Loading...
CC 2015 08 10 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 10, 2015 Mayor Laufenburger called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Laufenburger, Councilman McDonald, Councilwoman Tjornhom, Councilwoman Ryan, and Councilman Campion STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Paul Oehme, Kate Aanenson, Todd Hoffman, Greg Sticha, and Roger Knutson Mayor Laufenburger: Welcome to this council meeting, not only to those of you present in the chamber but also to those of you that are watching on Mediacom Channel 8 in your homes or somewhere else. Nice to have you with us. First action tonight if regarding the agenda. Council members are there any modifications to the agenda? And if not we will proceed with the agenda as printed. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman McDonald seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations: 1.Approve City Council Minutes dated July 27, 2015 2.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated July 21, 2015 Resolution #2015-50: 3. Approval of Grant of Permanent Easement and Temporary Easement, 9401 Audubon Road, Patrick & Teresa Kocourek; Award Contract to Minnesota Dirt Works to Install Storm Sewer Pipe and Appurtenances. 4.Approve Extension to Purchase Agreement with RBSC Chanhassen, LLC for nd Redevelopment of Lot 2, Block 1, Gateway East 2 Addition 5.Approval of Fireworks Display Permit, Resolution #2015- Specialty Pyrotechnics for Display at St. Hubert’s Church, 8201 Main Street, September 12, 2015 Resolution #2015-51: 6. Resolution Authorizing Redemption of 2004-C General Obligation Tax Increment Financing Bonds (TIF #4 – Downtown Entertainment District) 7.Approval of Summary Ordinance Amending Villages on the Pond Sign Criteria for Publication Purposes Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. None. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR VACATION OF STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY, 8805 SUNSET TRAIL, APPLICANT: JAMES AND ROSEANNE BOYUM. Paul Oehme: Thank you Mayor, City Council members. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Oehme, nice to see you tonight. Paul Oehme: Very good evening to you. I have a real short presentation about the vacation here. So the subject property requesting the vacation is at 8805 Sunset Trail which is just north of Lyman Boulevard and say west of Powers Boulevard on Sunset Trail. The property survey is shown here. The property was originally dedicated or recorded at the County in 1966 metes and bounds before it was platted. The easement, roadway easement is on the west side of the property line shown here. A 25 foot roadway easement in the shaded area. The property again, Sunset Trail currently ends at the north property line. You can see it here. There’s a driveway that runs to the west to service the property here. The right-of-way for roadway is shown here. On our comp plan, City’s comp plan there is no need for a roadway connection to the north there. Right now that’s Power trail. Power Hill Park out there and there’s no need for a roadway right- of-way to that park. Right now there’s access provided on the north side of the park so there is no need for this right-of-way to exist. We would recommend if the right-of-way is vacated that a trail easement be dedicated at the same time. The roadway again, the easement is shown here. 25 foot, I blew it up a little bit to show you some of the detail associated with the vacation. There is the existing driveway at 2750 does cross the existing right-of-way that’s dedicated on both of these properties so if the right-of-way is vacated at 8805 we would request that the right- of-way be maintained for that driveway. There is a power pole here so the driveway can, it would be very difficult to relocate. Right now the vacation easement shows that there’s a one foot separation between the driveway and where the right-of-way vacation would take place. And I can show you on the next slide here that the, what staff is recommending that the one foot offset from the driveway be increased to 5 feet just for normal use of the driveway. Like I said again the driveway would be very difficult to relocate outside of the right-of-way that is proposed to be vacated and our code states, city code states that in 20-1122, paragraph 1 that a reasonable 10 foot offset from the side property lines is recommended. However in this case it’s somewhat of a unique situation with the vacation and how the area was dedicated in terms of right-of-way that we think a 5 foot offset from the driveway at the current location would be appropriate. So this drawing again shows what the trail easement would be, where it would be dedicated right on a 5 foot, or 10 foot trail easement on the project property with a 10 foot, or 25 foot vacation so this would be the vacated area here. The area in yellow, the trail easement has, was dedicated at a previous council meeting on June 8 so that one’s all dedicated. The area in green here, that’s the proposed trail easement before you tonight for consideration. With that staff is recommending that a public hearing be held for this matter at this time and if council 2 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 thinks that a 5 foot offset from the trail, or from the driveway to the right-of-way line is appropriate we would recommend that a future item be put on a future council meeting for that item. That would be on a future consent agenda item so, but with that if there, if the council has any questions regarding this vacation I’d be more than happy to try to answer them. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay thank you Mr. Oehme. I will open the public hearing in just a few minutes but let me ask council if you have any questions of staff at this time. Council? Alright. Then at this time I will open the public hearing on this item, F(1), request for a vacation of street right-of-way. Does the applicant wish to make a comment? I invite the applicant forward. Please state your name and address please for the record. Good evening. Jim Neilson: Good evening Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. For the record my name is Jim Neilson. I’m an attorney at 118 East Main Street, Anoka, Minnesota. I represent Roseanne Boyum and James Boyum. I have appeared before you in the last 30 to 45 days pertaining to the vacation of the property by Mr. Undestad immediately to the east. Or immediately to the west of this property. Mayor Laufenburger: Just a moment. Mr. Oehme could you go back one slide please? So you’re reference there Mr. Neilson was to the yellow bar that is shown to the council at this time, is that correct? That’s the easement that was vacated. Jim Neilson: That is correct and if I may approach and make a handout of a larger of both properties or all properties. May I approach? Mayor Laufenburger: Yes you certainly may. Mr. Neilson continue. Jim Neilson: What was handed out was a portion of the survey that was done by the surveyor Gary C. Huber of Rehder and Associates as of July 14, 2015. The only thing not on that enlargement is a legal description. The pink portion is the property that is Undestad’s and that we were discussed with the City Council last time and there was an attempt to vacate that. The property today is to the east of Undestad’s property. It is the portion in the X’s. We agree with the staff report except for the fact that we do not believe that it is necessary to have a 5 foot setback instead of a 1 foot setback. There are a number of reasons. First of all the city code doesn’t permit it and I will get into that. I have to talk a little bit about legal stuff. We have a lot. We have what is called fee title. Fee title means that the Boyum’s own everything on it. They can build a house as an example. Then you have an easement. Well you can’t build a house on an easement but the easement has to be definite. You can not simply have an easement because you don’t know what that easement is. It is definite due to the fact that in 1966 the easement was given by the then owner for road and utility purposes. The road has not been improved. The City hasn’t taken over the original 50 feet prior to the vacation of the Undestad property. There is a specific case. Village of Medford versus Wilson and I can provide that case to the City Attorney. That an abutting owner can use dedicated street until municipality opens and uses the street and abutting owner’s use is not regarded as hostile and I’m assuming that you 3 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 know to the fact that you cannot adversely possess the king’s property. State, county, city is a king. I can’t use my 15 years of trying to take your property. The law does not permit it. Can’t have adverse possession. So if an adjoining property owner goes over the, what is the easement they are not able to obtain anything by adverse possession. Our position at this time is we’re trying to resolve it without having litigation and court. If I go to court I’m going to take the position that driveway doesn’t exist because you cannot have a driveway over a public road that hasn’t been opened. You cannot have an adverse possession against the owner when the owner has given possession. We’re simply trying to settle this. My client will settle it with a one foot th difference. Not with a 5 foot difference. July 15 of this year the city engineer sent me an email said, saying I, and I quote. I think it is the best interest of all parties the vacation line start 3 feet. Now he said in that email 3 feet. Not 5 feet. In back of their driveway. I am not confident the survey line is correct. I got a hold of the city engineer also through the assistant city engineer and said you have nothing, essentially you have nothing to back that up with. I know the surveyors that are involved. The survey is correct. I have a little bit of knowledge on surveying and on legal descriptions. I have given a number of seminars. I have written articles and