonight. If
any of the other heads would like to speak up, I'd invite them. We've got some stuff to hand out. Our goal
tonight is just to get a chance to talk some more so as much time as the Council's willing to give us, we'd
be happy to take it and when it's time for the hook, just let us know. We, Tim Nelson is another member of
the group. He's just going to hand you out some collateral material you look at at your leisure. I guess
you've got this high tech deal, zoom. We prepared a little agenda and I'd like to just give you as close to a
thumb nail sketch of what, where we're coming from as we can given the volume of stuff we've just handed
you. Lake Minnewashta's had milfoil since about 1988-89. Once a lake gets milfoil.
Mayor Mancino: It's there.
Bill Howe: Well, there are some examples right now. Christmas Lake and I believe Lake Ann was just
treated where you find a very small concentration, a very contained area. Eradication, which is kind of a
sacred word in milfoil treatment, is a possibility. I know Christmas attempted to pull it out by hand with
divers a few years ago. Now I believe Christmas has it in two locations and to quote Chip Welling of the
State DNR, he's the guy. He calls that game over. Find it here and you find it here, it's here. Milfoil only
grows in areas that are roughly between about 4 and somewhere around 10 feet deep. That's called the
littoral zone of the lake, and at Lake Minnewashta for example that's approximately 300 and some odd
acres out of the 740 some odd acres of the lake. I'll get into that in a second. So a deep, steep lake like
Christmas for example which just has a small eligible area for milfoil to grow. A very flat lake like Lotus
has a bigger opportunity to support milfoil. There's infestation and I guess probably everybody's seen the
little commercials and knows kind of how you get it. It can be brought in on the foot of a seagull. It
38
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
probably comes in on a boat trailer. Someone who came from another infested lake puts their boat in your
lake. A little bit of it can start a big problem. It grows inches per day and it grows to the surface and then
it starts to do this and anyone who's ever been out, I have a ski boat with a whole lot of horse power that
can be brought to a standstill by running through a clogged area of milfoil so, it's bad stuff. Once it's
infested, you attempt to eradicate it. If your eradication efforts are unsuccessful, move into a strategy of
what the DNR refers to as management. Kind of the lawn mowing strategy. You've got it. If you want to
use your lake, it's important that your lake is navigable, now you do something about it. There are several
ways to do that. Herbicide treatments and mechanical harvesting are the two most popular treatment
methodologies. I'll talk about them in a little bit. To talk about how we got started, the Lake Minnewashta
Preservation Association. About a little over 4 years ago in this room, and you'll, at the very bottom of
your stack and I don't want you to dig for it now but there's a letter that was sent around by one of the
residents who said more or less, I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore. I want to see what
we can do about this. And he got ahold of Diane Desotelle, who was at the time the Water Resources
Coordinator and said, is there anything the City has planned for this? She said yeah, we've got money. We
can do something but you need to take some steps. So the first thing we did was came down here.
Attended a meeting. All waved our hands and said yeah, we want to get involved. And then we went to
school. We went to seminars. We talked to the DNR extensively. We called people from other states who
have got the problem. Called people from Lake Minnetonka and tried to learn as much as we could about
the problem. Subsequent to that educational process we started to formulate a plan. The first thing you
want to do is say okay, what have we got to do to get a bunch of chemicals, blow this stuff away and live
happily ever after. And we quickly learned, your mama's not coming. You have to live with this stuff and
you have to manage it. We got together with Diane extensively, and at that time the City had contracted
with Steve McCommas who's a marine biologist. I think Steve is still doing work for you? And Steve
worked with us and with Diane and developed what he felt was a plan. We took that plan, added our
thoughts to it and presented it to the DNR on May, and it's in your packet of information. On May 2nd,
1995 and kind of the thumb nail summary of that was, about the only thing we feel we can pass the hat
around, beg for money and get people to support would be a herbicide treatment. Harvesting had had a
very bad rap. Lake Minnetonka. People who live on Minnetonka typically refer to harvesters as planters
because they chop the weeds up in little fragments take off and replant themselves. Re-establishment.
Now you're clogged up again. Later we learned that the plant fragments itself automatically several times
a year so to quote Howard Crush of the DNR, that's a lot worse than any harvester so we're changing our
opinion about that a little bit. We sent newsletters out. We told people what our plans were. We asked for
money and we got a lot of money. The first year we had $20,000.00 of residential contributions come in.
People, on blind faith sent us $20,000.00 and said here, do something. Do anything but get this stuff out of
here. We got roughly $2,300.00 from the DNR. That was matched by Chanhassen. It was also matched
in 1994 by Carver County so we had approximately $7,500.00 of non-residential money came in to support
treating the plant.
Mayor Mancino: That's approximately $30,000.00. Did you spend it all?
