Loading...
CC 2005 10 10 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 10, 2005 Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman Labatt, Councilwoman Tjornhom, Councilman Peterson and Councilman Lundquist STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Roger Knutson, Justin Miller, Paul Oehme, Greg Sticha, and Kate Aanenson PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mayor Furlong: Good evening and thank you for joining us. Those here in our council chambers and those watching at home. Glad you’re with us. At this point I would ask if there are any modifications or additions, changes to the agenda that was distributed with the council packet. If not and if there are no objections the agenda will stand as distributed. CONSENT AGENDA: Kate Aanenson: Can I just clarify Mayor for the record, item (h). It states approval of amendment to Chan West Business Park and I did provide modifications to that amendment which included changing it from Eden Trace to Minger-Volk Properties LLC and expiration date on that was 2006 as modified. Mayor Furlong: Alright, thank you. Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations: a. Approval of Minutes. b. Approval of Request for an Off-Sale 3.2 Beer License, Cub Foods, 7900 Market Boulevard. Resolution#2005-87: c. Approval of Resolution Authorizing the Sale of Water Revenue Resolution#2005-88: Bonds, and Approval of Resolution Authorizing the Sale of Refunding Park Bonds. e. Approval of an Off-Premise Directional Sign to Direct Traffic into the Park Nicollet Clinic and American Legion Site. f. Approval of Amendment to Chapter 10 of City Code, Eliminating the Limit on the Number of Off-Sale Liquor Licenses Allowed in the City. City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 g. Approval of Amendment to Hidden Creek Meadows Development Contract. h. Approval of Addendum to Chanhassen West Business Park Development Contract as amended. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. D. APPROVAL OF 2006 POLICE CONTRACT WITH CARVER COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT. Councilman Lundquist: Couple of reasons Mr. Mayor. First of all, we spent a lot of time over the last year on public safety stuff. On that so I wanted us to highlight that and bring that out that you know some of these things, changes or non-changes in here have come as a result of that, which I think is a good thing. The question I had, the change Todd or Justin, change proposed for 2006 versus ’05. Same number of deputies. And then what was the total contract amount in ’05? Justin Miller: I have that, I can’t tell you the exact number off the top of my head. It’s. Councilman Lundquist: Just over a million. Justin Miller: It was I think a million 70,000. Something like that. Councilman Lundquist: About 100,000 increase? Okay. And then the other thing is I would, discussion with other council members about the potential as I’m doing some work with Mr. Gerhardt and the sheriff’s department now to entertain tabling this item for 2 weeks to bring it back at our next council meeting so that we can collect some more information. If other members would be open. Mayor Furlong: I guess the question I have, is there any urgency from a time standpoint that would prevent us from considering this in 2 weeks? Okay, if there’s nothing. Do you want to make a motion to table? Councilman Lundquist: I would move that we table item 1(d). Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second? Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to table approval of the 2006 Police Contract with the Carver County Sheriff’s Department. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None. 2 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 TH PUBLIC HEARING: CENTURY WINE & SPIRITS, 2695 WEST 78 STREET, REQUEST FOR AN OFF-SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE. Public Present: Name Address Dan Herbst 7640 Crimson Bay Ron Clark 5716 Long Brake Tr, Edina Jim Paulsen 8629 So, Falling, Victoria Mark Bollio 1873 Whiteoak Drive, Chaska Craig Alshouse 1300 Willowbrook, Wayzata Tara Clawson 18909 Explorer Tr, Eden Prairie Justin Miller: Good evening Mayor, council. The city has received a request for an off sale th liquor license from Century Wine & Spirits, LLC to operate a new liquor store at 2695 West 78 Street. The store is planned to be on the north side of Highway 5 in the Arboretum shopping center. This is a PUD development that was approved and in that development liquor stores were an approved use in that development. Law enforcement has completed background investigations on all the principals stated in the application and no negative comments were found. This is a public hearing and notice was sent to the property owners within 500 feet of the proposed store. At this time staff did not receive any comments before the meeting. Staff recommend that you hold a public hearing and then approve the off sale liquor license request by Century Wine & Spirits LLC contingent upon receipt of the liquor liability insurance certificate and license fee. And also the license will not be issue until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. Be happy to answer any questions. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff. Just for the record, we did receive or Karen Engelhardt at the City had received a phone call from a resident who could not be here tonight. I know that she sent that from Mr. Wright. She sent his comments along to the council so we should make that part of the public record. Councilman Lundquist: That’s from the next one I think. Todd Gerhardt: No, this one. Mayor Furlong: I think it’s on this one. Okay, so if we can make that part of the public record as well. Thank you. Any other questions for staff? If not, this is a public hearing so at this time we would entertain comments from interested parties on this matter. Please come forward to the microphone. State your name and address please. Please. Now would be the time. Asim Syed: Good evening everyone. My names is Asim Syed. I live right next to this proposed site. My home address is 2766 Century Circle, Chanhassen. I’m not very good with this proceedings. I just received this in my mail and based on my experience, I don’t have a lot of experience. You probably have a lot of experience here but my…and my knowledge says that I should not have a wine store next to my house. So if the council members here can guarantee 3 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 that the crime rate or anything that won’t suffer as a direct result of this wine store, then I’ll be happy… But again I just say, I