chapters in books on all of these matters. I think I know what I’m talking about in real estate. Not necessarily on everything that Mr. Knutson does in municipal law. I don’t claim to be a municipal lawyer. I’m simply a little dirt attorney. Most people understand who Jim Neilson is. You can ask the surveyor for Mr. Undestad Rick Bloom what Jim Neilson knows and Rick Bloom knows me very well. When I heard about the 5 feet that had to be done the assistant city engineer on July 22, 2015 sent me an email saying that I had to have my surveyor draft a legal description for that. I said I don’t have to. I can draft it if I want to. I’m able to do it. I’m not going to do it on the 5 feet. I will have it done on the 1 feet which was done. I was not advised by any that this 5 foot setback would come until I was out of town. Actually out of the country. In the memorandum that you’ve received they’re referring to the city code 20-1122(1) which requires a minimum setback from the driveway to the property line. The code specifically says in subdivision 1, driveways shall be set back at least 10 feet from the side property line. You then have to define what a property line is and it’s very easy to think if you’ve got a square. That’s a lot. 200 feet on each side. That’s a square. The property lines are the north line, the south line, the east line, the west line. There is no property line being created by this vacation proceeding. The Boyum’s property line remains exactly as it was in 1990 when they bought. It’s a north, south, east and west line. That easement has nothing to do with a property line except the center line of Sunset Trail is both the property line of Boyum’s on the east and Undestad’s on the west. But by drafting a new description for a vacation that does not change a property line. Therefore this particular section doesn’t apply. Driveways shall be set back at least 10 feet from the side property lines. It is not a side property line. There is no logical reason that you have to have 5 feet. The staff is trying to show a code item that does refer to 10 feet. There is logic when I went through it with the assistant city engineer because if you have a lot, Lot 1 on one side and Lot 2 on the other side, the common line is in the middle. The city code says you cannot have your driveway 5, 10 feet from the property line. That’s in order to keep the driveways apart both on the east and the west so there is a purpose for that. There is no purpose for referring to an ordinance or a code referring to a property line where you do not have a property line. There is also a case, Village of Newport versus Taylor which specifically provides 4 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 that you cannot adversely possess an easement again because it is a, you can’t adversely possess against the city. I would request that you reconsider or consider simply taking one additional foot for the vacated property. Or the property that is not vacated. There is no reason that the party needs an additional 4 feet beyond the driveway. If there’s a question of throwing snow, that snow can be thrown to the south or it also can be thrown to the west which would be back on the property owners on Undestad’s property. It does not have to be thrown on the Boyum property. Do you have any questions? Mayor Laufenburger: Council, do you have any questions of Mr. Neilson at this time? Mr. Neilson I have just one. As I’m looking at the sheet that you gave to the council and to members of the staff here, your position is that the, I’m just going to call it a triangle which is on the southern portion of the easement that you would like to be vacated. You agree to have that triangle in place but you want the vertical measure. Let’s see, yeah. The vertical measure from the southwest corner of your property line to be roughly 4 feet less than the staff is advocating. Is that correct? Jim Neilson: That is correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Jim Neilson: And the legal description that is used by the surveyor goes from the north line to the quarter quarter south a particular distance, 251.25. That distance 251.25 is exactly one foot north of the northeasterly line of the black top driveway. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. And when this easement is vacated in your view, or in the view of your clients, then the Boyum’s will have full use of their property to the property line subject to city ordinances of course and with the exception that they would not have use of that yellow triangle, is that correct? Is that your interpretation? Jim Neilson: No Mr. Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Jim Neilson: The Boyum’s have full use of all of the east 25 feet of Sunset Trail. Going down to the south line of the Boyum property. The south line of the Boyum property has the bearing north 88 degrees, 50 minutes, 08 second west. Mayor Laufenburger: So you’re identifying that, that area which is the easement to be vacated. You’re identifying that as a part of Sunset Trail, is that correct? Jim Neilson: Yes. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. 5 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Jim Neilson: But the question I think goes to use. Mayor Laufenburger: Right. Jim Neilson: The property owner has a right to use all of his property. Mayor Laufenburger: Right. Jim Neilson: Which is to the west line or to the, what is, what used to be the center line of Sunset Trail and all the way down to the south line of Sunset Trail. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Jim Neilson: But the City would retain a public easement for road purposes over the portion that is in yellow which includes the 1 foot. Mayor Laufenburger: Gotch ya. Okay Mr. Neilson just a moment. Councilwoman Tjornhom you had a question or comment? Councilwoman Tjornhom: As we’re discussing property lines and all the stuff we’re discussing, can we put this map up on the monitor so we can all be on the, in the same area. In the same lines. That would help me a lot. Mayor Laufenburger: There we go. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Thank you. Thank you. So can we kind of go back and talk about what we just talked about? I’m sorry but it helps if you’re pointing it out too so everyone’s pointing it out. Mayor Laufenburger: Let me ask the question again then Mr. Neilson. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yes, thank you. Mayor Laufenburger: On the, that which is on the screen right now there’s an area on the lower left of your sheet of paper there kind of in yellow. And you are of the position that you would like that, that position in yellow or that part of the easement in yellow, you want that to be no more than 1 foot beyond the current driveway. Staff is recommending 5 feet beyond the current driveway, is that correct Mr. Neilson? Jim Neilson: That is correct Mr. Mayor. 6 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Alright. Okay. Mr. McDonald, did you have a comment? Question. Councilman McDonald: Yeah. Can you point out where the 1 foot and the 5 foot, what are we talking about based upon the yellow line? Where are those lines? Jim Neilson: On the survey there is an arrow that was provided by the surveyor. That arrow designates the line which is one foot northeasterly of the driveway. North of course is to the, this way. This is a north line. Northeast be it goes this way. This is a northeasterly line and it is, it’s in the southwest corner of the lot belonging to Boyum’s. Councilman McDonald: So the dashed line represents 1 foot off the driveway. What the City is asking for would be to move that 4 feet kind of to the northeast. Jim Neilson: That is correct. Councilman McDonald: And then you said something about the property owner is entitled to the full use of that. What are you proposing as far as the driveway then? Are you saying that the property owner could block the driveway or do something with that? Jim Neilson: No I am not. That is a, same as Sunset Trail. From the south line to the north line the east 25 feet is a public road. The public road means that if the city wanted to improve it they have the right to do so. They have an easement. But the property owns all of this property. The property owner owns it in fee. As long as a property owner does not impede the public from their use as a public road they can use that property any way they want to. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay Mr. Neilson let me stop you just for a moment if I may. Mr. Oehme if the action, if the council takes action to vacate this easement do then, does the City then give up it’s right to build a road in that area? Paul Oehme: Mayor that’s correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. So and we have already determined, have we not, that the City has no need to build a road on that easement. Paul Oehme: That’s staff’s recommendation and yes. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright. So Mr. Neilson just, we’re going to just roll the block forward a little bit here. There’s not going to be a road there north of that driveway so once this easement is vacated, and it looks like what’s in question is whether or not it’s going to be 1 feet, 3 feet, 5 feet, or 10 feet and that’s perhaps up to the council direction but the Boyum’s will have full use of their property up to their property line and there will be no easement. There will be no Sunset Trail built. Do your clients understand that? 7 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Jim Neilson: That is correct however that’s not a correct statement to the extent the City is then requiring that there be a 10 foot trail on the west side of their property. Same as you’ve required a 10 foot trail on the east side of Undestad’s property so the public still has a interest in finding in 20 feet. And my client is not objecting to that. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Just a moment then Mr. Neilson. Mr. McDonald, do you have a comment or question? Councilman McDonald: Yeah then I’ve got a question for you. If we agree that the triangle is still within an easement for a trail if the City wanted to build that then what difference does it make if we want a foot or 5 foot? Jim Neilson: Well you have it, you have the trail on the west 10 feet. The question is what the owner to the west is able to do on the additional 4 feet. Can they plant a tree? Apparently, at least I have been told that that has been tried. Can they put a fence on that 4 feet? Property is not owned by the owner of Lot 5, Block 1. It is owned by the Boyum’s. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Neilson just ask you to pause for a moment here. Kate was it your item when we vacated the property, the Undestad property? Kate Aanenson: No it was engineering’s. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay Mr. Oehme. The area on the screen that is marked in pink, has that easement been vacated? Paul Oehme: I’m not sure if the paperwork has all been… Mayor Laufenburger: But the action has been taken. Paul Oehme: Right. I don’t know if it’s been recorded. Mayor Laufenburger: So that means the council has essentially, we have acted to remove our claim on that property for both a road and a trail? Paul Oehme: So just for roadway. Mayor Laufenburger: Just for road purposes. Paul Oehme: Yep and then we dedicated, the council did dedicate the 10 foot trail easement on the Undestad property. 8 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. So that’s a 10 foot trail easement on the Undestad property and will we retain a 10 foot trail easement on the Boyum property as well? Paul Oehme: Well we’re requesting that a trail easement be recorded so there is, there’s not a trail easement currently. Mayor Laufenburger: There’s not, okay. Paul Oehme: Right. Mayor Laufenburger: But there will be a trail easement recorded on the Undestad property. Paul Oehme: That’s correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. And is it normal for us to ask for a trail easement of 10 feet along a property line for around the City? Paul Oehme: No. I mean it’s all depends upon the situation and what the city staff and the comp plan shows as needs for the city and public use. Mayor Laufenburger: But we would like to reserve the right to use 10 feet on the Undestad property and 10 feet on the Boyum property for a trail. This is a walking trail or a bike, a pedestrian trail that would connect the end of Sunset Trail with Power Hill Park. Paul Oehme: That’s correct. That’s the intent. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright. And do we have definitive plans. This may not be a question for you Mr. Oehme but for Mr. Hoffman. Do we have definitive plans to put a trail in there at this time? Todd Hoffman: No we do not. Simply our interest to maintain that. We have the opportunity to maintain a trail connection if one is needed in the future to protect the residents on Sunset Trail. Right now residents are allowed to walk across private property. Both children and family can walk across private property. Mayor Laufenburger: To access a park? Todd Hoffman: To Power Hill Park. That may not be the case in the future. Somebody might block that access. They might put a fence up. They might impede public access across private property. At that point then the City would retain the opportunity to go in and construct or improve that public trail easement to gain public access to the park. 9 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Mayor Laufenburger: Right. And in the meantime until we assume a trail easement is maintained, until that time who maintains? Who mows? Who cultivates? Who nurtures the land on that, in that trail easement? Todd Hoffman: The property owners. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. And we do nothing to impede them from doing so. If they wanted to plant a tree there they could. Todd Hoffman: Sure at the risk of… Mayor Laufenburger: Recognizing that if they did so and we chose to exercise our trail easement rights we could ask, we could take the tree down and build a trail. Todd Hoffman: Correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Alright. Councilman McDonald: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Laufenburger: Yes sir, Mr. McDonald. Councilman McDonald: I’m just wondering because I think it’d be nice if we could hear from Roger. A lot of things have been said about what the City could be facing if we don’t agree with all of this and I’d like to hear from counsel as to Mr. Knutson’s opinion. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Good suggestion. Roger Knutson: Mayor, members of the council. Let’s go back. The only issue for you tonight is how much of any of this should you vacate. That’s the issue. We’re not deciding whether there’s adverse possession or not. We’re not deciding anything else. Are you required to vacate it? No. Can you in your own judgment vacate it? Yes. That’s the simple issue. I don’t think we should get side tracked on all the other issues. As far as using a city easement, can we allow someone to use it for a driveway? Yeah. There’s case law in that. So I just wouldn’t get into all the other issues. If two neighbors want to get into the issue between themselves that’s fine but the issue tonight for us is do you want to vacate or do you not. If you want to vacate, how much do you want to vacate. That’s within your discretion. Mayor Laufenburger: Great clarification there Mr. Knutson. Mr. Gerhardt. Todd Gerhardt: So the item before council tonight Roger is to vacate everything in the cross hatched area. The yellow area is not being proposed to be vacated. 10 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Councilwoman Tjornhom: It’s not? Todd Gerhardt: It’s not being proposed to be vacated so the road right-of-way would remain there. Roger Knutson: And then you would get, then the proposal is in which you’re vacating you’ll get back a trail easement there too as I understand it. That’s one of the conditions. Todd Gerhardt: So call it an extension of Sunset Trail there that’s unimproved at this point. Mayor Laufenburger: Right. Todd Gerhardt: And Mr. Undestad is using that as a driveway. Access to Sunset Trail over top of a city roadway right-of-way. Councilwoman Ryan: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Ryan. Councilwoman Ryan: But the yellow triangle is on the property of the Boyum’s. As part of their property. I know it’s the easement that they’re asking to have vacated but their property is in that square. Todd Gerhardt: They have fee title to that land. However we have an easement that will remain over that land for roadway purposes. And a trail. Councilwoman Ryan: And Mr. Neilson said that his clients are willing to grant the trail easement, correct? Jim Neilson: That is correct. The trail easement was initially drafted by I believe the staff. Sent to me. I made a change. Was then sent to the city attorney. He made a change. I agreed with it so it’s all set so it’s essentially a condition that in vacating the Sunset Trail, the property owners have to give back to the City a trail easement over the west 10 feet. And the property owners are agreeable. Councilwoman Ryan: Thank you. And why is the City’s position that, is it so Mr. Undestad isn’t inconvenienced with a new driveway? I mean I. Mayor Laufenburger: Could I ask you to hold that question Councilwoman Ryan. Let’s finish the public hearing portion then we’ll direct that question to staff. Is that okay? Alright. Mr. Neilson is there any other comment that you wish to make at this time? 11 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Jim Neilson: One comment and the city attorney probably would realize this. All we really have to do is vacate all of Sunset Trail conditioned upon the property owners giving an easement for driveway purposes to Undestad. And in addition giving the trail easement to the City. Don’t have to, well. That would cover everything. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Alright. Thank you Mr. Neilson. Is there anybody else that would like to make comment during this public hearing on the vacation of this easement? Please step up to the microphone and state your name and address. Jim Boyum: I’m Jim Boyum. My wife Roseanne. We live at 8805 Sunset Trail and I’d like to have that map again. We are the most affected by this. Mayor Laufenburger: Just wait until we have this positioned. Can you, okay. Very well. There, that’s. There you go, thank you. Now speak directly into the microphone Mr. Boyum. Jim Boyum: Can I borrow a pen? This line, this point to this point is all the road frontage we have. He is right now using three-fourths of our road frontage. Our lot, out of the 4 lots in that intersection our’s is the only one that does not have a lot line issue. This is a clean lot. He is over our lot when he should be coming through another area. That is all our road frontage. Mayor Laufenburger: Is there anything else you’d like to say Mr. Boyum? Jim Boyum: Well I needed to say that so I don’t know where I’m going. Thank you. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. Boyum. Is there anybody else who would like to speak at this time? Okay, I will close the public hearing and bring this back to council for comment or question. Councilman McDonald: Mr. Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. McDonald. Councilman McDonald: I have a question for Mr. Oehme. Okay right now they’re willing to agree to a 1 foot I guess extension off of the driveway. You’re asking for 5. Can you explain to me why 5 and does that 5 also extend into what was the pink area which I guess is Mr. Undestad’s part of the road that was already vacated. Paul Oehme: Sure Councilmember McDonald. So Mr. Neilson had indicated his client would be willing to go with 2 feet. Right now the 2 feet in back of the driveway, right now the documentation, the description is for 1 foot in back of the driveway. Staff’s recommendation is to go 5 feet in back of the driveway. It’s back to the city code. City code really doesn’t reference a, you know this situation so we try to make an interpretation of it from the code 20- 1122 where you know side, driveways from side yards should be 10 foot back. This is a little bit 12 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 unique situation. We think reasonable use of his, of the driveway and future maintenance considerations, those type of things we, staff just feels the 5 foot would be appropriate at this location so that’s staff’s recommendation. Councilman McDonald: Is that 5 foot based upon you know you go to another lot where you put a house and you do a driveway, what are our setbacks there? Paul Oehme: Right so if it’s a new development you know and it’s a normal platted lot our code states it should be 10 foot. The driveway should be 10 foot from the property line. Councilman McDonald: Okay and so at this point we’re asking for 5 foot and that 5 foot would also run again into Mr. Undestad’s because part of what was vacated before we reserved for a trail. Paul Oehme: Right. It would be a little bit combined in that area. It’s just basically moving, if I can maybe just go back to the computer here. So this is basically Mr. Neilson’s drawing here so basically this is a driveway line. The vacation line right now is at 1 foot behind, all we’re recommending is that this dashed line here be moved up another 4 feet paralleling the driveway right there. That’s basically what staff’s recommendation is. So basically the dashed line, or the hatched in area would be moved up a little bit farther up, yeah. Councilman McDonald: Okay, and that’s currently our easement within that area. We’ve currently got an easement there and what we’re doing now is we’re saying okay we’re going to give part of it back because we’re not going to give it all back. Paul Oehme: Right. I mean for, you know for normal use of the driveway and access that’s staff’s recommendation. There is, again there is the vacation of the roadway easement. That would be all vacated here. The only portion that wouldn’t be vacated again is the driveway plus whatever the footage in back of the driveway would be so Mr. Boyum would still have use of his property. Again it’s just encumbered by that right-of-way easement. Councilman McDonald: Okay and I guess for Mr. Knutson, the City has great latitude as to how much of an easement, if we’re going to vacate, that we want to give back, we can give it all back. We can retain part of it. That’s pretty much whatever we want to do, is that correct? Roger Knutson: That’s correct. Councilman McDonald: Okay. No further questions Mr. Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you. Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Paul, Kate, both of you. What are the implications of both scenarios? If we give the vacation that the Boyer’s want. Or Boyum’s want. 13 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Paul Oehme: Boyum’s. Councilwoman Tjornhom: What are the implications to the neighbor and vice versa? Paul Oehme: Sure. And you know if, say if they’re a 5 foot, if the line moves up another 4 feet from it’s current location I think you know there wouldn’t be as much, potentially as much conflict in the future with maintenance or other roadway, or the driveway maintenance or things getting on Mr. Boyum’s property outside of the roadway easement so we’re just trying to look out in the future and anticipate what potentially could or could not happen. That’s and I think that’s consistent with how the code reads with the 10 foot setback from driveways to property lines as it currently states. So if that answers your question. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Another question. Paul Oehme: Okay. Councilwoman Tjornhom: The proposed motion is that this item be tabled so staff has more time and is that something you still recommend or after what you hear tonight or what do you think? Paul Oehme: Yep exactly. So the motion tonight is again to hold the public hearing. We do not have a description for either a 5 foot setback from the driveway or a 2 foot setback from the driveway. All we have right now is a 1 foot setback from the driveway so it was in talking to the city attorney it’s, it would be better if we had that description to go into the resolution at this time prior to approval by the council. So we’d like to have a description, a recommendation by the council of what vacation line it should be before the resolution is drafted and brought before you. Typically we have that description already done and resolution, within the resolution within the packet but currently we do not. Councilwoman Tjornhom: And is this issue time sensitive at all? Paul Oehme: Not from a city standpoint and I don’t think it is from a property owner standpoint but I can let them speak to that. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Thank you. Jim Neilson: Mr. Mayor may I correct one statement that was presented? Mayor Laufenburger: Yes Mr. Neilson, you can come forward please. Jim Neilson: Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. Jim Neilson again. I think there was a misunderstanding of what Mr. Oehme stated regarding the Boyum’s agreeing to a 2 foot setback. 14 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 I specifically said I would attempt to have my clients agree to 2 feet. Going from 1, instead of 1 to 5 I said let’s do 2. That’s what I said. That’s not what my client said and I then asked my client and answer came back no. Mayor Laufenburger: So your position remains Mr. Neilson, or that of your client is that you would agree to a 1 foot setback from the existing driveway versus the 5 foot, is that correct? Jim Neilson: That is correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, thank you Mr. Neilson. Did you have another question Councilwoman Tjornhom? Councilwoman Ryan did you have a question? Councilwoman Ryan: Yes I would like to ask, you know the question that I asked previously. Mayor Laufenburger: There you go. Councilwoman Ryan: The, for consistency purposes because I did when I was looking at this item on the agenda I did go back to read the Minutes from the prior meeting and I guess I, to remain consistent in treating both property owners the same you know we granted the full easement from the Undestad property, or vacated that and so they’re looking for the same portion vacated. Have agreed to allow for the trail easement. The 10 foot trail easement so other than the inconvenience or the I guess the challenges around Mr. Undestad accessing his property differently, I mean is that the only reason that staff makes this recommendation is to accommodate the property to the west? Paul Oehme: That’s correct. I mean basically the driveway encumbers Mr. Boyum’s property. If that driveway wouldn’t you know extend past Mr. Undestad’s property and then go on the currently the dedicated right-of-way on Boyum’s property we wouldn’t be discussing this right now. Councilwoman Ryan: And would Mr. Undestad be able to access his property with a 1 foot easement or 1 foot. Paul Oehme: So 1 foot setback, he would but again its staff, and based upon city codes and the interpretation, you know typically you’d like to see some setback from the driveway to an easement line or a property line, those type of things so just for maintenance and reasonable use of that driveway. Councilwoman Ryan: But he could still access his property off of a 1 foot and there isn’t anything right now that’s set, we don’t have any definitive code other than the one that you’re referencing of the 10 foot to the property line but there isn’t anything that says 1, 2, 3, 4, 5? Paul Oehme: No. 15 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Councilwoman Ryan: And with 1 foot he could still get into his property. Paul Oehme: Yeah absolutely, yep. Councilwoman Ryan: Okay, that’s it. Thank you. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Campion, did you have any questions or comments? Councilman Campion: I have one question. It’s a curiosity if we, do we know how long the Undestad, the driveway has been in its location? Is that relatively new or has that been there? Paul Oehme: It’s been there a while and our best estimate is 1987 when that house went in and the driveway went in so. Councilman Campion: Okay. Mayor Laufenburger: Anything else Mr. Campion? Councilman Campion: I guess my comment or concern or question is if, you know if we do limit it at a 1 foot setback from the edge of the driveway, I mean should we expect complaints you know if the driveway is plowed and the snow goes over 1 foot? I would assume that’s what you’re alluding to in maintenance, right? Paul Oehme: Normal use maintenance, that’s our concern. Councilman Campion: Okay. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Oehme I, I have a couple questions. Would you say that this, this document that Mr. Neilson, would you say it accurately reflects the current driveway make up in this area? Paul Oehme: I would. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. So on this sheet of paper there’s a word that says gravel surface and it looks like that gravel surface goes across the southern boundary of the Boyum property. Whose property is that? Paul Oehme: I believe that’s Mr. Undestad’s property too. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. So Mr. Boyum is actually at present, according to this he has access across a portion of Mr. Undestad’s property and a portion of his own in order to access his property, is that correct? 16 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Paul Oehme: That’s the way it appears. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Mr. Neilson, could I ask you to step to the mic? Would you say that’s an accurate statement that I just made that a portion of the drawing which shows gravel surface, a portion of that gravel surface goes across property that is not Mr. Boyum’s? Jim Neilson: Mr. Mayor that is correct. It goes across a portion of the northwest corner of Undestad’s property to the south of Boyum’s property. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Mr. Neilson. Jim Neilson: I have already discussed that with the Boyum’s. The Boyum’s are able to simply push their gravel surface to the northwest so it’s completely off of Undestad’s property. Mayor Laufenburger: Well I wasn’t suggesting that. My follow up question to you Mr. Neilson is that portion of the driveway, has that caused any tension between Mr. Boyum, the Boyum’s and the Undestad’s as far as you know? Jim Neilson: I have not heard anything, no. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, thank you Mr. Neilson. Mr. Oehme, how wide is that checkered area called easement to be vacated? Is that 25 feet? Paul Oehme: That’s correct. Mayor Laufenburger: So it looks like we’re talking about maybe 120 square feet of yard. The difference between 1 foot versus 5 feet, is that correct? Paul Oehme: Yeah pretty close, yep. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Is there any reason why we do not need to retake the portion of Mr. Undestad’s pink drawn property and keep that as part of a, part of an easement to project that driveway? Paul Oehme: The pink area on Mr. Undestad’s property, that’s a private drive. There’s really no public purpose for that so that’s why staff felt comfortable vacating the right-of-way, road right- of-way that’s shown in pink on this drawing. Mayor Laufenburger: So essentially that’s, he’s using his property the way he chooses. Paul Oehme: That’s correct. 17 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Mayor Laufenburger: So what we are doing is we are protecting, we in this action either 1 foot or 5 foot, we’re essentially protecting that driveway access onto the property at Mr. Undestad at the west side of that property line, that’s really what we’re doing right? Paul Oehme: That’s correct and for normal routine maintenance and reasonable use. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Knutson did you want to make a comment about that? Roger Knutson: No. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Gerhardt you have your gun up there. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. The reason we’re keeping the yellow portion is for access if and when a trail is to be built along there. Mayor Laufenburger: Well we could, isn’t it true that we could vacate that entire rectangle from the north to the south and we still protect the building of a trail? Isn’t that true Mr. Oehme? Todd Gerhardt: You can. Only if the driveway would be relocated into the future. Because once you vacate that you would have a trail that would go over top of his driveway so in doing it like this, if the City should improve, make a cul-de-sac we could use that portion of street right- of-way and then start the trail. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, well I understand what you’re saying but in point of fact what we’re really doing by not giving a vacation of the entire easement, we’re essentially protecting the presence of that driveway. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah and for the basis of as Paul mentioned the utility pole and is there an electrical transformer there too? Mayor Laufenburger: Did you have a picture of that utility pole Paul? I think you did. Paul Oehme: I did right here so. Mayor Laufenburger: Yeah there it is. Paul Oehme: So this is looking basically, say northwest onto Mr. Undestad’s property. Here’s the power pole so the property line comes someplace in that location. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Alright is there any other question or comment? Let’s restate what Mr. Knutson, Mr. Knutson can you restate what the action that we are looking at right now tonight? 18 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Roger Knutson: The recommended action would be to decide how much, if any of this easement you’re willing to vacate. That is the question. Since we don’t have legal descriptions for all the possibilities the recommendation is that one, you close the public hearing. And two, direct staff to bring back to you prepared resolution showing the vacation of what. Everything? Just leaving the yellow. The yellow plus 1. The yellow plus 5. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright. And I believe I did close the public hearing. I think I’ve already directed that so we’re out of the public hearing. We’re in council so the, and Mr. Knutson does, does this require a voted action by the council to direct staff to execute a resolution of either 1 foot separation or 5 foot or 3 feet or 10? Roger Knutson: Staff is looking for your direction as to what you want so they can bring back a prepared resolution for your adoption. Mayor Laufenburger: For our final action. Roger Knutson: For your final action. It will have to come back to you the final, once the resolution is prepared so what you want to do is give staff direction. Do you want to vacate nothing? All of it? Just the, everything but the yellow? Everything but the yellow plus one? Everything but the yellow plus 5? I think those are the options. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, thank you Mr. Knutson. I think I’d like to hear comments from council. You’ve had a chance to hear from the public. From the property owner. From his lawyer. You’ve heard from Mr. Oehme some of the arguments. I’m interested in kind of achieving some kind of consensus on what the council would like to direct staff. Anybody care to offer an opening comment? Councilwoman Tjornhom: I will Mr. Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: I think I am comfortable giving this back to staff as they recommended for a couple of reasons. For one as they stated legal descriptions and so forth when it comes to engineering and drawing lines and having things recorded correctly but also I just think that there’s always been a contentious kind of feeling between the two neighbors and I would hope that maybe with that time, staff time, time given to staff that maybe between the Undestad’s and the Boyum’s and their attorneys that maybe something can be worked out between them where council doesn’t have to necessarily decide what’s going to happen with these lines for the rest of their lives. Or living in these spaces. Since it’s not time sensitive I would hope then that this could be resolved without council having to intervene. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Councilwoman Tjornhom. Anybody else? 19 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Councilman McDonald: Yeah I’ll go Mr. Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. McDonald. Councilman McDonald: Yeah I too am comfortable with giving this back to staff. I mean we’ve already gotten the hidden threat of a lawsuit no matter what we do. We don’t have to vacate any of the property. We can keep it. I think that’s an option we ought to look at and at that point that takes part of this away and maybe gives incentive to the parties to try to come up with a resolution and then re-approach the City with a consensus as to what’s the best approach for doing this. So in the meantime I think the City should stay out of the middle of all this and I’m in favor of not doing a vacation of that particular easement at this time. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, thank you Mr. McDonald. Anybody else care to make a comment? Councilwoman Ryan: Mr. Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Sure, Councilwoman Ryan. Councilwoman Ryan: I too am comfortable giving it back to staff to you know keep working through it. Working through it with the residents but I also heard Mr. Knutson saying that we also could possibly make a recommendation or share our thoughts and direction with staff and you know I do believe that the residents look for consistency and the decisions that council makes and to be treated equally when they, when they’re talking about property lines or vacation of easements and again in looking back at the process that Mr. Undestad went through and the, in the somewhat ease in which it went through council in terms of granting the vacation of the property or the easement, it’s something that I think that we should work towards. I understand that, the challenges with, if it’s snow clearing snow from a driveway and if that’s causing friction you know that’s something that the property owners have to work through but I think we should look for the, if you had initially suggested 3 feet. You know maybe look at the 1, 2, 3 feet versus the 5 or 10 foot setback for the, that small portion of driveway for Mr. Undestad so you know turn it back it over to staff to work on but I do support granting the vacation of that easement and I would look to limit the setback for the driveway. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Councilwoman Ryan. Mr. Campion did you want, you don’t have to but would you like to make a comment? Councilman Campion: No I’m also comfortable turning it back over to staff. I would prefer to see the neighbors work it out amicably rather than drawing the line here. And if it does come back to us and it is not settled I would like to hear more about the hardship that, you know whatever the recommendation, if it’s 3 feet or 5 feet and if that is not agreed to I would like to hear more about what, you know what hardship is being caused if the line is drawn there. 