Bill Howe: Well, I'll get to that. As of this year, yes. Because as it tums out, to do, well, I've got to get
into a little definition. There's a little called the littoral zone. That's the part that's a certain depth. The
DNR will permit you to treat 15% of that acreage. At Lake Minnewashta that calculates out to about 56
acres out of 740 that we're allowed to treat by the DNR. Our strategy with the DNR was to go in the first
year and say we'd like a variance on that 15%. We'd like to hit it real hard in a big way the first year and
then in future years chase the weed around and pick areas of the lake and we've got maps of different areas
charted by the DNR that designated areas and said okay. This one's okay. This one's not okay. You can
treat here. You can't treat there for numerous reasons. And that's in one of the newsletters too so I can get
39
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
you to there. Bottom line is, it costs about $15,000.00 a year to do 56 acres. The second year we were
only able to raise about $6,000.00 from residential contribution but we had a big flywheel affect from the
first year. This year, or last year we raised another roughly $6,000.00 but again flywheel affect from prior
years has kept us going. So if you average that. If you say we've got 20 and 6 and 6, that's 32. If you
divide that 3, it's a little over $10,000.00 that we've begged out of our neighbors effectively. That
combined with the $2,500.00 some odd dollars from the DNR, the $2,500.00 some odd from the City of
Chanhassen, has supported the $15,000.00 expenditure every year. Plus there's mailings that cost us about
$500.00 every time we print a copy and mail letters to everyone in the watershed. So effectively this year
we have now been tapped out. We made an impassioned appeal to everyone around the lake. We sent a
newsletter out that said, please send us money or this is the last one we're ever going to do. I know there, I
see there's some neighbors in here and if you're willing later on we can ask them what they think about the
effectiveness of the treatment but speaking as the LMPA, the Lake Minnewashta Preservation Association,
we feel like without it we'd be unnavigable. It just clogs the lake solid to where you can't get through
certain areas. And so we picked, we've taken our 56 acres and we've tried to spend them wisely. We've
tried to pick the areas that affect the lake population at large. Not homeowner X or Y, here or there. It's
got to be for the greater good rather than some guy who sent us a big check gets out in front of his house
done. One of the rules of the DNR treatment is they cannot come in closer than 150 feet as a commons
area treatment. If I as an individual homeowner go to the DNR for a permit and I hire Lake Restoration or
Lake Management, they'll do my yard. But we as a lake organization are limited to come in only to 150
feet. There's a lot of rules and regulations and do's and don'ts in this whole process. And we feel like
we've worked very closely with the DNR. We have achieved I think a high degree of credibility with Chip
Welling who's the, for lack of a better word, he's the Big Kahuna. He's the guy who, what's his title?
Phil Elkin: Coordinator.
Bill Howe: Fisheries and some other stuff too. So Chip has now given us leeway to kind of make the
decisions of what areas we treat whereas the first couple years he was very strict about this is okay. That's
not okay and you know, since then he's allowed us to expand that. We registered very early on as a
charitable organization so all the contributions to the LMPA are tax deductible. We've got a bank account.
We've got a P.O. box. We think we're a legitimate organization, even though we're four guys who live
on the lake who forgot.
Mayor Mancino: Look pretty shady to me.
Bill Howe: Who forgot to step backwards when they said all volunteers please take one step forward. I
guess that really completes kind of our history. Phillip faxed me a copy of his memo that I guess maybe
you, he sent it to Don Ashworth last Friday and with all due respect to our good friend Phillip, we felt like
we needed to take some exception to a number of the items in the letter and I guess it's real important to us
because we studied this and have taken it real serious for a long time and we can go through them now or
whenever it's good for you.
Mayor Mancino: Well, not the exception so much but will you tell us the few points Bill where you think
that it's really made the difference. I mean going, the 24-D. I mean are you, is it actually killing the
milfoil? Is it coming back the next year? Exactly what are the results of your spraying for the last 3 years?
Bill Howe: Okay, what they do, just so you know, is they've got this boat and it's got a couple ofwhirly
gigs on it like a sandy truck. Like you know the trucks that plow the snow and spray sand around. They
pour granular chemicals into these hoppers and then we buoy off, we work with a contractor who, for just
40
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
about all of the last 4 years it's been a company called Lake Restoration out in Hamel. They come out.
We buoy the areas that are permitted by the DNR and then these guys drive these boats back and forth and
run the spreaders. It drops the granulars down to the bottom of the lake and then if we're lucky and it's a
still quiet day, those chemicals are absorbed through the root structure of the plant.
Mayor Mancino: Systemic, okay.
Bill Howe: Very good. Systemic herbicide versus a contact herbicide. It sucks it up through the plant and
effectively the plant grows too fast and chokes itself to death. It does come back. Typically we've seen it
re-establish itself toward the end of the year of the treatment. We've typically treated in late June.
Mayor Mancino: Fast.
Bill Howe: Oh yeah. Oh yeah. And something you can't discount is that out of 300 plus littoral acres,
we're treating 50 plus. So if you've ever driven your boat through this stuff, it's not uncommon to drag
along a bale of this weed and then as soon as you've hock off those weeds. Put your boat in reverse for a
second and you cough them off and they sit there, they're going to go right where you left them and they're
going to re-establish. And a little fragment can land in the bottom and start growing again. So being over
zealous type of guys when we first got there, we had this mind set of eradication when we started out.
Well, the bottom line in Lake Minnewashta is if it can grow there, it's growing there. If it's an eligible area
for it to grow, we've got it. And so yes, it does re-establish. And what we're really gotten, you know it's
kind of like mowing your lawn or weeding your garden. It's, you do it and then you enjoy the navigation of
the lake for that summer and you plan to do it again and again and again and the term, you know the term
money pit fits that, I guess it's a money pit.
