Loading...
CC 2016 10 10 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 10, 2016 Mayor Laufenburger called the meeting to order at 7:25 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, Chelsea Petersen, Paul Oehme, Kate Aanenson, MacKenzie Walters, Todd Hoffman, Greg Sticha, Roger Knutson, and Chief Don Johnson PUBLIC PRESENT: Emily Mattran 8210 West Lake Court Steve Brown 8240 West Lake Court Andrew K. Olson 8290 West Lake Court Mark Hauri 6845 Lake Harrison Wendy O’Connor 1702 Valley Ridge Trail North James & Sarah Duffey 8241 West Lake Court Kari Davis 8200 West Lake Court Stephen Jones 8260 West Lake Court Linda & Ron Solheim 1321 Lake Drive West Sarah Lietz 8260 West Lake Court Linda Boerboom 8261 West Lake Court Rick Robideau 8230 West Lake Court Letitia Dyer 8280 Market Boulevard Joan & Tommy Klinger 9025 Warren Court Anita Ward 780 Preakness Lane th Kris Howland 407 West 78 Street rd Teawanna Burton 3425 53 Avenue North Michael Engelhardt 403 Santa Fe Trail Mayor Laufenburger: Well good evening and welcome to this council meeting. To those of you that are present in the council chambers as well as those of you who are watching on Mediacom cable channels locally and some may also be watching live stream from the Chanhassen city website. I apologize for our delay. We had some business that took a little bit longer than I had originally anticipated but we are about to get underway. First of all, first action is council members you have the agenda in front of you. Are there any modifications to the agenda? Councilman Campion: Yes. Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Campion. Councilman Campion: I would like to add the Paisley Park museum PUD, I guess it would be to old business. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Roger Knutson: Mayor could I also suggest if you want to do that you might want to add also the Site Improvement Performance Agreement and the resolution concerning parking. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay Mr. Campion you want to add the. Todd Gerhardt: The site improvement. Mayor Laufenburger: The site improvement, the PUD, the site improvement and the Findings of Fact is that correct? Roger Knutson: Findings of Fact and the resolution on parking. Mayor Laufenburger: Resolution, okay so there’s really 4 elements associated with that. Councilman Campion: Yes. Mayor Laufenburger: Do you want to add that? Okay in just a moment I think what I will do is I’ll put it right after visitor presentations and I’m going to call that item F. Old Business. Item number 1. Councilman Campion: Okay. Mayor Laufenburger: Are there any other modifications to the agenda? Alright. All those in favor of adopting the modified agenda signify by saying aye. Councilman Campion amended the agenda to include discussion of Paisley Park rezoning to PUD, Site Improvement Performance Agreement, Findings of Fact and Resolution for No Parking on McGlynn Road. All voted in favor except Councilwoman Tjornhom who opposed. The motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. Mayor Laufenburger: This item will be on the agenda as old business. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. 2 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations: 1. Approve City Council Minutes dated September 12, 2016 2. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated September 20. 2016 Resolution #2016-64: 3. Approve Resolution Authorizing Limited-Use Permit with the State of Minnesota Department of Transportation for Non-Motorized Recreational Trail in the right-of-way of Trunk Highway 101 South of CSAH 18. 4. Approve Amended Public Purpose Expenditure Policy, Purchasing Policy, and City Personnel Policy. Resolution #2016-65: 5. Approve Resolution Appointing Election Judges for the General Election. Resolution #2016-66: 6. Boulder Cove, Project No. 06-15: Accept Streets and Utilities. 7. Approve Ordinance Amending Chapter 10 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning Wine. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Mayor Laufenburger: At this time anyone wishing to address the council on a matter that is not on the agenda this evening would you please step to the podium stating your name and your address for the record. Is there any visitors that would like to speak. Just for those of you in the chambers as well as those of you watching at home, visitor presentation is conducted at every council meeting and we invite you to address the council on any matter or concern and as long as it’s not on the agenda. There being no visitor presentations. Councilwoman Ryan: There are. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. State your name and your address please. James Duffey: I’m James Duffey, 8241 West Lake Court. I lived there for 10 years. This is my daughter Sarah. She’s lived there 7 ½ years. She would like to address the council. Mayor Laufenburger: And Sarah would like to address the council? 3 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 James Duffey: Yes. Mayor Laufenburger: Sarah, welcome to City Council. Sarah Duffey: My name is Sarah Duffey. I live at 8241 West Lake Court and I’m a second grader at St. Hubert’s School. I am scared to walk my puppy Becket down the street because I am scared that we will get hit by the arrows. I would like you to close down the archery range so that the kids and animals in my neighborhood are safe. Thank you. Mayor Laufenburger: Sarah, thank you very much. James Duffey: Thank you. Mayor Laufenburger: Is there anybody else who would like to address the council on a matter that is not on the agenda? Stephen Jones: I’m Stephen Jones. I live at 8260 West Lake Court and I’m here to ask that the range be closed and moved for our safety in our neighborhood. That’s what I’m saying. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you very much. Anybody else? You’re welcome to step up to the podium please. Steve Brown: I just thought I’d bring up show and tell. Mayor Laufenburger: State your name and address please. Steve Brown: My name is Steve Brown. I live at 8240 West Lake Court in Chanhassen, Minnesota. I’ve lived there for 15 years and I love the neighborhood. Great place to live by the way and I want to say I’m also an avid supporter of hunting and bow hunting and all sorts of you know wildlife work of any kind but I have found over the last couple of years a number of arrows in my back yard or near my back yard just walking my dog and these were not at the archery range itself but they were physically you know across the little stream and into our back yards so just wanted to put in an exhibit that these are the arrows. They’re all different kinds. Different, so they’re different people. Different, just and whether they’re random, I don’t know if there’s any maliciousness here and maybe it’s just errant arrows and accidents but still it’s kind of a little bit unnerving at times when you think about bringing your dog or whatever through that area. Strangely enough I was going over to Steve Jones’ house and not looking, and I’ve never looked for any of these arrows. They’re just, you know you’re walking by and you see one. I was walking in Steve’s back yard, the actual property, inside of his property and I found this one yesterday just walking by so I thought that was another interesting data point so that’s all I want to say. Again I support the range. I want somebody to, I want it to be in a safe place. Maybe not where it is. 4 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. You’re welcome to take those with you. Steve Brown: Okay. Mayor Laufenburger: Before I invite anybody else to speak, Mr. Gerhardt can you speak to the item that was on the work session tonight and the instructions that council gave to staff. Can you speak to that please? Todd Gerhardt: Yes. Tonight council holds a work session prior to every City Council meeting and there’s a variety of items that are placed in front of them just to talk at will and in more relaxed setting. Our Park and Rec Director Todd Hoffman gave an update on discussion that he had with the Park and Rec Commission. Park and Rec Commission came back with 2 options for the City Council to take under advisement. One of the options was to close the range. The second option was to keep the range open at it’s current location with a temporary shooting structure. Fencing. Kevlar fencing on both sides of the range and the council chose to keep the range closed permanently until a new location can be found outside of it’s current location so the current location will be closed and direction was given to staff to work with Carver County Parks department to see if the range could be located at Minnewashta Park and staff is going to pursue that option. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay thank you Mr. Gerhardt. Is there anybody else who would like to address the council during visitor presentations? Okay I might have spoken too soon. Kari Davis: Hi, I’m Kari Davis, 8200 West Lake Court is my address and I have been a resident here for about 20 years. Mayor Laufenburger: Welcome. Kari Davis: Thank you. And thank you for the conversation at the work session too. I appreciate that and I appreciate the comment so I again just want to reinforce that I am in favor of permanently closing the range and relocating it to another location. I also appreciate different sports including archery. I have no problem with archery. I appreciate the passion that practitioners have for it. I would I guess emphasize or hope that we could though go one step further than what was recommended at the work session and let’s just permanently close it down. I feel that if the range is still there, even if it’s temporarily closed, you know we don’t see people at the range that frequently and so I have a little sense that maybe it’s a seasonal thing or maybe scouting groups come once a year or something like that but I think because it’s been there for 25 years it’s still perceived as, well that’s where the range is and so you kind of think about those judgment errors that some people may have that you know in addition to errant arrows probably and so that’s part of my concern. Another concern that I have is I remembered, our daughter’s 18 now so we’re not in this place anymore but I did remember when she was a real little girl we used to go for nature hikes along the creek that is at the base of all the homes that are adjacent to the archery range and then I remember when the kids in the neighborhood got just a little bit 5 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 older, maybe they were 8, 9, 10, 11, that was a really fun place for them to play is down by the creek and why wouldn’t it be. It’s like being a kid 101 right? There’s mud, rocks, sticks, stones. Mayor Laufenburger: Nature. Kari Davis: Tadpoles maybe. Mayor Laufenburger: Nature. Kari Davis: Nature okay. And how many times do we hear these days different reports saying our kids need more unstructured time. They need to be out in nature so it’s really a good positive thing. However it is, it’s right adjacent to the range and so it’s very close. This is called Riley Creek and it is described on page 15 of Mr. Hoffman’s packet that was put together on th September 27 so I would refer you to that for your future reference. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Kari Davis: The other thing that I would like to say or plant as a seed, I appreciate that you said well we don’t necessarily just have 2 options right? So maybe there’s a third hybrid option because I appreciate the passion that our archers have for their sport and I kind of, I’ve just been through kind of fresh off working with a group of parents to get a swimming pool in our school district and that kind of evolved into working on the referendum in the school district which included a soccer multi-purpose dome as well and I just, so I have observed kind of the how our communities are receptive to park and rec facilities. To different kinds of options. I really can sympathize that it’s got to be tough to shut down an activity when it is an activity that has been in place for a while. I have been struck by the number of different organizations who might be receptive to helping out and working in a cooperative way with our archers and so I wonder if you know maybe the archers would want to simultaneously make an effort and I guess I’m asking would there be any reason for them not to go ahead and simultaneously you know go rogue and work on something on their own possibly you know in combination with the City. Mayor Laufenburger: Well Ms. Davis if I can just conclude this a little bit. It’s not council’s responsibility necessary to solve the problem. We have provided some direction to city staff. We have asked them to explore other options. The archery range remains closed at our direction until they come back with more options. Now your comments and that of Mr. Jones and others concern me in that I believe the archery range has been closed for some time and for arrows to show up now, that’s a concern to me so I think that it probably merits we provide further guidance to Mr. Hoffman to make sure that people who come there to shoot arrows or to practice archery clearly understand that it is no longer available for that purpose. Mr. Hoffman do you want to comment to that? Please. Todd Hoffman: I believe those arrows are just old arrows. Yeah those were there for maybe years. 6 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Mayor Laufenburger: Is that true? Steve Brown: I would agree with that comment. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Steve Brown: They don’t look like they’re brand new. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright. Okay. So Ms. Davis I think your suggestions are really good and I would encourage that if there are people that would like to work in concert with city staff, parks and rec department, I would encourage them to reach out to Mr. Hoffman. I’m sure that he would welcome a conversation and a dialogue about something like that. Does that make sense? Kari Davis: Yep, sure does. Thank you for your time. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Ms. Davis. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council. Just for your edification, the targets no longer sit out at the range so they have been taken out of commission and we will improve the signage down there just to make sure it’s clear. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. State your name and address please. Sarah Lietz: Sarah Lietz, I’m at 8260 West Lake Court. So just to clarify I heard Mr. Gerhardt say that it was permanently closed. I heard you say that it’s only until there’s another option available. Can you clarify that for me please? Mayor Laufenburger: I sure can. We gave instructions that said the archery range would remain closed and we also directed Mr. Hoffman to explore other options. Other safer options. Sarah Lietz: Is that remain closed permanently or is that it could be reopened at a later date? Mayor Laufenburger: I don’t want to say anything’s impossible Ms. Leek, is that correct? Sarah Lietz: Lietz. Mayor Laufenburger: Lietz. But the sentiment of this council clearly is that it remain closed and move to another location. 7 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Sarah Lietz: Okay that’s good. That’s good to hear. I just wanted to clarify because I heard a couple of different things and is that your decision then or is parks and rec? Who makes that final call? Mayor Laufenburger: I would say that the City Council will make that final call because of the visibility of this. Because of the nature of this. The City Council would make that final call but Mr. Hoffman is doing his job by exploring options and presenting those options to the council. Sarah Lietz: And that’s great and I think there’s a lot of great ideas out there. I too very supportive of archery. My husband and I both own bows. It would be great if it could stay in our back yard but it is not safe to be in our back yard so I appreciate the comments during the work session as well. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright thank you. Sarah Lietz: I also wanted to let you know I did start an online petition recently and it already has 25 signatures on it. Mayor Laufenburger: Good. Sarah Lietz: I don’t know if you want a copy of it or if you’d like me to email that to you or what you would like. Mayor Laufenburger: You can let Mr. Gerhardt have that information and he’ll make sure that City Council has that. Thank you Ms. Lietz. Sarah Lietz: Thank you. Mayor Laufenburger: There being no other visitor presentations I will close visitor presentation and I want to say especially thanks to Sarah Duffey for being here this evening. Future council member perhaps. Alright. Let’s move to the next item on our agenda. PAISLEY PARK MUSEUM REZONING, SITE IMPROVEMENT PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT, AND PARKING RESOLUTION. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Campion you made that, you made the modification so I’m going to turn to you and ask you in accordance with strict adherence to Robert’s Rules of Order I’m going to ask that you make a motion. If there is a second then we will conduct discussion on the motion. Councilman Campion: Okay. Mayor Laufenburger: You comfortable with that? 8 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Councilman Campion: I think so. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council. Just to. Kate Aanenson: Can I give an update? Yeah. Todd Gerhardt: Help council member Campion I’m having out some new site plan improvements, the resolution and modifying the no parking on McGlynn Drive and also a copy of the proposed ordinance. Kate Aanenson: If I may Mayor then. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay go ahead. Kate Aanenson: Based on your comments. Councilwoman Tjornhom: If I could stop you, we’re one short when it comes to the ordinance amendment. Todd Gerhardt: Here we go. Kate Aanenson: Make sure everyone’s got one. So based on the comments in the work session the PUD ordinance was modified. Again busing only until the entire parking lot’s completed which would be, appears to be next spring sometime. We also added the landscaping requirement along the east side of Audubon. Some of the conditions went away that had been met. I think that’s the just, I’m not sure if I missed anything else Roger on the PUD. Roger Knutson: On the PUD ordinance the only change is in paragraph, on page 2, paragraph E with the addition of paragraph 5 on the landscaping. And paragraph F, parking was rewritten. We had steps before you could do this, that and the other thing. Now we’re requiring this requires all the parking improvements to be constructed including the 230 spaces and until everything is constructed provides, until all the parking requirements have been constructed all access to the site shall be by bus with the exception of handicapped, employees, press and contractors. Councilman Campion: Okay. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay before I restate that to you Mr. Campion, we now have in front of us a revised ordinance. A revised Site Improvement Performance Agreement. By the way the ordinance includes a Findings of Fact is that correct Ms. Aanenson? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Your motion would, yeah. 9 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. So we have in the one document we have stapled together the ordinance, Findings of Fact, the Site Improvement Performance Agreement, and the resolution establishing a no parking zone on McGlynn Road from Audubon Road to the cul-de-sac. Kate Aanenson: Correct. If I may mayor then on the Site Improvement Performance Agreement what was added would be under required improvements would be landscaping be planted along Audubon per the PUD. Councilwoman Ryan: So you’d take out 2D? Kate Aanenson: No 2D. Councilwoman Ryan: Of the performance agreement. Kate Aanenson: No they’d still have to be, all those sidewalks, internal sidewalks. Councilwoman Ryan: Oh internal sidewalks. Kate Aanenson: And that may be resolved the way they’ve laid it out it looks like that may be resolved. We did find internal sidewalks but if there needs to be some, yeah. That could. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Kate Aanenson: But this sidewalk is not external so if you want to clarify that. Councilwoman Ryan: Well I thought because I thought that we were taking the sidewalk was going to go away on the east side of. Kate Aanenson: Yeah this was an internal one. Actually when we walked the site last, a week ago there is an internal sidewalk there between where the customers come out and where they go around to the front so. Councilwoman Ryan: So can we just clarify that? Kate Aanenson: Yeah I think the issue there was walking between the two but there is a place for that to happen so if you want to strike that that’s fine. Councilwoman Ryan: Or just identify where the sidewalk. Kate Aanenson: Internal. Let’s put internal sidewalks. Councilman Campion: So if I. 10 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Mayor Laufenburger: Just a moment. Ms. Aanenson I just, I want to clarify something. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Laufenburger: You have provided an additional item that was not in the original PUD discussion and that is this establishing a no parking zone on McGlynn Road from Audubon Road to the cul-de-sac. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Right? Okay. Mr. Knutson, I’m not opposed to that being subject of discussion tonight but I’m uncomfortable that we’re adding that to something that was not on the agenda earlier. Give me your thoughts on that. Roger Knutson: You certainly can add it if you chose to. If you’re not comfortable doing it you don’t have to. This is not something we need an agreement on by the, by Paisley Park. This is. Mayor Laufenburger: This is a public thoroughfare. Roger Knutson: Right. Mayor Laufenburger: This is city authority. Roger Knutson: Right, this is your jurisdiction. You can adopt it tonight or you can adopt it any night you want to and you can repeal it at any time you want to for that matter. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Alright. Todd Gerhardt: Public hearing isn’t required mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: It is not required? Roger Knutson: It is not required. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Mr. Campion let me return to you for just a moment. You have a motion in front of you on the screen in front of you that does not include the resolution on the no parking zone right? So I’m. Kate Aanenson: I added it. Todd Gerhardt: It’s in the second sentence. 11 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Mayor Laufenburger: Is it identified in here? Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Councilman Campion: As the parking resolution. Kate Aanenson: Parking resolution. Mayor Laufenburger: Where is that? Todd Gerhardt: Look on your screen. Kate Aanenson: It’s on the screen. Councilman Campion: Last line. Mayor Laufenburger: Oh and parking resolution. Okay so it’s been added and it would be your choice if you would like to make this motion as it showed on the screen or you can make any motion you choose but I’m turning to you because you were the one that asked for the modification to the agenda. Councilman Campion: Okay. Yeah personally I would like it included so I like it as written. Mayor Laufenburger: You make your motion as you choose. Councilman Campion: So I move that the city, the Chanhassen City Council approves the rezoning of Lot 11, Block 1, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park from Industrial Office Park (IOP) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) and adoption of the attached PUD ordinance, Site Improvement Performance Agreement, parking resolution and Findings of Fact. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay thank you Mr. Campion. Mr. Knutson do we have a valid motion? Roger Knutson: Mayor you do. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, thank you. Is there a second to this motion? There being no second this motion fails for lack of a second. Is there any other action the council would like to take tonight? Roger Knutson: Mayor if you’re not going to take action I suggest to make things clear that you table action on this. Mayor Laufenburger: Is that motion still in effect? That action still in effect? 12 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Roger Knutson: No. Since you’ve already, there’s a motion been introduced. I think just to make things perfectly clear you want a motion to table if that’s what you want. Mayor Laufenburger: Well I’m trying to understand council’s interest here. Earlier there was a suggestion to modify the agenda and that was approved and I can only assume that council is not comfortable with the motion that was made. Is there any other motion that would like to be made? Councilwoman Tjornhom: Mr. Mayor I’d like to make a motion that we once again table this until our next council meeting. th Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. And that would be October 24. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Is there a second to that motion? Councilwoman Ryan: Second. th Mayor Laufenburger: Alright we have a motion and a second to table this until October 24. Is there any discussion? Councilmember Ryan. Councilwoman Ryan: There is. Is there a opportunity, because I’ll speak to your question mayor because I know we had a lengthy work session around it and got a lot of answers, or questions answered. Is there an opportunity to grant another temporary permit for other days or is that open for discussion? And the reason why I’m asking is because I think we, my biggest concern after what I saw on Saturday is I think that there needs to be more understanding of the traffic impact. Whether it’s buses coming down Park Road. Coming off of 5. Some of the back up’s. Some of the confusion that I saw I think it’s important, I understand that part of seeing that is going to be having the museum open and so instead of waiting for it to be, to rezone and have it permanently be open if we could have those traffic studies set up and have a better understanding of the impacts to that area while it’s, while it’s operating under a temporary permit, I think that would be really helpful to me to have a better understanding of you know what’s being reported back to staff and then we get that report so we can make better decisions based on the impact to that area versus just rezoning everything and moving forward, let’s really take a look at what the impact is with some of these new bus routes and what not. Councilman McDonald: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. McDonald. 