20 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. Campion. This is, this is quite unique and first of all I want to thank Mr. Neilson and your clients for bringing some clarity to this situation that I was not fully aware of but I, people may have heard me say this before. We do not have any ordinances on harmonious relationships between neighbors. I wish we did but we don’t so I think the suggestion that Councilwoman Tjornhom supported by Mr. McDonald and also supported by Councilwoman Ryan and Mr. Campion that we ask, we ask these property owners to come back to us with an agreeable solution. By the way I think 5 feet is not enough to cover all the snow that Chanhassen could get. I’m not sure 15 feet would cover it frankly so any decision that we make, if it does not have the support of the current property owners then I think we are, we as a council are attempting to enforce harmony when that’s not really our responsibility so my direction, or the council’s direction Mr. Oehme is that we would like you to take some time since this is not a time sensitive issue. I’m not prepared to ask this council to make a decision on what that distance is. I think there is a distance that will become agreeable and I think it’s important to note that in this area of the city there is some cooperation that’s going on right now. You know Mr. and Mrs. Boyum are using a little bit of Mr. Undestad’s property for their driveway. I’d like them to continue to do that. Mr. Undestad uses a portion of Mr. Boyum’s fee title property for his driveway. I’d like to see, I think what we’re saying is using a biblical gesture here, we’re not prepared to cut this baby in half at this time so we would like to, we would like to direct staff to come back with a legal description of the easement to be vacated that is acceptable to both parties. And if that’s not possible then we as a council will be forced to make a decision that we’d probably rather not make but we will. Mr. Knutson your thoughts on that. Roger Knutson: Well I have nothing to add Mayor. I think you said it well. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, thank you. Mr. Oehme do you understand the direction? Alright, okay. Thank you very much. Thank you to the public for making comments. We’re going to move to our next item. Jim Neilson: Thank you Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council for hearing us. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. Neilson. Mr. Oehme do we need, do we need a, no motion is made. Been made so we do not need to table any motion. We’re simply directing staff. Are we legal Mr. Knutson? Roger Knutson: Very legal Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright. So we’re okay. Next item on the agenda is new business item G-1. 21 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 LAMETTRY’S COLLISION, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF AUDUBON ROAD AT MOTORPLEX COURT, APPLICANT/OWNER: RICK LAMETTRY: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW MULTIPLE STRUCTURES ON A SINGLE LOT AND TO PERMIT DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT. Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor, members of the City Council. This item did appear before st the Planning Commission on July 21. At that time the commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval. They also looked at some revised site plans that were handed out that night so those were so noted and are included in this packet. The subject site is located at 1650 and 1651 Motorplex Court. This is private property. It’s guided and zoned office industrial and its part of the Bluff Creek Overlay District. The entire property is 23 acres. A lot of that acreage is actually encumbered in the Bluff Creek Overlay District. Put the laser pointer on. It’s easier to, so there’s the Bluff Creek Overlay District so these are the two properties that we are talking about. As a part of this one of the things that we talked about to meet the new watershed district rules would be that they’re dedicating this property here so that makes it in compliance with the total maximum daily load requirements. In addition it meets the goals that we have for the Overlay District and that would be dedication of that property so that would be an area that the city wanted to do some improvements or enhancement in that area that we would do that. Just a little bit of history on that. This area down in here was always a concern of some of the neighbors down in there wondering if there would be uses down there so having that control point or access to that property alleviates some of those concerns when there’s activity that could potentially spill off from over here down there so that would be a part of this. The dedication of that property. So there’s a little bit of history on the Motorplex itself. There was 12 buildings that were approved which the original site plan including a club house, 11 storage buildings and the property then that we’re talking about tonight would be these 2 buildings here. As the City had always envisioned working with the applicant of the Auto Motorplex we saw that it’s complimentary to the Auto Motorplex, kind of auto related type uses on those northerly portions. I just want to add too, I did include in your packet some of the comments that we received from some of the neighbors. Not too many of those showed up at the Planning Commission. We’ve been addressing those separately. Bob Generous on the planning staff, Chief Johnson and Eric Kittelson from the Carver County Sheriff’s Office has been working with them, Motorplex itself to try to kind of work to resolve some of these issues regarding some of the parking as you saw in the photos and parking on Audubon. In addition with those 2 buildings going in they’re losing some of that parking space so we’re working on resolving those so I just want to make sure that that’s being tracked separately from this application. So with the site plan itself the, which was originally approved we again as we said envisioned a couple of buildings on that north side so now they’re coming forward. Because it’s a single lot, as I said it’s all part of the wetlands one piece and the two parcels are split by the private street, it does require a conditional use permit for building within the overlay district and to have two structures on one lot. So the site plan also is included as your action and that’s to review the site material itself. Again as I stated earlier one of the biggest issues we had was kind of blending the storage units with the maintenance part of the buildings so that was something that was actually kind of resolved at the 22 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Planning Commission and I’ll go through that in a little bit more detail. So as I stated earlier the conditional use for grouping two buildings on a single parcel is a conditional use permit and then also prior to all subdivisions, site plans, alteration within the Bluff Creek Overlay District is also a conditional use so there’s two actual conditional uses here. So the site plan itself, there’s two buildings. One on the north and one of the south. Again same parcel. 18,290 square feet with 3 storage garages. Again that’s the big part of the operations down there is the storage of the vehicles and then the building to the south will have 9 garages and 22,000 square feet. So this is the architecture of the building. Now if you recall these are kind of when we worked through these pre-fab buildings where they put architectural enhancements on the outside so looking at those buildings we went through a lot of iterations with the architects trying to match the two, kind of the more industrial look with the enhanced features of the storage bay units so kind of came through a blend. Again the highly articulated views are the ones facing the road. They’ll be coming off of that private street and those will be the enhanced views. On the back side those would be internal views which wouldn’t be seen from the public. So this is the building on the south side. The grading of the property is pretty straight forward. There are some retaining walls on the site I wanted to point out and those would be on this side up here there is an 8 foot, 60 foot long retaining wall kind of wraps this. If you recall it’s challenging coming up from Audubon. They drop down into the site and then on the south side there’s a retaining walls here and those are two retaining walls. One 4 and 5 feet and 90 feet in length and then there’s another retaining wall along this section too so again that’s to work the grades. We are looking at a trail connecting the property going north. There’s a sidewalk along the other side of Audubon so that would take you back up to the intersection and you could cross and go south onto Audubon. Utilities, sewer and water is available to the site. Will be extended to both buildings. Here you can see a little bit better the auto body and then with the storage units. Again the auto body and then storage units wrapping around those so there are some minor tweaks to the building that’s including landscaping. Just some minor modifications that we’re confident that they can meet all those standards so again taking what we had originally envisioned and that’s kind of auto related as complimentary to the uses going on there and then with the addition of providing some additional storage units for the cars. So with that it does meet the city code. We put conditions of approval in there. We will be doing a site plan agreement that we’ll have the applicant do. Again there’s no private improvements on this. Obviously they’d have to get a building permit and pay the sewer and water connection fees but with that we are recommending approval and the conditional use subject to the findings in the staff report and I’d be happy to answer any questions that you have. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Ms. Aanenson. Council members any questions for staff? Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Kate was this addition always in the plan? Kate Aanenson: Yes. Yes it was. We always envisioned something auto related up in the top. I think we didn’t want to see just all storage units up there. Something that would compliment some of the uses down there where they can work on their cars and meet some of their needs 23 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 internally so again the, anything that would, activity wise the way the building’s oriented I think it’s going to be well suited for the area. Councilwoman Tjornhom: And no concerns with the traffic? Kate Aanenson: No. I think if anything because of some of the events they have there it’s going to eliminate some of that parking space and some of that access so we’re going to continue to work on that. I think that’s really separate from those larger events that they’re having are separate from the business activity that they’re having here because I think a lot of that will probably be internal from some of the attendants that are already there. Mayor Laufenburger: Any other questions? Councilwoman Ryan. Councilwoman Ryan: Kate I just have a couple that just jumped off when I was reading through some things. A gentleman wrote in and asked about you know keeping the same look as a horse stable. What was, could you just, what was your response to that in terms of building materials? Has it just changed over the years? Could you just explain that? Kate Aanenson: Well if you look at the pitch of the roof, so they’re kind of like what we’ve done in the park building which is like a Lester building and they’ve actually added on the enhancements to get a more residential look. If you look at traditional storage units they’re pretty much a flat roof. If you’ve ever looked at the one that’s on Highway 5 so when you looked at the Autoplex and storing a car in there it became a bigger building with a bay window. It seemed pretty sterile just to put it that way so at that time, because there were so many and the staff really wanted to have a little bit more architectural design to them. Obviously the buildings have a lot more value than a traditional storage unit so that was the intent to carry that out. So when we got up to this phase up here, that comment reflected that we went through 3 or 4 different iterations and design. The first ones were not the best so I think we’ve really moved in the right direction. We’ve had, this is like the third plus one of design so I think we’ve met the concerns that the residents have regarding design because we concurred with that the first drawings. Councilwoman Ryan: Okay great. Kate Aanenson: And that’s what went out in the website so that’s what people are responding to. Councilwoman Ryan: Okay perfect. And then just in terms of there was a comment about the commitment or that the lighting plans will comply with ordinances. Have you received all that information? Kate Aanenson: Yep, that’s one of the conditions of the plan. Again that’s kind of being that good neighbor because you’re up higher there and there’s visual impact to those residents that show below the Bluff Creek so we’ll make sure that our ordinance does require that they be 24 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 down lit and that there’s no spillover onto adjoining properties so we’ll make sure that they give us the photometric plan on that. Councilwoman Ryan: Great. And then another thing that I read was, it said that the proposal exceeds over 1 acre of disturbance for erosion. So who oversees that? Is that something the City manages? Kate Aanenson: Yes. Yep as part of their approvals to go through the watershed district and the like and so as a part of their site plan approval they’ll have to give all that documentation will have to be shown that they’ve met that before they’ll be issued a permit to build. Councilwoman Ryan: Okay. Two more to go. Okay and then in terms of traffic it said that, or my question is what role does City play in enforcing that the two businesses, there was a mention about entering into some sort of a cross access agreement. Could you explain that please? Kate Aanenson: Sure. This is a private street and let’s see if I can get the best on that. This is the street that they come in off of. It’s all under one parcel. If they became separate owners then you wouldn’t someone to block somebody else off. It’s all part of, there’s a HOA that manages these buildings but we want to make sure that these are also have a right to use, continue to use that street and Motorplex Court that comes down here so they will be accessing that. Councilwoman Ryan: So in case it changed ownership it’s already in place. Kate Aanenson: Correct. So it will run with the property. Councilwoman Ryan: Okay. And my last question, you mentioned about on the south side of the property the vehicles backing out of unit 1 don’t have adequate space to turn around. Has this been addressed? Kate Aanenson: Yeah so we haven’t seen the changes there. Willing to accommodate so it’s just right through here it’s tight so they’re working to resolve that one so that also will be, they’ll have to give us revised plans before we sign off on that too. Councilwoman Ryan: Okay great, thank you. Kate Aanenson: You’re welcome. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Councilwoman Ryan. Any other questions or comments? Councilman McDonald: Mr. Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Councilman McDonald. 25 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Councilman McDonald: Kate you had mentioned that they are going to give us what, access on the southwest corner down there around Bluff Creek. What are we looking to do there with that area? That area right there. Kate Aanenson: So as you recall we have the Bluff Creek corridor plan and so our original intention when we went through that, we had two choices. One is to try to get all that property, purchase all that property but what the City Council chose to do is work on each project individually to find out if there’s parcels that we could get through density transfer. We talked about that on some projects. Or dedication so in this circumstance this is the last piece that we could, it’s tied to the other as a part of that 23 acres so through dedication of that they’re meeting some of their storm water management requirements. In addition it’s fulfilling some of those goals of the Bluff Creek corridor as that starting up at Minnewashta going all the way down to the Minnesota River that open corridor that we’ve talked about. In doing some enhancements and vistas so in looking at this trail on the north side too you’ve got, you’re looking down through this corridor here so it’s part of that so it does help with their requirements for storm water. Councilman McDonald: So we have any plans to put any trails down in there? Kate Aanenson: I can ask Mr. Hoffman. I don’t believe so. It’s just an open space. There might be some future improvements to, we’ve done some re-meandering of the creek in certain areas to improve enhancements. Some additional capacity for storm water if that’s something that they wanted to consider in the future. Councilman McDonald: Okay thank you. Mayor Laufenburger: Anybody else? Kate is this, is the Motorplex property, is it fully fenced for security do you know? I think it is. Kate Aanenson: I believe the majority of it is yes. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay so this, these two, these two buildings right on Audubon they will not be inside the fence. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Laufenburger: They will be outside right? Kate Aanenson: Yep. Mayor Laufenburger: And both of these buildings are a part of the LaMettry Collision correct? Kate Aanenson: (Yes). 26 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. And did you mention that Motorplex Drive, is that a private street? Kate Aanenson: That’s a private street. Mayor Laufenburger: Private street, okay. Alright. Just a, is the applicant with us tonight? Kate Aanenson: Yes. Mayor Laufenburger: We’d like to give an opportunity for the applicant to address the council if you’d like. Ask you to state your name and address please. Richard LaMettry: Okay good evening Mayor and council people. My name is Richard LaMettry. I’m the chief managing member of the LLC that owns the property. I’m here to answer any questions you have. There really isn’t, pretty self explanatory so. Mayor Laufenburger: Sure. Mr. LaMettry can you just tell us a little bit about your business? You have a few of these LaMettry Collision’s around. Richard LaMettry: This will be number 10. Mayor Laufenburger: Number 10. How long have you been in business Mr. LaMettry? Richard LaMettry: Since I was 18 years old. Mayor Laufenburger: So a couple years huh? Richard LaMettry: Probably I don’t know 19, well I started playing with cars in 1968. Mayor Laufenburger: Good, good. Well I have personal experience with LaMettry Collision. I think your business is a very reputable business. I’m sorry that I’ve had personal experience with LaMettry but it’s been good and I know that you’re also a contributor to the community. You do a lot of work through the Chanhassen Beyond the Yellow Ribbon committee preparing automobiles for giving to families of service members so it’s important that we as a council recognize that you’re not just coming into the community as a business but you’re here to support this community and we thank you for that Mr. LaMettry. Richard LaMettry: Thank you. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, thank you very much. Any other comments or questions or motion? Councilman McDonald: I’ll make a motion Mr. Mayor. 27 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. McDonald. Councilman McDonald: The Chanhassen City Council approves the site plan and conditional use permit subject to conditions in the staff report and adopts the Findings of Fact. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. McDonald. Is there a second? Councilman Campion: Second. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. Campion. Any further discussion? Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded that the City Council approve the site plan and conditional use permit subject to the following conditions and adopts the attached findings of fact and recommendation: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1.Access must be maintained for the property to the rear (Autobahn Motorplex). If not currently in place, an access and maintenance agreement must be recorded. 