Mayor Mancino: That's what my garden is, yeah.
Bill Howe: That's me talking. You know you can ask other people who live on the lake what they think
but they're sending us their checks for, we're asking for $150.00 per household and some people are
sending that or more. And it's just you know take this money and help. So that's, I don't know if any of
my neighbors want to raise their.
Councilman Engel: This is basically...
Bill Howe: It's Weed Be Gone if you really get down to it. That's what 24, Aquaclean 24-D is a granular
form of Weed Be Gone .... Well in the past.
Mayor Mancino: Or D Agent Orange?
Bill Howe: Well you know, we as bad as anyone, I guess I'm probably worse than, I'm as bad as anybody.
I was very concerned about putting stuff in the lake. I've got little kids and blah, blah, blah. And
previously you can see these little orange signs out there after they treat and it says do not swim, do not
fish, do not drink the water, do not use it for irrigation.
Councilman Engel: How long?
Bill Howe: Well, swimming and fishing has been 48 hours I think in the past. Based on the MSDS sheets
for Aquaclean 24-D, the DNR changed their. See the DNR requires the applicator to put the sign up and
41
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
the DNR specifies what is written on the sign. This year the DNR backed off on their opinion based on
what the MSDS sheets for Aquaclean 24-D say and now there's no restrictions on swimming. No
restriction on fishing. And they do recommend not using it for irrigation because it does kill broadleaf
plants so if you've got a garden or something and you spray this on there, there's a risk. It's a low risk but
you'll kill your garden off. If you spray it on your grass, it might get rid of your dandelions but your grass
should be okay. So I guess a point I want to make that's really important in our opinion on the chemical
safety and responsibility aspect of this thing is the reason we have endorsed 24-D is that it's selective and if
you'll go back and read through all this stuff that you sent to us, you'll find out that it's nice to have a
broad variety of weeds in your lake. Or plants as they say. And Lake Minnewashta has about 27 different
varieties of "native plants" and then there are a couple varieties of "exotic plants". The most common
being Eurasian Water Milfoil and a plant called Curly Leaf Pondweed which is pretty icky stuff too. So
what you don't want to do is kill the happy plants. You want to only kill the nasty stuff. And 24-D
selectively will kill the milfoil and leave the native plants alone, as opposed to say Sonar which was
mentioned before which is, I call it nasty stuff. That's a contact herbicide. That's not a systemic herbicide.
Put that in and if you pour just the right amount in, you blow away everything you wanted. If you're off a
little bit, oops. Now we killed all the happy weeds and I draw an analogy to your lawn. If you burned
everything out, do you think Kentucky Bluegrass would be the first thing that would re-establish itself in
your yard or maybe it would be Creeping Charlie, dandelions and crabgrass. And so milfoil being a very
hardy weed, you know in the Zumbra scenario, I'm concerned that that's going to be the first thing they
find.
Mayor Mancino: That comes back, yeah because it's a survivor.
Bill Howe: So we're committed to a management strategy and we originally had thought we were coming
here to talk about enhancing the City's role in this and possibly looking at purchase and operation of
mechanical harvesting in not only Minnewashta but other city lakes. I guess based on the tone of what
we're hearing, we're kind of here fighting for our lives now. We're just saying we don't want to lose this
contribution. It's very important. It's about 15% of our annual budget and I guess if you think of it from a
lake resident standpoint, you know we can whine about our taxes and we can whine about how much it
costs to live on the lake and all that but the bottom line is, if we don't get this stuff out of there, it really
takes an awful lot away from why we came and it's very hard to explain that to somebody who's not seen it
and that but you can go out and take your hand and go like this and come up with as much as you can lift.
And so we're asking to reconsider restoring the funds. Not necessarily this year because we believe that the
Surface Water Management Plans are good plans and we want to see those too. But we want to see, I
guess we'd like to see a policy that Phillip doesn't have to worry about haphazardly dishing money out.
That it is in accordance with some great, bigger picture. And we'd really like the City to in the future
consider involvement in the form of mechanical harvesting and leave the herbicide treatment up to the lake
homeowners to fund on their own. We think that would be a pretty fair deal. And we'd like to have an
opportunity to talk in detail with you more later.
Mayor Mancino: Then let me tell you, and other Council members can reply to you. I think that
Councilman Senn had a good suggestion and we will certainly get financial, fiscal information back from
how much we've spent. We certainly want to make sure that we're equal and looking at all of our city
lakes. Because we value them all. What I'd like to see you do is to write up your options and what you'd
like to see us do. Actually take a proactive and write down some of the things you'd like to see us do as
your association. And if you could do it from a couple perspectives. And one is, you know our view is
looking at the whole city lakes, not just yours so if you could also keep that in mind. That we have all the
lakes to look at in our city so think of a policy or a plan that we could work with that incorporates all the
42
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
lakes. And some of the guidelines that you think we should be looking at. That would be very helpful.
And we will certainly take the time to read all the information that we have given you throughout the years
that I'm sure some of us who are new here haven't read and to actually come over and visit the lake.