13 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Councilman McDonald: What it sounds like Councilwoman Ryan is proposing is another motion and I guess I would encourage her to put it that way because that is another option so that would be another motion on the table to deal with this. Mayor Laufenburger: Well the truth is, we have an active motion to table. Table this action and so we will act on that first and then another motion could be made, is that correct Mr. Knutson? Roger Knutson: That’s correct Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay so let’s, I want to try to answer your or get an answer to your question. Mr. Gerhardt what are the options available to this council to grant the equivalent of a temporary status for a period of time to explore this and I think I believe Councilwoman Ryan’s concern is, let’s see what happens before we grant a permanent status, is that correct? Councilwoman Ryan: Correct, yes. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay so Mr. Gerhardt what are some options for us? Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council. I granted a 3 day temporary event permit to Paisley Park. I do not feel comfortable granting another temporary. If the council would like to grant another temporary permit you could take that action up tonight. You would have to modify your agenda to do that. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay so what you’re saying is you acted administratively within your authority to grant 3 days of special permit or temporary permit to conduct Paisley Park as a museum, is that correct? Todd Gerhardt: That’s correct Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: And you don’t feel that it’s in your administrative authority to grant that any further? Todd Gerhardt: No I do not. Mayor Laufenburger: So you’re asking council, if council wants to grant you that authority. Todd Gerhardt: No I’m saying if the council would like to give a 3 day permit they could do that. Mayor Laufenburger: How about a 4 day? How about a 4 day permit or a 5 or a 6 or a 7 day? Todd Gerhardt: That would need to get direction from the City Attorney. 14 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Knutson is that, is that latitude that the City Council has? Roger Knutson: I’ll have to look at your city code. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Mr. Mayor if I may. Mayor Laufenburger: Yes Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: I made the motion to table it. I first did not support the resolution or adding it onto the agenda to start with and I think one of my main reasons why is, excuse me. I’m suffering from a cold. When we started this work session we held it in this room for the reason because the public needed to be here. We wanted to make sure they had room to be here. Mayor Laufenburger: Right. Councilwoman Tjornhom: But it was expressed to them that it was just a work session. Very informal and we asked them to please be silent while we conducted our business and we had discussions with staff, applicant and council. Mayor Laufenburger: Sure. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Once that happened then all of a sudden that door got closed for anybody else to make any sort of opinion or suggestion because. Mayor Laufenburger: Wait, when you say anybody else you mean anybody in the public, is that what you’re saying? Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yeah because you know they, the residents heard that we were going to put it on the agenda and I think they just assumed that it was going to pass and so we lost out on that opportunity for our residents to tell what they’re thinking. What they want for our community, especially because a lot of them lived through it this weekend and then to have us just shut it down after we told them relax. It’s just a work session. Informal discussion. And then changing the rules I think that was not acting in the best public policy. Mayor Laufenburger: When you say changing the rules to what are you referring Councilwoman Tjornhom? Councilwoman Tjornhom: Well this was a work session. Mayor Laufenburger: Are you referring to my opening comments? 15 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Councilwoman Tjornhom: (Yes). Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Because we did not say this is subject to change at any time so please stay here because then we will have during our normal council agenda have opportunities for you to come and speak. They were not alerted of that and so I just think this is being, I’ve always said it’s been rushed from the start and now it’s being rushed even further because we’ve all been, as we discussed inundated with emails and it’s emotional. It’s emotional reading the people that have planned honeymoons. Vacation. They’ve spent thousands of dollars on not just tickets to Paisley Park but on hotels and car rentals and airfare and so I think we all feel a need to help them at some point but I think we first need to make sure, as I said last time at this meeting, that we need to get it right the first time and so I just feel there’s a little injustice done tonight by having a work session. Telling people they can’t talk and then they left. I just think due process was not done. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay I appreciate your comments regarding that Councilwoman Tjornhom. I think it’s important to note that when we have work session there are people that often come to that work session but they often come to listen and generally speaking, don’t ask me to put a percentage on this but generally speaking the public does not participate in that and there are other ways that the public does participate in the process that we have. Before I…your comment further I am absolutely not opposed to public comment but I am in my responsibility, I have a responsibility to conduct a meeting in a manner that is orderly and efficient and I think I rd was very generous with public comment on October 3. Cut off no public comment and that was during a session when it’s not required that we conduct a public hearing so while I appreciate your opinion I don’t happen to agree with you about the public process. Would anybody else like to make a comment about that? Mr. Campion. Councilman Campion: I would like to comment. I was under the impression that I was following due process. That that was the process to get it back on the agenda. We discussed it at the work session. We shared opinions. It sounded like there was, though we don’t vote at work sessions it sounded like there was some agreement that you know going to a busing only option until the parking improvements were made. There was some buy into that. At least it was something that appealed to me. That’s why I brought the motion. Obviously we’ve been in communication with many from the public. Hundreds of emails I would say and phone calls over the past week so I guess I object to the comment that we’re not following due process. And I would say that indefinitely tabling this, how do you know when it’s going to be on the agenda? Mayor Laufenburger: Well the motion, just to clarify the motion states. Councilman Campion: But I’m saying prior to, prior to tonight it was simply open ended right? Mayor Laufenburger: That’s true. 16 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Mayor Laufenburger: That’s true. Councilman Campion: It was indefinitely tabled and so at that point I was trying to get it back on the agenda. Mayor Laufenburger: Anybody any other comments? Todd Gerhardt: The public hearing was held at the Planning Commission level. That’s the time when the public can add their comments. Mayor Laufenburger: Public hearing. Public hearing. Just a moment. Anybody else? Mr. McDonald or Ms. Ryan want to make any comment? Councilman McDonald: Well I’d like to hear what Mr. Knutson found. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, Mr. Knutson. Roger Knutson: Mayor, members of the council. Pursuant to city code Section 6-3 you could issue the permit. Mayor Laufenburger: We could issue a temporary permit. Roger Knutson: Yes. For a period of time you think is appropriate. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, well that’s good to know. Councilwoman Ryan: And do we have to identify the number of days or just a temporary permit and then that’s discussion between staff and the applicant? Roger Knutson: If you’re going to issue the permit you have to say what period it covers. What days it covers. Mayor Laufenburger: And is it possible to stipulate that being up to an end date? Anything we want. Roger Knutson: Word it the way you want. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright. Any other comment on the motion to table this action until th October 24? Okay we have a motion and a second to table this action. Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilwoman Ryan seconded that the Chanhassen City Council table the rezoning of Lot 11, Block 1, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park from 17 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Industrial Office Park (IOP) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) and adoption of the attached PUD ordinance, Site Improvement Performance Agreement, parking resolution and Findings of Fact. Councilwoman Tjornhom voted in favor, the rest voted in opposition. The motion failed with a vote of 1 to 4. Mayor Laufenburger: That motion fails. Councilwoman Ryan: Mr. Mayor I’d like to make a motion please. Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Ryan. Councilwoman Ryan: I would like to make a motion that we issue. Mayor Laufenburger: Just before you do this, just make sure you state your motion and not the arguments why or not okay. Councilwoman Ryan: Correct. I’d like to make the motion that the Chanhassen City Council issues a temporary permit to Paisley Park, should I identify exactly the? Mayor Laufenburger: How about Bremer Trust? Councilwoman Ryan: Yeah who do we issue the permit to? Bremer Trust? Mayor Laufenburger: Kate who. Todd Gerhardt: It’s in the sign page of the site plan agreement. I don’t have one. Roger Knutson: Mayor can I ask a question? Under the administrative permit how many days can you issue them for? Kate Aanenson: Did you say Chapter 6? Roger Knutson: 6-3 doesn’t apply. Kate Aanenson: Thank you. Roger Knutson: That’s water permits. Kate Aanenson: Okay right. Roger Knutson: Under administrative permits how many days do you allow? 18 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Kate Aanenson: Typically we do 15 but they can only be so many consecutive so going back to what Mr. Gerhardt said would be the correct interpretation so we would, you can only do so many consecutive because then it’s no longer a temporary event so historically if they would have maybe 11 left, to only let so many do a year. For example you typically maybe do one a month but, so historically we’ve done, you can do so many consecutive days. Usually not more than 72 hours concurrently so. Roger Knutson: And how many a year? Kate Aanenson: 15. Roger Knutson: So that’d be my recommendation. Kate Aanenson: They’ve already used 3 of them so. Roger Knutson: So 12 more days. Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Mayor Laufenburger: Just to clarify. That would be an administrative permit correct? Roger Knutson: You’re directing. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Maybe what we need to do is you make your motion and we’ll discuss it okay. Todd Gerhardt: Paisley Park. Councilman McDonald: It’s Paisley Park Facilities LLC. Councilwoman Ryan: Okay thank you. I’d like to make a motion that the Chanhassen City Council issues Paisley Park Facility LLC a temporary permit for 12 days. Mayor Laufenburger: And this is a permit to do what? Councilwoman Ryan: Operate the museum with busing only. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. So your motion is that the Chanhassen City Council grant to Paisley Park Facility LLC a temporary permit for 12 days to operate the museum with busing only. Roger Knutson: Do you want to make an exception for handicap, press, contractors and employees? 19 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Councilwoman Ryan: Yes. Councilman McDonald: That was my question. If you except that for Uber and taxis. Councilwoman Ryan: Yes, yes. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. I believe we have a valid motion. Is there a second to that motion? Councilman McDonald: I’ll second it. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. McDonald thank you very much. Now any discussion? Councilman McDonald: Yes Mr. Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. McDonald. Councilman McDonald: Okay we have a motion now for at least 12 days worth of operation. At what point would the criteria be to bring it back to council to again look at whether or not we make it permanent? Is there any thought on that? Mayor Laufenburger: Well here’s how, do you want to try to interpret that for us Mr. Knutson? I mean what happens after 12 days? Roger Knutson: Then they no longer have a permit to do it. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay so after 12 days they no longer have a permit and then would they have to make reapplication for a PUD or does the application for PUD remains in place? Roger Knutson: It remains in place. You’ve not acted on it. You’ve not said yes. You’ve not said no. It’s pending. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay so the motion to act on the PUD, because it did not receive a second, it remains an application with the City? Roger Knutson: Yes. It has not been decided. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright. Does that answer your question Mr. McDonald? Roger Knutson: And even to make that even clearer, whether this motion passes or not, if you’re not going to act on the PUD tonight I suggest you move to table action on these items. Mayor Laufenburger: Oh on this, on this specific item that’s on the screen. 20 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Roger Knutson: Yes. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. If we don’t table it what would happen? Roger Knutson: I would recommend you do that otherwise there might be some ambiguity. Mayor Laufenburger: I see, okay. Alright. Mr. McDonald I think you still have a question? Councilman McDonald: I think I got my question answered. I think what it comes down to is I’m looking for an end date and I guess there is no answer to that. Mayor Laufenburger: Well I perhaps I would disagree and Mr. Knutson I need you to listen carefully to this. While I appreciate that the administratively 12 more days are left in the 15, isn’t it true that the City Council could say temporary permit to operate until end date? Roger Knutson: 15 days is it. Mayor Laufenburger: That’s all we, that’s the only authority that we have? Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. There that’s your end date Mr. McDonald. Your end date would be 12 more days of temporary permit and as far as what those days are Ms. Aanenson I believe you, when the application was made you told them that they could choose the 3 days, is that correct? Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Councilman McDonald: So at this point they can choose 12 days between now and December rd 23 if I understand correctly because. Todd Gerhardt: If that’s included in Councilmember Ryan’s motion. Councilman McDonald: Well what happened to the motion that got tabled last time? There was a deadline put on that one. ndrd Roger Knutson: That’s, if I remember right it’s about December 22 or 23. rd Councilman McDonald: 23 yeah. 21 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Roger Knutson: So you have to act on their application by that date or it’s deemed approved. rd Councilman McDonald: So the end date’s December 23. They can have any 12 days between now and then if that’s what they so choose, am I correct in that assumption? Mayor Laufenburger: Then let’s handle this properly. We have a motion right now that says that the, that the City Council approve the temporary permit to operate the museum by busing for 12 days. By busing with the exception as noted. That’s the motion that we have right now and if you want to put the motion, those 12 days be used or that the temporary permit not be issued rd after December 23 that would be an amendment to this motion. But before you do that I would like, I don’t want to deter your amendment Mr. McDonald but I would like to hear from some other council members first. Are you okay with that? Councilman McDonald: I’m fine with that. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Thank you to those people in the council chambers for allowing us the opportunity to do this right. Is there any other comment regarding the motion? Councilwoman Tjornhom: Mr. Mayor this just to me seems, and forgive me for being so informal but really sloppy policy making. We either confirm it or we deny it but stretching it out rd until December 23, I just think it’s not fair to the applicant. It’s not fair to us. It’s not fair to the residents. I think we could make a valid choice by our next council meeting and that would really end this and people could then move on either with Paisley Park carrying on or else it didn’t. Mayor Laufenburger: As a museum or not. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yep. Yep and so I just think that while I respect the motion that’s being made I just think it’s in everyone’s best interest to just go back to settling this at the next council meeting like should have happened at the very beginning tonight. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Councilwoman Ryan did you want to make a comment? Councilwoman Ryan: I did and I know that we decided on 12 days because they only used 3 but th in looking at my calendar our next meeting is October 24 so that’s within 14 days so if we give, granting them the 12 day permit they could operate the facility for the next 12 days. They could give us, or collect information that we’re looking for, or that I’m looking for in terms of traffic th impacts to the area and then, and why I seconded your motion the first time on the 24 is because I don’t want this to keep going on and on. I think people do deserve an answer. Our community does. The people traveling from all over. The management team. Staff. Everybody deserves that so I think by collecting information over the course of the next 12 days which then th would still fall in the 14 days we could get this back on our agenda by October 24. Have some real information that I think we’re all looking for and then we can, or at least what I’m really 22 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 looking for, I can make an informed decision on the impact to the community. We can hear from th people and then we can make that decision on the 24 and that’s why I said 12 days because it was the most we could do but it still fell within the 14 of the 2 weeks. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Councilwoman Ryan: So I could change my motion to say you know for the next 12 days with bringing it back to council on October. Tabling it. I wonder if I can make. Mayor Laufenburger: No. We’re going to deal with one motion at a time Ms. Ryan. Councilwoman Ryan: Okay. Mayor Laufenburger: So if, so you’re essentially advocating that let’s leave it at 12 days. Let the operator choose what those 12 days are and then you’re also inclined to in the future, maybe perhaps even later tonight stipulate a time that we act on this but you’re in favor of just leaving it at the 12 days. Councilwoman Ryan: Right. With the encouragement of using those 12 days within the next 14. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Anybody else? Mr. Campion. Councilman Campion: I support that. Councilman McDonald: Mr. Mayor then are you willing to accept an amendment? Mayor Laufenburger: Well you can make your amendment and the council will decided whether or not they will accept it. Councilman McDonald: I would like to make a friendly. Mayor Laufenburger: Just call it an amendment. Councilman McDonald: I’ll make an amendment to Councilwoman Ryan’s motion that this th does come back to the council at our next meeting on the 24 for resolution and that the 12 days permit be issued and the operator can choose which 12 days within the next 14 they choose to operate. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright. Before I mention whether we have a valid amendment Mr. Knutson, does that satisfy your, is the language of Mr. McDonald’s amendment to this motion satisfy your need to have a definitive date? 23 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Roger Knutson: Mayor I think it does but just to be clear on the amendment. Councilmember what you’re saying is, the PUD rezoning, site findings would all come to your next City Council meeting as part of your motion. You can do that. Councilman McDonald: Yes Mr. Knutson. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright. So we have an amendment stipulating that the PUD, Site Improvement Performance Agreement, parking resolution and Findings of Fact return to the th council on October 24. Is there a second to that amendment? Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second. Councilman Campion: Second. Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Tjornhom spoke first Mr. Campion. Councilman Campion: Which is fine. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright is there any further discussion on the amendment? We’re voting only on the amendment at this time. Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the Chanhassen City Council approve an amendment to table the rezoning of Lot 11, Block 1, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park from Industrial Office Park (IOP) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) and adoption of the attached PUD ordinance, Site Improvement Performance Agreement, parking resolution and Findings of Fact to October 24, 2016. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Mayor Laufenburger: The amendment carries. The motion now reads grant a temporary permit th for 12 days and return the PUD action to the council on October 24. Is there any further discussion on the amended motion? Councilwoman Ryan moved, Councilman McDonald seconded that the Chanhassen City Council grant to Paisley Park Facility LLC a temporary permit for 12 days to operate the museum with busing only, with the exception for handicap, press, contractors, employees and taxis, and with the amendment totable the rezoning of Lot 11, Block 1, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park from Industrial Office Park (IOP) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) and adoption of the attached PUD ordinance, Site Improvement Performance Agreement, parking resolution and Findings of Fact to October 24, 2016. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Mayor Laufenburger: That motion carries 5-0. We have final action for this evening unless there’s any further motion at this time. Okay, thank you council. Ms. Aanenson I would direct 24 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 you to issue the permit as appropriate based on your discussions with Paisley Park Facility LLC th and Mr. Gerhardt will you ensure that this matter returns to the council agenda on October 24 with all the materials as were presented? Todd Gerhardt: Yes Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, thank you very much. Thank you council members for your patience in this deliberation. We will now move to item G-1. 6845 LAKE HARRISON CIRCLE: VARIANCE REQUEST TO BUILD A PAVER PATIO AROUND A POOL AT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6845 LAKE HARRISON CIRCLE, LOT 2, BLOCK 2 LAKE HARRISON. Mayor Laufenburger: Do we have a staff report? Kate Aanenson: Before I’d like to introduce MacKenzie Walters, our staff planner. Been with us. MacKenzie Walters: 3 months. Kate Aanenson: 3 months so this is his first presentation to the City Council. Mayor Laufenburger: Welcome Mr. Walters. Nice to have you with us tonight. MacKenzie Walters: Pleasure to be here. So as was mentioned this is Planning Case 2016-22. 6845 Lake Harrison Circle variance. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this th variance on September 20. They voted to deny the variance request. The applicant appealed the variance and it is now on the agenda for today. They have also submitted a revised variance application and they are now proposing an 800 square foot paver patio pool area. The location of the property is 6845 Lake Harrison Circle, indicated in red. The area is zoned single family residential. The zoning has a stipulated maximum lot coverage of 25 percent. Minimum 15,000 square foot lots. 30 foot front and rear setbacks and properties also have 10 foot side yard setbacks. Block 2 of the Lake Harrison subdivision has a blanket 5 foot front yard variance in part to provide some relief from the large wetland that is in the back of all the properties. 6845 Lake Harrison Circle is also located within the Shoreland Management Overlay District. This district is 1,000 zone around all of the lakes in the city and it has a maximum of 25 percent impervious coverage. I mentioned that behind the property was a wetland. The wetland is classified as Manage 1. As the property is currently platted it has a 20 foot existing wetland barrier. I’m sorry buffer which you see in red and a 40 foot building setback so every building has to be set back a minimum of 40 feet from the current buffer. The applicant has the ability under the city zoning code to establish instead a 25 foot buffer with native vegetation that meets modern standards and in exchange for that they would be allowed to place accessory structures so like pools, patios, decks, things of that nature within, they would only have a 15 foot setback 25 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 from the revised buffer. The applicant has indicated it is their intent to use that provision and get the setback relief that way. A little bit of history on the property. It was originally platted in 2005 as Planning Case 14. That was also when the 5 foot front yard variance was approved. The house was built in 2008. In 2009 the original home builder built a 320 square foot upper deck. In 2011 they added a 320 square foot lower deck and in 2013 they applied for a permit to construct a pool area in the rear yard. The permit was issued and then the project was cancelled at the request of the homeowner. Mayor Laufenburger: That was a previous homeowner is that correct? MacKenzie Walters: That was the previous homeowner. There was no variance issued for that pool. It was done within the bounds of the code. The originally proposed home, pool area by the applicant that was denied by the Planning Commission was for a 40 by 18 foot pool with a 1,500 square foot paver patio, bar, hot tub and fire pit seen here. The revised application that’s being considered today is for an 800 square foot paver patio with the pool, bar, hot tub and fire pit. The biggest difference is the applicant spoke with staff about what the Planning Commission had highlighted as their most significant concerns and they moved the proposed area so that it would be clear of the 15 foot wetland setback and they removed about 700 square feet of paver patio to reduce the amount of rear lot coverage from 34.5 percent down to 23.3 percent. So they did make substantial efforts to try to address some of the concerns raised by the Planning Commission in their revised proposal. The revised plan variance would only require a 759 ¼ square foot hard cover variance or about 4.2 percent which would put the property’s total coverage at 29.2 percent so. Mayor Laufenburger: Can you go back one slide? MacKenzie Walters: Absolutely. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Walters right there. So do we have stipulation on rear yard coverage or is the ordinance on total lot coverage? MacKenzie Walters: Right we have a provision in our ordinance that says no detached accessory structure can cover more than 30 percent of the rear yard. The original plan exceeded that threshold. Mayor Laufenburger: 34.5. MacKenzie Walters: Right. The revised plan would not require a variance from that because it’s under the 30 percent threshold. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay so the rear yard coverage no longer requires a variance. Does the wetland setback require a variance? 26 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 MacKenzie Walters: They’d be right on it but they’d be within the ordinance. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. So the only thing that they’re coming to us now, or the thing they’re coming to us with now is the 29.2 total lot coverage versus our ordinance requires 25, am I saying that correctly? MacKenzie Walters: That is correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright. Continue Mr. Walters. MacKenzie Walters: So they are asking for again that 4.2 percent variance in total lot coverage. They’re proposing to mitigate the impact that would have on the runoff generated into the wetland by using an engineered permeable paver system. Basically it’s a series of paver patios with gaps. Pavers with gaps between them where water is still allowed to infiltrate and then they would also engineer about 2 ½ feet below that with inch and three-quarter inch rocks that would allow the water to drip through and pool and work naturally into the ground instead if being diverted back into the wetland. I believe they’re also proposing constructing a 2 foot deep rain garden and then a rear retaining wall to further manage drainage in the rear yard of the property. The staff concerns regarding this proposal revolved very heavily on maintenance and upkeep of paver patio systems. Currently the city ordinance and policies don’t have any means of monitoring and enforcing the proper maintenance of these systems so that’s something of a Pandora’s box. The other issue is like any systems they do degrade over time. In this case about a 5.2 percent decrease in efficiency of the system would be the same as allowing them to exceed hard cover through just using regular pavement so that’s a pretty small margin of error. It is, as I mentioned, 759 square feet over the hard cover limit. City policy is currently that all permeable paver systems are counted as hard cover and again that’s largely because we don’t have any mechanism in place to make sure they’re properly maintained, especially as houses change hands and new owners come on board. The other thing to note is that the previous homeowner was able to design a pool that complied with the code. The other staff concern does involve lot coverage. The 25 percent cap on lot coverage is, exists partially to manage the storm water that’s generated by properties and also due to a concern the city code has for preserving green space and open space in residential districts. So if you look at the property currently the area in yellow is the existing house which is about 24.7 percent lot coverage. The existing paver patio in red would also count as hard cover. That would be the 4.2 percent variance added on and then while the blue pool area and purple deck area aren’t counted as hard cover and are separate structures so they’re not going to push it over the rear yard lot coverage cap. It does create a very high visual appearance of a covered back yard which goes against the intent of the ordinance in mandating the 25 percent lot coverage. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Walters? Why do the purple and blue not count as hard cover? MacKenzie Walters: City policy. So with regards to the purple it’s a deck. If they have spaces between where the water can fall and hit the soil as a way of giving homeowners some relief, it’s 27 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 been city policy that that does not count as hard cover. The pool I believe it’s a similar rationale because the water’s hitting the water and is reabsorbed into the pool system. It’s not deemed to be running off. Mayor Laufenburger: Good, thanks for that clarification. Okay. MacKenzie Walters: This is just an overview of the neighborhood in general. These are the 3 blocks from the Lake Harrison subdivision. The property is fairly typical. These 3 are very similar in terms of the larger square footage house on about a 18,000 square foot lot. These 4 here are very similar as well and there are 2 over on Block 1 that are all within 2 percent of their hard coverage maximum. Mayor Laufenburger: They’re within over, they’re over? MacKenzie Walters: No they have 23 to 25 percent hard cover. The way the development was built was fairly large lots in general on, I’m sorry. Fairly large houses on fairly modest lots and that’s created a lot of pressure for hard cover. The purple area is the Block 2. When we check for variances the only variance we could find is the 5 foot front yard blanket variance I mentioned at the beginning and we’ve had 2 properties we’ve found that had enforcement action where they were forced to revise projects or remove hard cover in order to stay under that 25 percent limit. Mayor Laufenburger: And was compliance, did compliance result as far as you can tell? MacKenzie Walters: Yes it did. Both files have them listed as under 25 percent. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. MacKenzie Walters: In summary staff’s concerned about the potential impact of exceeding 25 percent hard cover in a shoreland management overlay district. DNR guidelines do not generally recognize that. Using paver patios is practiced for exceeding that threshold. There’s concern about the precedence of having permeable pavers and high percentage of lot coverage within residential districts. Currently the property is zoned for single family use and has a single family home built and the applicant can develop the back yard within the existing zoning code. For that reason staff is recommending that council deny the variance request. Be happy to take any questions at this time. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Let’s first deal with council questions of staff. Mr. McDonald. Councilman McDonald: Thank you Mr. Mayor. Have you got a picture of the pool that met the requirements? 28 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 MacKenzie Walters: Unfortunately we do not. When the applicant withdrew the proposal just to save space in our filing systems things are removed. I, from talking with staff that worked on the project and the applicant may be able to shed better light on this, my understanding was they were going to remove some hardscape in front and use a system of decking which we don’t count as hard cover to provide like the landing and apron area. Councilman McDonald: Okay, thank you. Mayor Laufenburger: Any other questions from council? Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: I actually back in the day we used to address a lot of issues when or the use of permeable pavers. Has that technology gotten better or is that just, is it used anywhere in the city right now or are we still sticking to our ordinance when it comes to? Kate Aanenson: We are still sticking to the ordinance. We’ve used it in some applications on parking lots maybe but not in back yards and the like. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Walters? This proposal is different from the proposal that was presented to the Planning Commission. What was the result of the Planning Commission on the original proposal? What did the Planning Commission decide? MacKenzie Walters: The Planning Commission denied the variance request. Mayor Laufenburger: Do you recall what the vote was? MacKenzie Walters: It was 6 to 0. It was a unanimous vote. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, so they recommended denial. Actually Ms. Aanenson, if they pass, excuse me if they deny a variance 6-0 does that come to the council for affirmation or not? Kate Aanenson: Yes it can. It can come that way. Mayor Laufenburger: Does it automatically come to us? Kate Aanenson: Yes, only if it’s appealed. Mayor Laufenburger: Oh so. Kate Aanenson: Anybody can. Mayor Laufenburger: The appeal is the process that brings it to the council. 29 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Kate Aanenson: Correct. Anybody aggrieved of the decision could appeal. The City, the staff could appeal it. The neighbors would appeal it. The applicant can appeal. Mayor Laufenburger: But a natural process if the council voted 6-0 to deny or to approve it would not automatically come to the council for review and consideration. Only if it’s appealed. Kate Aanenson: Correct and they appealed. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright. So another question is that this proposal is different from the proposal that was originally presented at the Planning Commission. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Is there protocol that would dictate that this go back, this modified proposal go back to the Planning Commission or is that not necessary? Kate Aanenson: So typically if it would come forward without any changes then he may want to modify it. We would have no information so we’re bouncing back between the two. As long as you don’t exceed what was requested you have, when it’s appealed to make a different decision. We always feel that as staff we want to give you a recommendation that they did in their best faith effort to try to get as close as they can as they reduced 2 of the variances which is very admirable to get to that so we’re just stuck then with the one issue still and that was the hard paver issue so they wanted to put their best foot forward which is what we always recommend too in the spirit of trying to meet the ordinances. Mayor Laufenburger: And defining the best foot, it’s the best that they’re prepared to deal with correct? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Mr. Walters just related to the, you talked about the purple area which is a decking. If they came to us with a plan that replaced some of the paver system with decking that would bring the coverage down below 25 percent, would this even be before the council? MacKenzie Walters: No it would not. That would just, it would be within the ordinance so it’d be approved administratively. As was the previously approved pool in 2013. Mayor Laufenburger: Right. Now that one in 2013 stipulated that you could do this in the back yard as long as you took away some of the pervious surface, impervious surface on the front yard, is that correct? 30 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 MacKenzie Walters: Yep. We do that a lot. You know homeowners decide that they’d rather have a slightly different use of their property but they’re up against that limit so maybe they pull out a patio on the side or the front in order to free up room in the back or they want a larger garage so they pull out a rear patio. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay that makes sense. Alright. Are there any other questions of staff? If not I’m going to ask the applicant, oh Councilwoman Ryan. Councilwoman Ryan: Mayor your questions were a question of mine. So is it the pavers that you’re concerned of or the, just the coverage that is the concern? So if they found other ways to get under that 25 percent it doesn’t necessarily have to be the removal of the pavers. MacKenzie Walters: As long as they’re under 25 percent staff has no issue with the project. The problem that they’re going to run into with that is the property has I believe 40 and ¾ square feet, somewhere in that ballpark of hard cover left to work with so they I believe would be challenging to do without removing hard cover from the front of the property. Mayor Laufenburger: So you said, the numbers you said was they’ve come back with an 800 square foot proposal and that 800 square foot proposal exceeds 25 percent by 759, hence the 40 square feet that they have left. MacKenzie Walters: Yep I can. Mayor Laufenburger: They’re close to that 25 right? MacKenzie Walters: Yes they are within a quarter of a percentile of that 25 as it stands. Mayor Laufenburger: Go ahead Mr. Campion. Councilman Campion: So the only change that’s happened to their house is that they’ve added the deck, the upper and lower decks, was that right? MacKenzie Walters: Yes. Since it was built. Councilman Campion: So how could the previous owner have submitted a pool plan that would have fit? MacKenzie Walters: Unfortunately I was not on staff at the time so I’ve never been able to look at that plan. From talking with people who remember it, I think a big part of it was pulling out some of the driveway or sidewalk in front because that would then give them a couple hundred square feet and then if you do a 1 or 2 foot apron around a smaller pool, it’s possible. 