2.That portion of the parcel located westerly and containing the Bluff Creek Overlay District shall be dedicated to the city. SITE PLAN Building: 1.The buildings are required to have an automatic fire extinguishing system. 2.The buildings are required to have individual water and sewer connections. 3.Building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. 4.Retaining walls over four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and a permit must be obtained prior to construction. 5.Detailed occupancy and accessibility-related requirements will be addressed when complete building plans are submitted. 6.The owner and/or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures. Fire Marshal: 28 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 1.A three-foot clear space shall be maintained around all fire hydrants. 2.Additional fire hydrants will be required (one for each building). Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact locations. Engineering: 1.Minor modifications to the grading plan are needed to clarify the proposed grades, specifically: a.The proposed 952 foot contour northwest of the entrance to Audubon Road closes in on itself, and b.The proposed 944 foot contour at the south site’s middle entrance. 2.The eastern retaining wall on the south site must not encroach into the adjacent drainage and utility easement. 3.LaMettry’s and Auto Motorplex must enter into a cross-access agreement for the existing private street. Staff recommends that this agreement address maintenance responsibilities and costs. 4.On the south site, the drive aisle between the east of the building and the parallel parking must be at least 22 feet wide. 5.On the south site, ensure that there is adequate space for vehicles backing out of Unit #1. 6.A building permit is required to extend the sewer and water services to each of the buildings; a plumbing inspector shall inspect the connections. Environmental Resources: 1.All transplanted trees shall be warranted for one year from the time the overall landscaping is complete. Any trees that do not show 75% canopy at the end of warranty shall be replaced with new trees. 2.Minimum bufferyard requirements must be met. Planning: 1.The developer shall provide a sidewalk connection from Motorplex Court to Park Road. 2.The applicant shall prepare a lighting plan with photometrics prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3.The applicant shall provide staff with a description of the sign locations for both buildings and monument sign. 29 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 4.The applicant’s architect shall work with staff to develop transitions between the different materials and the architectural detailing of the buildings as shown on plans dated received July 20, 2015 to make them compatible with the entire development. Water Resources: 1.A standalone Surface Water Pollution Prevention Plan with all elements required in Parts III and IV of the NPDES Construction permit shall be prepared and submitted to the city for review and approval prior to any earth disturbing activities. 2.The city-developed maintenance agreement shall be revised accordingly, executed and recorded against the property. 3.The applicant shall develop, or cause to be developed, an operations and maintenance manual which shall specify anticipated inspection and maintenance, as well as schedule, necessary in order to ensure there is not significant decreases in the practices’ efficacies. This operations and maintenance manual shall be referenced in the maintenance agreement. 4.The applicant must demonstrate that the required 90% reduction in TSS will result from the proposed storm water best management practices using P8, the MIDS calculator or another approved methodology. 5.The applicant shall provide documentation that adequate pretreatment is provided for the Cultec Recharger™ systems or that pretreatment is not required per the manufacturer’s specifications. 6.Surface Water connection fees in the amount of $118,134.00 will be due with final approval and prior to being issued a certificate of occupancy. In lieu of these fees, that portion of the parcel located westerly and containing the Bluff Creek Overlay District may be given a unique PID and dedicated to the city. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Kate and thank you Mr. LaMettry. We wish you good success. Richard LaMettry: Thank you. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Gerhardt, do you have anything to report now that you’re finally back in town again? Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. Nice to see Kerber Boulevard with first wear course going down and later this week we should see all of Carver Beach with the first wear course going down also. I also have the Carver County Leaders Group tomorrow at 7:30 at Carver County Courthouse and 30 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 going to talk about transportation funding and all the cities and townships and county working together to try to find a way to fund more street projects in Carver County. And then on Friday we have the 112 Leaders meeting with school district and all the cities and mayors of everybody in School District 112 so that’s all I have. Mayor Laufenburger: Very good. Mr. Oehme is there anything different to report on specifically 101 and the opening of the modified round about down there? Paul Oehme: No. Talking to MnDOT and Carver County it seems like traffic at the temporary intersection is performing and working out well temporarily. That temporary signal will be up until the bridge is opened at the end of November so little longer to just go through that circuitous alignment that currently exists today. They are wrapping up the piles, piling for the bridge right now too so that’s a huge step in the right direction. Wrapping that up. I’m sure the neighbors in the area will be happy to hear, not hear the piling from now on so. Mayor Laufenburger: How about west on Flying Cloud or 61 from Great, from 101 west? Is that, how’s that working? Paul Oehme: That’s progressing as planned right now. I was down there today and they’re about half way done with the muck operation so from Bluff Creek Drive going to 101 going north they’ve about halfway done with that. That operation right now. They’re still on track to open that section of roadway into Chaska by the end of September. Mayor Laufenburger: Wonderful, okay. Alright, thank you Mr. Oehme. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. Mayor Laufenburger: Any council presentations? Anybody want to talk about National Night Out? Councilwoman Tjornhom: I would love to talk about National Night Out. Mayor Laufenburger: Perfect. Councilwoman Tjornhom anything, any comment you wanted to make? Councilwoman Tjornhom: You know I’m glad that no one’s here from the sheriff’s department tonight because for the first night in like what, 13 years I was with the fire department. People love the fire department. You show up and kids are running to the car and it’s just you know, you feel so great that you’re with the fire department. And it was a beautiful night and it was really, really good and I just want to say thank you to the residents too because this is the first time, second time they’ve had a food drive and what was donated I think was over 1,000 pounds of food which is amazing so once again the residents of Chanhassen came through in a big way and they had a great time at their parties and had a great time donating food and I had a great time with the fire department. Mayor Laufenburger: Good. Good. 31 Chanhassen City Council – August 10, 2015 Councilwoman Tjornhom: Didn’t let me drive again or anything but. Mayor Laufenburger: And just for the record there were, I believe it was 55 neighborhoods that had National Night Out’s. I think that’s the most that we’ve had ever. I think last year it was like 50 or 52 so Mr. Gerhardt would you please extend our appreciation to Beth Hoiseth, public safety liaison. I know she puts a lot of time and energy into organizing that and it is really paying off and I echo the comments of Councilwoman Tjornhom. The residents were very, very appreciative and what is it about the fire department? They like, I think they like the big, the flashing lights and the ladder and I have to say in one neighborhood that I was at one of the ladder trucks they have water on board and they actually spilled some of that water and the kids were thrilled so it was really. Councilwoman Tjornhom: We even had residents wanting to sign up for the fire department. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, recruiting. Recruiting, absolutely. Alright. Todd Gerhardt: I’d also like to extend my appreciation for the department heads attended also so Beth had them scheduled for certain number of neighborhoods to go to so Todd and Paul and Kate didn’t make it this year right? Kate’s made them in the past. This is a first year. She had a family commitment but Don and Rick were all out and listening to the residents. Any concerns or questions that they may have on road projects or future developments going on in town so thank you for giving up their Tuesday night for that so. Mayor Laufenburger: Good. Okay. Well you haven’t heard me talk about baseball for a little while. I will tell you that the Chanhassen Red Birds are entering the playoff season. They have a game this Tuesday night at 7:30 right here at Storm/Red Bird Stadium and we take on the Victoria Vic’s in the first round of the playoffs so I haven’t seen Tom O’Connor present here so I don’t think there’s any wager that’s in place or anything. I’m not encouraging Mr. O’Connor, mayor of Victoria but once again the Red Birds had a great season and great to see them continuing to build momentum with the community. Anyway that’s my Red Birds update so any other council presentation? CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None. Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman McDonald seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 32