Bill Howe: We would welcome that and we would also offer that we would be happy to volunteer as
people who've been through this, to work with other people from other lakes and share what we've learned
because we've got just racks of stuff. I make air conditioning units. I don't know anything about weeds
but I know more about it than I ever wanted to so we're willing to share any and all of that.
Mayor Mancino: Great. Thank you very much. Is there anybody else here from the association or a
resident that would like to speak? I think there are two of you together.
Steve Bainbridge: Just a couple of short comments. My name is Steve Bainbridge. I live at 7351
Minnewashta Parkway, about a half a mile south of your residence. The treatment this year was done just
about 2 ½ weeks ago. If you want to visit our lake, I would invite you to sort of duplicate what we were
looking at during the last few weeks and I have some of my close neighbors here too that are just, what we
faced 3 weeks ago was an absolutely, you could not get through the weeds to the main part of the lake
around a wide expanse, running probably continuously 4 miles on our southwest side of the lake. So most
of us have treated in close, as Bill suggested, and without that external treatment that the Association has
funded, you wouldn't be able to use your property. It's just.
Mayor Mancino: So most of you are doing both? You're doing, or a lot of the people that have, that are
on the lake are doing their private?
Steve Bainbridge: Yeah, you really have to control it and it's like you say, you have a, I have a sailboat
and 3 weeks ago I had to physically pull the boat out going, walking it out pulling it and with hundreds of
pounds of weeds forming on the keel, so I mean frankly if it were to stay like it was 3 weeks ago, I'd move
away. It's not worth living on a lake. It's just a swamp. It's an ugly swamp that makes it unusable and
ugly to live in front of it and it also stinks so that's really my comment. The work that the Association has
done has made year and year out over the last 3 years, it's been night and day for our property and how my
kids and my wife view living on a lake and it's a lot of work living on a lake and you pay a lot of extra too.
Mayor Mancino: I understand, thank you.
Bill Howe: Can I make a comment?
Mayor Mancino: Yes.
Bill Howe: The question about homeowners treating individually. Of the 56 acres that the DNR permits,
they then deduct from that the sum of all the individual permits if people who want to treat in front of their
house. And we are then granted a permit for 56 minus that. This year that was about roughly 10 acres
deducted from the 56 so we were permitted 46 acres. In the past it's been higher so my conclusion is that
more and more people are taking it on themselves to hire, typically it's the same company that does the
main part of the lake. Lake Restoration at a cost of roughly $200.00 an acre and they come out and do a
treatment. And they use chemicals other than 24-D. They typically use a mixture of 24-D, possibly copper
sulfate, and possibly reward. And that will effectively blow away everything in it's path.
Mayor Mancino: And the DNR has sanctioned that?
43
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Bill Howe: Yeah. That's permitted. Those are approved chemicals and they're permitted by the DNR.
Councilman Engel: Why don't they just let you treat as much as possible to remove?
Mayor Mancino: Phillip.
Phil Elkin: There's the fear that it will disrupt the chemical composition of the lake, and nothing will grow.
Bill Howe: Well there's another fear, if you'll indulge me is that when you kill a lot ofmilfoil or any weed
in the lake, it dies and becomes phosphorous. Fertilizer. And in Steve McCommus' report here, Steve's
biggest concern was the release of a large amount of phosphorous into the lake and the subsequent risk of
an algae bloom. Pea soup. And as you know, if you look at some of the documentation, this thing for
example. You find that Lake Minnewashta has the highest water quality of any lake in the city and to take
a risk of creating algae in that lake would be a tragedy that none of want to even think about. DNR holds
their 15% rule very sacred. I think they do it because they just like their book but we appealed to them to
waiver on that and I don't see it happening in my life time.
Phil Elkin: As the weed breaks down it also uses up a lot of oxygen...
Mayor Mancino: Like anything you mess around with man made. Something else comes out of it that's
toxic.
Resident: Do you want to hear from more homeowners?
Mayor Mancino: Sure.
Resident: I'm not officially associated with the Association except that I have donated money because I
think it is extremely worth while. I know the City, or at least the tax assessor thinks that Minnewashta is
very valuable as I pay my taxes every year and I would not be the least bit shy about asking for some
return on the money that I give the City. I think that's absolutely fair. I would like to just offer a comment
as to the quality of the lake and the quality of life on the lake. We looked, we moved there in 1993. I live
at 7301 Minnewashta and we looked at two lakes. Christmas and Minnewashta. Both have excellent
clarity. After we moved in we discovered the milfoil on the lake and we love to water-ski. We have two
Jetskis and it has really changed our outlook on life as the milfoil infestation has gotten worse and worse as
we have lived there. The kids take the Jetskis out and we also treat out to 100 feet. That's as far as
homeowners as we can go. As soon as they get out beyond that 100 feet, they have to stop the Jetskis and
pull all of the milfoil out of the intake or they can't go. It just stops. We had someone fall in the middle of
the lake and that's a point I'd really like to make is, the lake is kind of like a 1/3-2/3 lake. We live on the
smaller 1/3 but diagonally through that 1/3 is a hill in the bottom of the lake. Now you might think this 15
foot deep area is just around the perimeter of the lake. Well that's not true because of this kind of mound
through the center of the lake, or diagonally across it. And what happens is the milfoil grows up there and
in effect cuts that big area right in half. So if you run a boat through there, the speedos quit. If somebody
falls, they look like a Loch Ness monster when they get out of the water, and even worse than that, we had
a fellow who was not a good swimmer fall off of a Jetski and he feared for his life because he got tangled
up in all the milfoil. So I think we owe it to ourselves and our fellow residents to protect this very valuable
resource of Lake Minnewashta. I don't think we even as residents want it to get a reputation as not being a
good lake and I think we have a reason to protect that and we should think of this as management, just like
44
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
we mow the lawn. It's unfortunate. It's not a black hole. It's not an infinite amount of money that will be
spent. It's just support because we know the DNR will only allow us to treat so much. So it's a finite
amount of money but it's money well spent.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Thank you for your comments.