31 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Councilman Campion: And that’s all I was getting is there’s a big difference it sounds like to get, to get there… Mayor Laufenburger: Sure, sure. Any other questions of staff? I, as is our custom I would like to hear from the applicant, if the applicant is present tonight. Simply state your name and your address for the record please. Mark Hauri: My name is Mark Hauri. I’m a landscape designer with Outdoor Escapes that’s working with Barb Hegenes at 6845 Lake Harrison Circle. I’m the designer that has designed the project and has worked with the staff. Had numerous conversations. Just real quick my stthth background, this is my 31 year doing this. I started landscaping between my 8 and 9 grade year. Mayor Laufenburger: In Chanhassen? Mark Hauri: Actually on the east side of St. Paul is where I started. Mayor Laufenburger: Oh okay. You said here I thought you were talking about Chanhassen. Mark Hauri: Yeah. I did some projects in Chanhassen then too. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright. Mark Hauri: So I’ve been doing this a long time. My degree’s in horticulture. Bachler of Science in Horticulture with a Theory of Design Minor. I’ve been designing and selling ever since 1996. This is all I do. I really work with a lot of the high end pool companies to really work with clients. Pool companies and to be a good steward to the land to get things that fit so that’s just a little bit of my background. I actually have done numerous permeable paver projects with the DNR. Molly Shodeen, I don’t know if you people know here. She worked more on the other side of town but I did quite a few projects with her on, in Afton and West Lakeland and Stillwater area so I’m very familiar with this system and the benefits that it provides to us. So thank you for hearing our appeal. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Mark Hauri: One thing that we definitely wanted to do is work with the City. Not fight against the City so without the City even coming to us asking for changes we decided, Barb and I, well let’s make some modifications and let’s get a scope of the project that fits a little bit more in line with some of the city codes. Right off the bat though I actually do have the old proposal and the old approval. Mayor Laufenburger: Give us a chance to orient here a little bit. Okay so point out major, so the street is where? 32 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Mark Hauri: Okay so our street is right out front here. Mayor Laufenburger: Yep. Mark Hauri: Front of the house. Mayor Laufenburger: Yep. Mark Hauri: Drive and then rear lot right back here. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Mark Hauri: Now what I find ironic and a little misleading is this was actually approved by the City but in theory at this point it does not meet the first setback that says a 20 foot buffer and then after that 20 foot buffer there’s a 40 foot setback. This pool actually sits right in the middle of that. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Mark Hauri: So it doesn’t meet criteria number one. Criteria number two. Mayor Laufenburger: Now just I want to make sure Mr. Hauri, is that correct? Mark Hauri: Yes. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay so you’re describing to us what you observe about the original plan that was approved in 2013. Mark Hauri: Correct. Mayor Laufenburger: And you’re applying that to current rules and regulations, is that correct? Mark Hauri: Correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Mark Hauri: So when the city staff says that a plan was approved and they could easily do it within our code that’s not really accurate. So first off the 20 foot setback requires another 40 foot setback with auxiliary structures which would put the line out here so this pool wouldn’t fit. The other one is a 25 foot setback which would have a 25 wetland buffer and then another 15 foot setback. This pool actually at one end doesn’t meet that requirement either. Actually at both ends it doesn’t meet. It’s only 18 feet off. 18.9 but that’s at 20 feet off. 33 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Hauri let me ask the question that I think may be going through some councilors minds. Mark Hauri: Okay. Mayor Laufenburger: Why are you spending so much time talking about an approved project that never was acted upon? Mark Hauri: Well because staff brought it up in their report and said that. Mayor Laufenburger: Well that was part of the history of this. Mark Hauri: Correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Mark Hauri: And I’m just kind of reiterating that they say it was approved but I don’t know how it was approved because with the guidelines that are set forth with the setback there’s no way that this could happen today. This project that was approved in 2013 could not be built today. Mayor Laufenburger: I would not dispute that but I think what’s important to note is that, what’s important to note is that it’s possible that some of the rules that are applicable today were not applicable then. Ms. Aanenson or Mr. Walters can you speak to that? I don’t want to stop you but I think this is an important consideration. MacKenzie Walters: Yeah I can’t speak to when the code changes were made off the top of my head. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. MacKenzie Walters: My gut is as mentioned that the applicant was being, would have been required to do the 25 foot buffer and yeah that’s all I can say having seen this for as long as you have. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Alright Mr. Campion. Councilman Campion: If this was approved is it still approved? Mayor Laufenburger: Ms. Aanenson or Mr. Kate Aanenson: I’ll let the City Attorney. 34 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Roger Knutson: A building permit is approved you have 6 months to start action on it or it’s over. Gone. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay so there’s your answer Mr. Campion. Alright continue as you wish Mr. Hauri. Mark Hauri: Okay and all I was doing is trying to help the council because there were questions about what was approved. But with the ordinance as it sits right now this pool could not be approved whichever wetland buffer you want to choose, the 20 or the 25. So that’s the first thing. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Mark Hauri: So we’ve worked with MacKenzie and staff to actually put this inside, or outside of the 15 foot setback. Build setback. We’ve accomplished that. We’ve decreased the lot hardscape in the back over 10 percent. What we’re asking for now is just the 4 ½ percent of the permeable pavers that go around the pool. Now we’ve actually, I’ve actually done about a dozen projects both with the DNR and watershed districts. We did one in Orono last year and 2007. We’ve got one in Christmas Lake where we were given 30 percent permeable pavers. We’ve worked with Orono where we’ve got 30 and sometimes 35 percent using permeable pavers so this technology has been around for over 30 years and has been perfected. One thing right now that this plan did have was building a deck structure. Now the City per their code allows decks to be built and it’s considered permeable which in their defense is absolutely correct. Water goes right through the deck. Mayor Laufenburger: As long as there’s not paver underneath it. Mark Hauri: As long as there’s not an impervious surface below it. Paver, concrete, whatever. Mayor Laufenburger: Correct, okay. Mark Hauri: So in this scenario I could build a deck. Rain water could come through the quarter inch gaps of the deck board. With this lot though right now 700 square feet is basically the whole back yard and half of the house shed water onto the back yard which rolls into the wetland. There’s about, it drops anywhere from 6 to 14 feet from the back of the house and all that water, 700 square feet goes directly into the wetland. So I could essentially build this deck. Make it fit. Get under the 25 and not do anything with the land below so water would still go through a deck but it would completely run off into the wetland. What we would like to do is we would rather not do the deck. Mayor Laufenburger: Just a moment. I’m trying to understand this concept that you say it would run directly into the wetland. 35 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Mark Hauri: Correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Are you saying that the ground is such that no water would go into the ground? Mark Hauri: No I’m not saying that. Mayor Laufenburger: Oh so then help me understand what you’re saying about it goes directly into the wetland. Mark Hauri: But what I am saying is at this corner of the lot, 979 it’s basically 16 feet below the back part of the house which is at 993. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Mark Hauri: This is at 980 so this has 13 feet so basically this whole back yard slopes towards the wetland. This is probably your continental divide at this point and right up here at this point so from this part of the lot and half of this house, all this water right now is moving towards the wetland. Now granted there is grass coverage now so this is some of the back yard as it sits. At this point right here it’s about 5 feet below the house right now so this whole back yard is sloping. Now granted there’s grass cover. That area used to be an old playground system. It’s just mulch right now but there’s no level area just it, whatever can’t soak into the ground it’s all running to the wetland. So I could build a deck. I wouldn’t even have to take the sod out. I could build a deck. Water would go through the deck and it would continue to run directly into the wetland. And per the code I could do that going back to, going back to what this kind of is showing. What we’re trying to engineer isn’t a paver area. It should be noted as a permeable paver area. So our pavers are allowing water to flow through them into an area that is 2 ½ feet of crushed rock. Three-quarter inch crushed rock. This situation now as water hits anywhere in this back, the back corners of the house rolling into the back we’re going to put all that water into this area. I have an overflow that once this system fills up, and I can basically capture about. Mayor Laufenburger: When you say the system are you referring to the area that the crushed rock is occupying? Mark Hauri: Correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Is that what you’re saying? Mark Hauri: Yep. Not only yep, goes through the pavers but down to the crushed rock. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. 36 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Mark Hauri: This system can hold a rain storm of about 3 ¾ of an inch before it actually gets up to an overflow pipe right here. That overflow is actually going to a rain garden. So now our overflow is coming into a rain garden where we can catch and hold approximately another 250 gallons of water. Once that fills up then everything will kind of, it can start spilling over the wall and head towards the wetland area where currently there’s nothing that can catch and hold that amount of water. And a deck per code actually would have no water retaining area ability on the lot either so although we’re asking for 4.2 percent more hard cover this is considerably benefitting the wetland area because of the water that we can catch, retain, allow to infiltrate. If we have a 5 1/2 -7 inch rain then we’re going to have some runoff going into the wetland area but it’s far less than what would currently go in there in a 5 1/2 to 7 inch rain storm. So that’s my reason for not wanting to do a deck. This is a far better system ecologically. It benefits the wetland area far better. I know there’s more hard cover, 4.2 percent but it’s just much better for the environment with how we’re engineering this and that’s why we are still adamant at pursuing the permeable pavers because it’s a much better solution for this wetland area and to just throw a deck up there, not change the grade, have water continue to run to the wetland, yes it satisfies code but it is doing no benefit to the wetland area. In terms of addressing any concern, you know like MacKenzie said well the lot, you don’t really have a hardship and Barb’s lot is one of the larger lots on this side but the only point to that is she has the only inside corner in her back yard. Everybody else that has a corner, the corner goes away from the back of the house and she has a pinch point as you can see right here. This is a pinch point that nobody else in this area has to deal with. Furthermore the wetland is denoted kind of right here. There should be much more of a contour around that. Something like this. Even if you drew a straight line from point to point of her back, she’s giving up about 15 feet which creates quite a bit of an issue with this pool. And again with what we’re doing we’re capturing the water and allowing it to infiltrate so we feel very strongly that this is a far better situation than just putting a deck and leaving the grass underneath it and letting it roll down into the wetland. In terms of their concern about well, you know these things clog up over time and if it clogs up by 5 percent that you know water, it’s going to act like a solid concrete surface. I don’t quite know how they’re getting the math of that