Carlton Langer: My name is Carlton Langer and I'm part of the Lake Minnewashta Preservation
Association. I live at 34... We haven't talked about the public access to the lake and I think there's about
40 full parking spots in the park and every weekend they're full at 9:30-10:00 in the morning it's full and
throughout the day. Every spot that vacates is occupied almost immediately. So from a city use,
Minnewashta is very, by the city, by the residents of the city so it's not just homeowners that are concerned
about the safety and I think safety is a prime concern. Of falling off of your boat or water-skiing,
whatever. I mean it can be very. We'd like to make a plea not only for homeowners, but also for residents
of the city of Chanhassen. Thank you.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Phil, does the Minnewashta Park, does Carver County participate?
Phil Elkin: They did I believe.., one year they did.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, because they have public access there too.
Phil Elkin: Right.
Mayor Mancino: Any comments from Council members?
Councilman Berquist: I'd just like to know if there's a long term prognosis for this stuff.
Bill Howe: Well I think the long term prognosis is it's here to stay.
Councilman Berquist: The adage for ad infinitum.
Bill Howe: Yes. That's my opinion. I guess there are opinions varied on that but it's here to deal with
forever...
Phil Elkin: Steve McCommus who has prepared the lake management plan and other opinions from the
DNR is that this is a new resident to the lake that thrives and native species have not learned how to
compete with it for oxygen, for light and once they learn to compete to it, then it will be under control or it
wouldn't be as rampant as it is now. But whether that is 5 years from now, 10 years from now, 20 years
from now, they don't know.
Councilman Berquist: In areas of the world where it's indigenous, does it get along if you will with other
plant life?
Phil Elkin: It doesn't thrive as much as it does here.
Mayor Mancino: So there's a balance to it I'm sure. There's more of a balance.
Bill Howe: It has no natural predators in North America and therefore it's called an exotic species...
45
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Mayor Mancino: So we'll have cloning of the natural predator and bring it over here. Yeah Bill.
Bill Howe: ... as part of our 5 year plan with the DNR we declared certain areas of Lake Minnewashta,
especially for the more back waters, the swampier.., primarily an area called.., leave it alone. Don't touch
it and see what.
Mayor Mancino: What happens.
Bill Howe: So our designated areas according to the plan that we are, the hands off area where we'll leave
it alone and see what happens.
Mayor Mancino: Good. Good. So you're looking at all different, got it.
Councilman Engel: Where are these areas that are unnavigable? Which areas?
Mayor Mancino: Just around the lake.
Bill Howe: I would say at this point it's everywhere that hasn't been treated and we can show you
sometime, whatever works for you.
Councilman Engel: Can you give me a description, north, south, east, west.
Bill Howe: The biggest area that would be the easiest example would be the area right in front of the boat
launch and the beat. We checked that early this fall. We felt like it wasn't as advanced as other areas of
the lake so we consciously avoided.., roughly 40 acres which we treated.., the closest part to the road,
there's a...you can almost walk on it. That's the south bay looked like 3 weeks ago. That small area there,
that little... If you go further north you will not find milfoil because it's been treated within the last 3
weeks. And when we stopped in that southern bay where you could walk on the water... I think you'd
realize pretty quickly... It looks like land. When you.., my living room and I look right out at it, it looks
like land. No weeds. No water...
Mayor Mancino: Okay, good. Phil, if you can pull some information together. I also think maybe during
a work session or something we should do some site visits would be helpful.
Councilman Senn: You can come over to my house if you want to see it.
Mayor Mancino: As long as you'll serve burgers and.
Phil Elkin: See why I passed this onto you.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Thank you. We're going to go to everybody's house and make sure you
have something to eat for us. We'll come and have a progressive dinner. But if you can pull the
information, historical information, we can start doing, and do some site visits still in the summer and we'll
have some time this year obviously to work on it in the fall and winter. Yes .... through Phillip, yeah.
And we'll communicate to you. If he has you know a lead person to communicate what we're doing and
our activities. Thank you for coming. And your educating us very well. Appreciate it. I don't live on a
lake but I'll get ready to now.
46
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Councilman Senn: Oh just flood part of the 40 acres and have a lake, come on.
Mayor Mancino: I'll start a big pond out there.
B. REQUEST FOR OUTDOOR STORAGE~ TARGET, PLANNING DIRECTOR.
Kate Aanenson: I met with Kathy Guettler to hear the needs that Target... Obviously the answer would be
to add onto the store. But to go through the corporate process it takes a number of years and before I went
much further with this I really wanted to get some direction from the Council before I led them down a
path... She's outlined in her letter that I attached for you...
Mayor Mancino: I didn't get an attachment.
Kate Aanenson: Oh, I'm sorry.
Councilman Senn: Turn the page over.
Kate Aanenson: She believes it would take about 2 years for them to go through the process.
Mayor Mancino: Tell her to deal with Dayton Hudson. Make them go faster. That's her company.
Worse than government.
Councilman Senn: We move slower than 2 years so I guess they may as well go their way.
Kate Aanenson: What they have out there right now is one trailer... Mark Littfin, the Fire Marshal looked
at it in the proximity to the building. What she wanted to do, as she indicated in her letter... 6 to 8 out there
which I believe... The underlying district does allow outdoor storage if it's completely screened. It is
screened towards Highway 5 with trees but Mr. Burdick owns the property there so I'm not sure you could
completely screen it without putting up a fence.., on Mr. Burdick's property. Some options to consider to
somehow... I guess what I was really looking for was some input...
Mayor Mancino: Well there's an unsightly truck next to Festival Foods right now that's just sitting there.
That's been there for a while. It doesn't have a cab attached to it. It's the rest of the trailer. Is that what
you call it? That's to the east of Festival Foods and it's just been sitting there. And I would, east. Yeah,
between Market and Festival. It's been there, it was there last weekend and last week. I don't know if it's
still there. I didn't look this week, but I have a concern about doing that in our downtown. I mean I'm just.
Councilman Senn: Kate, I think you should say, call your builder and get it through your corporate
process. I really don't think we're interested in this. I don't know. I don't think it needs a lot of
discussion.
Mayor Mancino: And I don't want to start it in our downtown. 6 or 8 is quite a bit.
Councilman Senn: Any is quite a bit.
Councilman Mason: Yeah. 6 or 8 storage containers. Is that 6 or 8 trailer trucks?
47
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Councilman Senn: And depending on which size trailers you're talking about, those could get up to about
80 feet I think.
Mayor Mancino: Yeah. Dayton Hudson needs to do what they need to do to get this passed for one of
their Target stores. And let them deal with it and as much as I, I mean I think it's great the business is
doing well and Kathy's obviously a great person to deal with but I would, I just think it would be not
compatible with our downtown and how we've been dealing with it.
Councilman Engel: It's a very bad precedent.
Councilman Berquist: Well I've got, you know in looking at the letter that she had written, she said
through our busy holiday season. She's not advocating that this be a long term solution by any way, shape
or form.
Kate Aanenson: Right, I guess that's what I was thinking. It could be, if you wanted to put some
conditions on it say like for a 3 month period or something... That's what I was concerned. What kind of
controls to put on it.
Councilman Senn: But once we approve it for one.
Kate Aanenson: ... I'm not sure how you can screen it...
Councilman Senn: But once you approve it for one of them, then every one of them, have everybody come
in looking for holiday season we want trucks.
Councilman Engel: And every single business gets one.
Mayor Mancino: Okay? Should we move ahead? Do you want us to make a motion or anything?
Kate Aanenson: No, that's fine...
C. SUMP PUMP INSPECTION PROGRAM UPDATE, CITY ENGINEER.
Mayor Mancino: Sump pump inspection program update. That was just in our admin section and it's not
a presentation. I know that the City Engineer will be coming back to us in another month, in one month
and making a presentation. A formal presentation to us. Lastly is item (1) that was pulled from the
Consent Agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA: (L) APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT; HAMMEL,
GREEN & ABRAHAMSON, INC.; CHANHASSEN RECREATION/BLUFF CREEK
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PARKING EXPANSION.
Mayor Mancino: Mark, I think you pulled this and have some comments or questions.
Councilman Senn: One additional question. Is HGA the civil on the project? Or I mean are they doing
their own civil or do they subcontract with a civil or what?
48
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Todd Gerhardt: They have a civil on staff.
Councilman Senn: So they do the civil themselves? Okay.
Councilman Berquist: Can I ask one while you're?
Councilman Senn: Yeah, go ahead.
Councilman Berquist: When they did the original drawings, where the parking lot's not shown as
expandable, are they shown as expandable? Future expansion.
Mayor Mancino: Yes.
Todd Gerhardt: Ours did.
Mayor Mancino: Yes. Yes. And I think the elementary I want to say that the elementary school, the
school district cut back because they couldn't afford it.
Councilman Berquist: So the drawings already exist.
Councilman Senn: So why are we paying for more?
Councilman Berquist: The way I look at it, when I hire somebody to do a mechanical drawing, I own that
drawing.
Todd Gerhardt: There wasn't a set of plans that showed. I mean we've got to move a watermain. We
need grading on one side. I mean you've got to show those all on a plan.
Councilman Senn: I'm sorry, you have to move a watermain?
Todd Gerhardt: A water line, yeah.
Councilman Senn: So you installed a water line where we knew that we were going to expand the parking
lot?