because that just isn’t correct at all. In essence with this system I could fill this hole, this hold, this hole, 3 out of the 5 areas. I could complete clog those. I still have the ability to put water into the system that is far better than any deck and it’s far better than any concrete surface so I don’t know how they’re getting that math but it’s completely wrong. So those were just some of the things that we were looking for. We are using the city code per MacKenzie. He helped me with that. The 2411E with the 25 foot setback and the 15 foot buffer. We’re not looking to rewrite the city code so you know don’t misconstrue this is we’re coming in and we want everybody in Chanhassen now to start using permeable pavers. Okay but we are engineering this to have a better situation for the wetland area. Granted we are asking for an additional 4.2 percent but it’s a much better situation and it’s engineered right and we would like you to consider the approval of this. We will work with staff. If they have concerns they put a 13 point list out of concerns that they might have if the 29.2 percent is granted. Obviously not to exceed that. They would like site specific infiltration data. Our engineering company, Solutions Blue out of downtown St. Paul can provide them with any data that they’re looking for. The applicant, they want us to demonstrate that we have 3 feet separation between the bottom of our 37 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 permeable system and the ground water which won’t be a problem since the pool is actually going to be set at 7 feet deep and we’re not going below 3 feet. Plus the next door neighbor has a pool so as you can see this is Barb’s house right here in question. This is their next door neighbor. They do have a pool here and they actually sit below. That pool is set about 4 feet below where Barb’s is and as you can see right here this would be the next door neighbor where the pool is completely covered with evergreen trees and it’s actually 4 feet below this grade area right here so I don’t think there’s going to be any issue with separation with ground water. The design of the permeable pavement systems. We can give them as many cross sections. We’ve already shown them one cross section. The rain garden that we’re installing, again that’s something we drew up. Nobody asked us to do that. Just extra benefit. They want a maintenance plan. We can do that. One of their concerns was these fill up. That again is not really an accurate statement for the simple fact that this is going to be a pool deck. We’re not going to let dried leaves or wet leaves sit on this system for years to come because she’s going to walk out of her house. Walk into the pool. If we allow leaves to sit on this or grass clippings to sit on this for 2 years and decompose and turn to dirt to fill up the pores well then she’s just dragging all this into her pool so more so than even paver systems or paver patios this is going to be maintained on a regular basis. Power washed every year. Because it’s in the back yard it doesn’t see, we’re going to shut this pool down in the middle of October. We’re going to open it up in May. It’s going to see no traffic. There’s no cars driving on this. There’s no tractors driving on this. There’s no salt. There’s no sand. It’s just going to be leaves that blow in and grass clippings that we’ll maintain and blow off so to have a concern of this plugging up 5.2 percent and losing completely all of it’s ability to hold water just it isn’t really a valid point. It’s really of no concern because this will be a maintained system so. In general that’s kind of what we’ve done. Some more background on the site from our point of view, and we’d really love somebody to have a motion to pass this and if we have to go back to Planning we’re more than happy to do that but we would really like your help in getting this approved. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. Hauri. Would you stand for questions if there are any? Mark Hauri: Absolutely. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright. Staff, excuse me. Council any questions of the applicant Mr. Hauri? Kate Aanenson: Can I just make one clarification before you, a lot of those conditions came from the watershed district. The calculations. The soil so I just want to be clear on that, that’s watershed district. Riley-Purgatory has different standards than Minnehaha with some of the other ones so we just incorporated those. The letter’s attached in your staff report so we just incorporated those technical things. I just wanted to make sure that you knew those came from the watershed district. Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Tjornhom you had a question. 38 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Councilwoman Tjornhom: Only for staff. When you look at the pool and we, you discussed the pavers or you discussed the rain garden and we talked, or I could have thought I swore I heard someone say that we don’t count the pool as part of that impervious surface. But my thought is with the experience I’ve had, we had a retractable cover on our pool and so whenever it would rain we would pump that water off and it would have to go somewhere and so I don’t know if that’s ever been considered when we’re looking at pools but that is I know it’s definitely an issue. I mean the water’s got to go somewhere. Mark Hauri: Correct. This, the auto cover. Mayor Laufenburger: Just a moment. Mark Hauri: Oh sorry. Mayor Laufenburger: I think your question was to staff is that correct? Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yes. Mayor Laufenburger: Kate you want to address that? Kate Aanenson: I don’t think we can address that. It’s a good question. Mayor Laufenburger: Why do we not count pool surface as impervious? Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council, I think the City Attorney can probably address it better than myself but there’s also evaporation that occurs as a part of a pool system so there’s a replenishment but there’s also rain events so to allow pools to occur in Chanhassen we’ve looked at the pools as permeable. Roger you want to add anything else to that? Mayor Laufenburger: Even if they have a cover on them? Todd Gerhardt: Correct. Mayor Laufenburger: That’s what your concern was about the cover. Councilwoman Tjornhom: You know it’s always been in the back of my mind when we addressed pools because of that issue because like I said I know that when it rains there’s a pump on that pool and the water’s going somewhere no matter how long the pools open and evaporation happens there’s still water that has to go somewhere. Mark Hauri: Yeah what we are going to do with, if I may speak to the question. Mayor Laufenburger: Sure. 39 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Mark Hauri: What we are going to do with that is actually that overflow, when we pump the top of that or when we have to drain the pool or do anything we’ll actually put that into our permeable base to allow that to infiltrate so we’re not actually going to pump it to the street or we’re not going to pump it into the water directly. We’re actually going to put it into our permeable base to allow that to infiltrate and break down and recharge the water that way. So we’re not actually going to be pumping it into the storm sewer or have a hose going directly into the watershed either. That’s another one of the benefits with this permeable system. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Any other questions of the applicant? Mr. Campion. Councilman Campion: Mine’s a question for staff as well. So for the rain garden is there an offset for that? Mark Hauri: If my memory of the letter provided to us by the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek thing, watershed is correct I believe in their opinion they said that the rain garden may possibly constitute a best practice which they allow to, as one of the conditions for getting a permit from them but they did not definitively say whether or not it would be. But in terms of for the City no but for the watershed potentially it could be considered a best practice. Councilman Campion: But not an offset? I mean based on, because their rules dictate the calculation right? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mark Hauri: And I did speak with Claire Bleser of the watershed. I actually went in there and sat down with her and their engineer and we did speak about the whole area and they were very positive about it because nobody does, more people should do this. Now one of their concerns, and why we were rejected the first time is they basically said that we had not pulled the permit for them so we’re going to have to go to them for a construction permit also. It’s about $250 and then another $50 one for erosion control that we spoke about. The only reason we didn’t pull that before our planning meeting is because that’s more of a construction build type permit and we didn’t even know if we could build this so we didn’t go to the extent to pulling that but I have talked with Claire and she has seen this and knows what we’re doing. Councilman Campion: Okay. Got it. Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Ryan. Councilwoman Ryan: Thank you Mayor. You speak of your system for the permeable paver system. Mark Hauri: Yes. 40 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Councilwoman Ryan: Is it exclusive to you? Is your system different than somebody else’s? Mark Hauri: No I don’t have a proprietary system but. Councilwoman Ryan: But is there something that you do different that maybe has caused, that has been different when they’ve put in these systems somewhere else? Mark Hauri: Absolutely. We actually do it right and that’s what it boils down to is a lot of these systems because what the City is concerned about and it’s a very legitimate point is, okay well we’ll give you the 4 ½ percent but because nobody’s really monitoring that a landscaper could say well maybe I’ll save you know $3,000, $4,000, $5,000, $6,000 and instead of putting 2 ½ inches of rock I’ll put 6 inches and nobody will know and unfortunately that’s a concern and a valid concern. When we engineer these we have our civil engineer sign off on them and also the surveyor sign off on them so they are done according to spec. Barb knows exactly how we’re going to build this so we’re actually going to build what we say we’re going to build and that’s probably the biggest difference. We’re using a Belguard paver so we’re using in conjunction with Solutions Blue we’re using Belguard’s on staff engineer to make sure that this is done right and it’s actually something that they want to look at doing a case study on so it’s a very important project to us. Very important project obviously to Barb and very important project for the wetland too because it’s actually going to help mitigate water runoff even though we’re adding hard cover. Councilwoman Ryan: Thank you. Mark Hauri: Yes. Mayor Laufenburger: Anybody, Mr. McDonald. Councilman McDonald: Thank you Mr. Mayor. Well it sounds as though you’ve put a lot of time and effort into the engineering and I applaud you for that but the bottom line is that you could build the pool without all of this and it would probably fit within our ordinances. Why do you continue to want to do this because you haven’t shown me the hardship. Just because you want to do the engineering, that’s nice. That falls under best practices. You could still put you know whatever you wanted to under the deck to prove whatever theory you have but at the end of the day I mean what we look at is what’s the hardship? And just proving out an engineering is not a hardship so why wouldn’t you just build it you know to meet the code? To put something in there and at least there would be a pool. You could put a pool on the lot. Mark Hauri: Sure and we could put a pool on the lot and we could build a deck around it per your code and problem solved. The only issue is I still know that there’s water isn’t going to be treated. It isn’t going to be held. It’s still going to continue to run into the wetland so although we’re building a deck that the City says is allowable it’s not even a second or third best option 41 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 for the wetland area. It’s a horrible option for the wetland area. What we’re proposing is a much better situation to mitigate water runoff because we’re not going to have direct runoff in that whole back yard. So although we could build it, this is a much better system and even though we’re adding 4.2 percent hard cover it’s a far better system than just building a deck and not doing anything underneath the soil and letting the water all run into the wetland. In terms of the hardship like I talked about, the biggest thing is just that pinch point in the back and because this lot has the way the development was set up, which you know my client didn’t do or we didn’t do or their, or most of their square footage is actually set out front and it’s a huge house built on a lot and my client didn’t build the house obviously. Mayor Laufenburger: She did buy it is that correct though? Mark Hauri: She did buy it. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you. Mark Hauri: So you know in the back with the pinch point, with that inside corner which nobody else on that side has that does create a little bit of a hardship to get the pool in there. And we just feel very strongly that this is a far better system doing a permeable paver deck than just putting a deck structure over the top of it. It’s just night and day difference. And these, this is like I said it’s over a 30 year technology. There is Total Wine in the city here has permeable area in their parking lot which they’re using so it’s technology that’s out there and it’s proven and it’s kind of tried and true so. And the DNR has let us do it. Mayor Laufenburger: Ms. Aanenson did Total Wine comply with ordinances when they built their? Kate Aanenson: Yeah they have an underground storage system so their storm water is underneath the parking lot. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay but they did comply with ordinances? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Alright any other questions of the applicant? Thank you Mr. Hauri. Appreciate your comments. Mark Hauri: Thank you. Mayor Laufenburger: Let’s bring this back to staff for either any discussion or motions. Or questions of staff. Anyone? 42 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Councilwoman Tjornhom: I guess I think I’ve asked the question. I’m sorry Mr. Mayor, may I ask a question? Mayor Laufenburger: Please, please. Councilwoman Tjornhom: I think I asked this question at the beginning of this report. We as a council or as an Environmental Commission have always decided that these special pavers were not necessarily something we wanted to take on and have to maintain and have we ever used them recently? Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Councilwoman Tjornhom: I’m sorry Kate. Kate Aanenson: Well that’s alright. In the parking lot with Total Wine but that’s part of an underground system. It’s a complete underground storage system. Councilwoman Tjornhom: But not in a residential area. Kate Aanenson: No, not in a residential. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Next to a wetland. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay. Mayor Laufenburger: So let me ask that a different way. To the best of your knowledge is there anywhere in the city where we have allowed permanent pavers to be regarded as a pervious surface? Residential. MacKenzie Walters: Residential no. Kate Aanenson: No. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. And are you aware of code in other surrounding communities Mr. Walters? MacKenzie Walters: I’m aware of, I’m blanking on the name. One city credits the first 100 square feet of permeable as not counting and then considers it to count as normal. I do know of other cities that will count it as say 75 percent instead of 100 percent hard cover. I know of none that count it as completely exempt. 43 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, very well. MacKenzie Walters: Again that is to the best of my knowledge from researching this. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Councilwoman Ryan: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Laufenburger: Yeah Councilwoman Ryan. Councilwoman Ryan: Can we talk about that a little bit more? About what other cities consider it. I mean to further my thought you know the case or the argument that has been made and understanding how why falling in a deck operates with the runoff into the wetland versus this system, it seems as though it’s a better system. Maybe I’m missing something but if they’re able to pump water from a pool into their underground system to hold the water versus putting it into the watershed or out to the road, obviously they have confidence that the system’s going to work. And I know we haven’t done it before but is it something that we could consider and I would, so to go back to the question in these other cities to your knowledge, you know what is the justification for, I know you might not know but with the 25 percent or you know considering it only 75 percent versus 100 percent. MacKenzie Walters: I’m afraid I would need to do research and I would have to work extensively with the Water Resources Coordinator and engineering to feel comfortable in answering that question. Anything I said would be sheer speculation. Kate Aanenson: I would just like to add this. Again different watersheds, different cities approach it differently. Again Minnehaha’s different than Riley-Purgatory. Actually Claire Bleser just gave a really wonderful presentation to the Planning Commission last week. About an hour presentation just about all the things they’re doing. Could this system be better than using just a decking? Potentially. I mean I think they made good effort. It’s kind of a philosophical that we work in coordination with engineering, water resources on their interpretation of this but to your point is it potentially better than just using a decking? Could be. I think if you, we went through, if you looked at the attachment from the watershed district which they said they hadn’t gone to, there’s a lot of calculations and maintenance that they will have to demonstrate to you know to their satisfaction and the installation. That’s a lot of the questions that we’ve had in the past is who’s going to make sure that it’s installed correctly and maintained and that sort of thing so that’s been part of the history on that. Councilwoman Ryan: Right and I mean I understand and that’s also the concern when we put in you know retaining walls. Kate Aanenson: Absolutely. 44 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Councilwoman Ryan: You know that that’s the responsibility of the homeowner is to maintain that and there’s no assurances that the, as we well know that the, you know that they’re maintained and cared for. I don’t have any questions. Just thinking. Mayor Laufenburger: Well if there are no more questions on this matter would you bring, put the motion up there? This matter was brought to us on appeal and Ms. Aanenson do we have an obligation to act on the appeal or can we? Kate Aanenson: Yes. Yes, yep. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright. Kate Aanenson: So again they removed significantly towards meeting the goal but just to reiterate they, maybe MacKenzie if you want to just reiterate that too again. MacKenzie Walters: Yeah from the initial proposal they removed 800 square feet. I’m sorry 700 square feet of permeable paver which brought it from requesting 8.14 percent hard cover variance down to the 4.2 percent hard cover variance that’s before you. They did agree to bring the wetland buffer into compliance with modern standards with native vegetation, posted signs, and with that revised setback they would no longer require a variance for the wetland setback. And the revised one is also under the rear yard coverage ordinance, the 30 percent so the only ordinance that it’s not in conformance with is that 25 percent total lot coverage which as was mentioned has both the storm water mitigation and greenscape and visual appearance components. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Well is there anybody that would like to make a motion that acts on the appeal as presented by the applicant? Councilwoman Tjornhom: I’ll make a motion Mr. Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Mr. Mayor I’d like to make a motion that the Chanhassen City Council denies a request to allow a 4.2 percent hard cover variance and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Is there a second to that motion? Councilman McDonald: I’ll second. Mayor Laufenburger: Motion is made and seconded. Alright at this time is there any further discussion on this motion? 45 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 Councilwoman Ryan: Yes Mr. Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Ryan. Councilwoman Ryan: The only reason that I would deny this is because I am very concerned in this case and other cases about the precedent that it sets and if we start going down the path of 4.2 here, 2.5 there, I think it puts us in a tough situation. I do think that looking at this system is something that we as a city and a council should re-evaluate these systems as a whole to have a better understanding because from what was shared tonight, and I know it’s just one perspective however this system does seem to be a better solution than having a whole back yard filled by a deck with catching you know on the grass and running down. It seems like a much better and more effective solution so I would like to have us take a harder look at that and have a better understanding of it. But because I feel strongly about the precedent that it sets I will have to support this motion. Mayor Laufenburger: Now’s your time to comment if you’d like. Mr. Campion. Councilman Campion: I would like to echo Councilwoman Ryan’s comments. From my time on the Planning Commission I had seen several applications with these permeable pavers and you know I would like staff to look closer to what other cities are doing for offering some discount for those as it is not a cutting edge new technology. You know it’s been around for a while but I echo Elise’s or Councilwoman Ryan’s comments that it would set a bad precedent. Mayor Laufenburger: Anybody else comment? Ms. Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: And I agree with my fellow council members but I also want to just say that they do have other options. They can still put a pool in but they needed just to comply with our ordinance and so that’s another reason why I feel that it’s important that we not important but that’s why I’m going to vote or I made the motion to deny it because of that. Mayor Laufenburger: I think you make a very good point Councilwoman Tjornhom that there are other options and while I appreciate they came back with a modified proposal, according to our ordinances permeable pavers are not an acceptable pervious surface and yes we can change that ordinance and if we in the process of discussions with Ms. Aanenson regarding changing the city code, we can direct them to look at that and see if that’s a possibility but today those permeable pavers are not consider a pervious surface. Mr. McDonald I had my back to you. I didn’t want to. Councilman McDonald: No I’m fine. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright. There’s another thing too and while I certainly appreciate the new homeowner’s interested in making their home more livable and more enjoyable and I 46 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 respect that. There have been other homes in this block that we have denied variance requests, is that correct Mr. Walters? MacKenzie Walters: That would not be precise. They did not apply for variances. In one case part way through the project they were informed they were over hard cover and told to reduce it and they chose to rather than go through a variance to just comply with the ordinance. In another on a different inspection it was discovered that the property was over and the owner agreed to remove X number of square feet to bring it back into compliance. Mayor Laufenburger: Into compliance, okay. MacKenzie Walters: Yep. In both cases the homeowner’s voluntarily brought their properties into compliance. Mayor Laufenburger: It would be hard for me to hear from those 2 folks in a visitor presentation saying you gave them that, why didn’t you give it to us? Now I realize it’s when it’s them it’s not necessarily the same people that are here on the council but it’s the current council that’s acting on this decision. Is there any other discussion? There being one, the motion is to deny the request to allow 4.2 percent hard cover variance and adopt the Findings of Fact and Decision. Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman McDonald seconded that the Chanhassen City Council denies the request to allow a 4.2 percent hardcover variance, and adopts the Findings of Fact and Decision. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. None. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. Mayor Laufenburger: Any council presentations? Mr. McDonald. Councilman McDonald: Yes Mr. Mayor. Yesterday it was my honor to attend the Chanhassen Fire Department’s dedication for their memorial to past fire fighters and fire fighters who died in the line of duty and former chiefs and also acknowledgement of fire fighters with longevity on the force, and excuse me for not saying 10, 20, 40 and I think 50 years but it was a very moving ceremony. It was very impressive. Everybody was in their dressed blues and we had pipers and all of that kind of stuff and it was just very moving. The two speeches for the fire fighters who had died in the line of duty from their families was very moving so I think we’re very lucky in the city of Chanhassen to have the fire department that we do. The dedication that all of it’s members have shown towards the city. Really appreciate the job you guys have done and I think that bringing this memorial together I hope that shows that the community also supports what you all have done for the community because I know there were a lot of donations and a lot of time and effort spent by a local resident so I’m hoping you all enjoy the memorial and that 47 Chanhassen City Council – October 10, 2016 everyone as you go in to vote or you go to the fire station you take a moment to kind of look at it and reflect back on those who have come before and the things that they have done for our community so thanks Chief. Mayor Laufenburger: Well said Mr. McDonald. Any other council presentations? There being none is there a motion to adjourn? Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilwoman Ryan 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 9:20 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 48