Councilman Berquist: All the more reason to be upset over $6,500.00 bucks. I mean that's something
that.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, yeah. You know I'm sorry but given what this firm, their performance on this
project and given what they've cost us on it, I'm sorry. There's no way I can go with continuing that out of
contract for more money. I would say at this point if they want to do it, gratis given everything else might
not be a bad idea but.
Don Ashworth: I don't think that the water line thing can be blamed on HGA. I think if there was
probably blame in there, it would be whoever we used as consulting engineers for the construction of
Coulter. And I don't think it's very logical or doesn't occur that many times where whoever you hire to
take and do let's say a street project like that, sewer and water, is going to come in and ask to research files
49
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
that, when this thing was originally looked at from a concept plan standpoint, was there any drawings in
there that potentially showed how a parking lot could be extended?
Mayor Mancino: I think they should but.
Don Ashworth: Well, you know. Maybe we in house should have caught it. Our engineer. Our planner.
Myself. But I don't know that that's a fair one to lay on HGA. And realize I have no love lost for them. I
mean it was over my dead body that we did this but I, to go somewhere else and it will be twice as much
money.
Mayor Mancino: Well that's what I was going to ask. I mean I agree with going ahead and doing it. It's
in the budget. It's $50,000.00 I'm fine with. The elementary school and charging them interest, etc. And
if you feel that the fee would be higher with someone else, than I'd obviously much rather go with the
lowest fee that we can get for the services. Now, in light of past work with HGA, if there's a way to get
that fee down, it says not to exceed $6,500.00. If we can, as I said in light of past experience, if we can get
that down I would, I think we would all be much happier.
Councilman Mason: With that I'll move approval of item I(L).
Mayor Mancino: Is there a second?
Councilman Berquist: I'll second.
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to approve the attached professional
service agreement with HGA in an amount not to exceed $6,500.00 for work associated with the
expansion of the parking lots at Chanhassen Recreation Center/Bluff Creek Elementary School. All
voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION DISCUSSION.
Mayor Mancino: We now look to the Administrative Section discussion. A couple things. I had called
Karen this morning just to say there were quite a few things on this list I didn't get. The last 5.
Councilman Senn: The last 7 on the first page I didn't get.
Mayor Mancino: Yeah. So we just need to be delivered those to be able to read them.
Councilman Senn: Last 7 items.
Councilman Mason: Yeah, I didn't get them either. I kept looking for them thinking I missed them.
Mayor Mancino: So if you could just put that. And also I would like to request from the letter from the
Postal Service, I would like to see the original agreement that we sent them so that I can compare the two.
I know that it seems to be different. What they sent us seems to be different than the original. I would also
like Kate please, if you could tell us the property line where the property line is of the U.S. Postal Service.
Thank you. Any other discussion?
Councilman Senn: On the post office one, I was hoping Roger could tell us what the differences were.
50
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Roger Knutson: The only one I can recall, I believe the only one in my judgment of substance was the
provision in there that said they would follow, refer to as best management practices to control the noise.
They would.
Mayor Mancino: They would develop their own best management practices. And there was also one about
maintenance.
Roger Knutson: Excuse me, yes. I would assume the reason they didn't want the provision in there about
noise is that their attorneys took a look at it and said, the neighbors will never be satisfied with this in here.
We open ourselves up to future litigation with the neighbors. I'm just speculating.
Councilman Senn: Okay, but that's it. I mean all the rest is as?
Mayor Mancino: And it has to do with, as I said, maintenance.
Roger Knutson: Maintenance of the berm.
Mayor Mancino: Of the berm. Which is fine. I have no problem with that but if it is on their property, I
think they should have the maintenance so.
Roger Knutson: But as you recall, it's going to be a natural vegetation. It's not going to be a berm that
gets mowed.
Mayor Mancino: No.
Roger Knutson: It will be natural vegetation or whatever you want to call it.
Councilman Senn: Okay. I have some questions on other items if.
Mayor Mancino: Sure, go ahead.
Councilman Senn: There's a MnDot letter in here relating to TH 5 and TH 41. It says both TH 5 and TH
41 are minor arterials. Based on our transportation system plan guidelines, MnDot will not be planning
additional projects on minor arterials. Therefore we don't have any additional plans for TH 5 and TH 41
improvements within the next 20 years. We are not improving the TH5/TH 41 intersection to the extent
recommended in the AUAR. These improvements are not within our proposed Highway 5, our
construction plans scheduled for 1999 to 2000. The development proposal necessitates the additional turn
lanes, signals and signal upgrades identified in the AUAR. These improvements are the responsibility of
the project proposers, the City or both. We strongly encourage the City to consider these responsibilities
and coordinate with MnDot before development occurs. I assume.
Kate Aanenson: I can comment on that.
Councilman Senn: Okay.
51
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Kate Aanenson: ... AUAR. The report that was done by Strgar Roscoe recommended actually 6 travel
lanes for TH 5 at the intersection of TH 41. And the person reviewing this transportation plan.., upgrading
of Highway 5 indicated that that is not part of that additional lanes...
Councilman Senn: So who's doing it?
Kate Aanenson: They are responsible.., putting in the development, responsible for... That segment of TH
5 will... 4 travel lanes. TH 41 has not been programmed as... At one time it was tied with the upgrade of
Highway 5...
Councilman Senn: But you just said their fair share. I mean I assume their fair share is 100%.
Kate Aanenson: Of upgrading of Highway 5?
Councilman Senn: Of upgrading the mm lanes and everything.
Kate Aanenson: No. The mm lanes that they're talking about were indicated in the study. One of the
recommendations of Strgar Roscoe was to put another travel lane...
Mayor Mancino: Plus a turn lane.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Mancino: So you're talking about 6 lanes plus a turn lane.
Kate Aanenson: Right. That will not be done.
Mayor Mancino: That will not be done but we will have 4 lanes plus a turn lane.
Kate Aanenson: And those are already in place... You will be participating in the.., but you have to
recognize that that phase will not be done, the part that was approved, the southern on 82nd. This other
portion on 82nd Street. This phase that they're talking about here will be done in conjunction with the
upgrading of Highway 5. At the same time. This is a three...
Councilman Senn: Maybe I'm misunderstanding something Kate here but it says here these improvements
are not the, you know are the responsibility of the project proposer or the City or both. Okay, so all I'm
trying to get at is, is the developer paying for the improvements?
Todd Gerhardt: $240,000.00 for signal lights is their responsibility.
Councilman Senn: Is that the total cost or not?
Todd Gerhardt: As a part of the construction budget, I don't see anything on our side of the ledger.
Councilman Senn: Well that's what I'm asking. So I mean that is the total cost?
Todd Gerhardt: Not for the signal light.
52
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Councilman Senn: Okay. And what about the mm lanes and everything?
Todd Gerhardt: That isn't a project item.
Kate Aanenson: Turn lanes are being done in conjunction with the upgrade of Highway 5.
Mayor Mancino: By MnDot?
Kate Aanenson: By MnDot. Right. This letter is also in response to the traffic study, which you're not
looking at. There were things in the traffic study that were above and beyond the scoping that MnDot...
And MnDot said well that's fine. We're not going to put it out there...
Councilman Senn: So where it says here the development proposal necessitates the additional turn lanes,
signals and signal upgrades, what you're saying is those aren't going to be done?
Kate Aanenson: This is Mr. Peters, a local transportation planner reviewing the AUAR sending out a
letter. It does not mean...
Councilman Senn: It's confusing.
Mayor Mancino: It's not very clear.
Councilman Senn: It's real confusing. Okay.
Kate Aanenson: What I'm telling you is that it's, what we've approved is consistent with what MnDot's
got designed for Highway 5. That's the bottom line.
Mayor Mancino: So Gateway is dedicating land for the Highway 5 upgrade to 4 lanes plus turn lanes.
Kate Aanenson: On TH 41.
Mayor Mancino: And on TH 41 and Gateway is also paying for the signal on TH 5.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Mancino: And that's it.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Todd Gerhardt: I think the question that Mark's asking is about the turning from a 4 lane to a 6 lane,
who's paying for that? Is that going to occur? And if it does occur, who pays for that I think is Mark's
question.
Mayor Mancino: Well, if I'm remembering the plans from the project, when you put the signal in there,
you've got to put in the additional lane. Now not the additional lanes to make it a 6 lane plus turn lane but
to make it a 6 lane effectively you have to put that in to accommodate the signalized intersection.
53
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
Todd Gerhardt: That's included in the signal one because I asked Charles that question when we put, when
I put my budget together. I didn't ask Charles if it included the 6 lane.
Councilman Senn: Okay. But the 250 does include the additional mm lanes and the signal?
Mayor Mancino: Yes.
Councilman Senn: Okay. Confusing. Let's see, back. Let's see here. The news alley thing...the alligator
and make a little more room to give us the updates. I see no value in the alligator.
Don Ashworth: We just have to see how much we get in there. I think like I can maybe summarize on that
front thing but I know have a report in regards to this.., that occurred out in the Greenwood Shores area.
I've got like 4 or 5 reports and what I had anticipated doing is kind of clumping that to this thing, especially
in a mid-week type of thing. And to the extent that I can put one liners in there, fine but most of the stuff
comes out that the City Council should have more information on. We'll see how it goes.
Mayor Mancino: Oh, so you're just doing bullet points here and then put the real document inside? Okay.
Any other comments?
Councilman Senn: The Rec Center report that was part of the Admin packet. I guess Todd's not here so
I'm not sure there will be an answer to the question but on the first page under revenues there's something
called in-house. Does anybody know what that is?
Don Ashworth: I'll find out for you.
Mayor Mancino: Actually I wanted to read this and spend more time.
Councilman Senn: If we're going to that's fine. I've got a number of notes about it, we can do it later. I
don't care. If we're going to.
Mayor Mancino: Does everybody feel comfortable doing that? When Todd's around so he can answer the
questions. I agree.
Councilman Senn: Yeah. So then he can be prepared to answer them later.
Don Ashworth: I'll have Hoffman give you a call.
Mayor Mancino: The meeting is over. So adjourned.
The meeting was adjourned by Mayor Mancino at 9:25 p.m.
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
54
City Council Meeting - July 14, 1997
55