don’t have a lot of experience but I did invest to buy a house right next to the proposed site so… Mayor Furlong: Well that’s a fair comment. I think it’s difficult for us to guarantee anything but I think it is a fair question to ask of staff. What has been our experience, if at all, with the existing off sale liquor stores in town? We have 3 currently, is that correct? So perhaps can we give some comment. Todd Gerhardt: Typically the concern with most liquor stores is serving liquor to underage individuals and our local establishments have done an excellent job. They’ve been using new technology now where you can scan somebody’s drivers license in and can tell if it’s a fake or not. So they’ve done a great job in maintaining that. As to criminal activity, I’m not aware of any that has occurred in the 3 stores that we’ve had in the last 15 or so years that I’ve been here. Asim Syed: Yeah, I understand but if you’re going to open a store up here and we have seen a lot of crime… I’m not saying it’s because of the wine store but… Now having a wine store next to my house is going to increase the flow of traffic and will invite a lot of customers from different backgrounds, so that bothers me a lot. And in fact raising children in that area, it bothers me a lot. So those are the concerns. I’m not sure if my sense is right here but that’s something I have. Todd Gerhardt: I mean traffic will be generated with any type of use that may be there. Liquor is a legal substance in Minnesota. Our law enforcement agencies patrol this area quite a bit and do a lot of traffic control. We have one car that is just designated for traffic control so we watch all the areas in town so as the Mayor stated, I don’t think we can guarantee you there won’t be crime here. We’ve had crime at some of other establishments this past weekend and so, Pizzeria and some of the gas stations had some theft that occurred this past weekend so it happens. But we’ve got a great law enforcement agency working for us and surveys have shown that people in the community do feel safe and I think that’s a credit back to our law enforcement. Asim Syed: Okay, thanks for giving me an opportunity. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. If anybody else would like to comment during this public hearing as well, please come forward at this time. Sir, please. Craig Alshouse: Hi, my name is Craig Alshouse and I built and own the building next to this facility that now houses 3 different entities that Edina Realty owns and we still have a little bit of space next to it that we’re trying to lease out to some retail. My comment is that I think this is a use that very well fits the zoning. I’m all in favor of it even though I have the store, or excuse me the business next door. This is an off sale facility, not an on sale so the concerns that people have with serving minors really doesn’t enter into this. They may sell something by mistake but there certainly are concerns. And I don’t believe that we’re going to have criminal activity at the store or around the store because these are package goods. People walk out with them and they go someplace with them. I think you have, what you as the council and the planning people wanted for this area was a retail establishment where people could drive in. Stop in on their way 4 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 home. Or drive past it and stop in on the way west or east and get gas. Buy liquor. Buy take out food. Buy coffee. Buy this. Buy that and I think we’re getting there. What we need is more traffic to build a synergy within that whole area, so I speak in favor of it. Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Ron Clark: Good evening. I’m Ron Clark. I’m the developer of Arboretum Center and I just wanted to explain to the council why it, the reason it has taken so long to be before you with this request. I think it was quite a few months ago that we came to you requesting additional approval of a liquor license at that location and at that point in time we actually had 3 perspective tenants that wanted to enter into a lease with us and for one reason or another, not one of those 3 turned out to be the operator that I wanted for that location so knowing that I wanted to deliver what we had, what the council had approved, I subsequently called Dan Herbst that I had been acquainted with to see and knowing that he was a proven operator, to see if he wanted to get back into that business and he certainly did and so we are here tonight for that. But it’s been a long time coming and I wanted the council to understand why. Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any other comments this evening as part of the public hearing? If not then without objection we’ll close the public hearing and bring it back to council. Any follow up questions for the council? That the council has for staff at this point. Councilman Lundquist: No. Mayor Furlong: If not, is there a discussion? I mean it’s one of those issues I think the concerns raised by the resident are always valid concerns. Anyplace we live we want to make sure that we’re not, that our neighbor is not increasing crime and other problems around the area. I think this is an approved use within this PUD and it’s something that, especially because we haven’t experienced problems at our other 3 locations, one that I think we can feel comfortable going forward with. But as always we need to monitor that and Mr. Gerhardt, obviously we can work with our policing services to make sure that that is monitored and traffic as well, around the area as that continues to grow and develop. If there are no other comments, is there a motion to approve? Councilman Peterson: Motion to approve. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second? Councilman Labatt: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion? Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council approve the off-sale liquor license requested by Century Wine and Spirits, LLC contingent upon receipt of the liquor liability insurance certificate and license fee. The license will not be issued until a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for the space. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. 5 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 PUBLIC HEARING: FOOD FOR THE JOURNEY dba JACOBS TAVERN, 7845 CENTURY BOULEVARD, REQUEST FOR AN ON SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE. Public Present: Name Address Craig Alshouse 1300 Willowbrook, Wayzata John C. & Joan Howe-Pullis 1385 Wildflower Lane, Chaska Justin Miller: Mayor, council. The staff has also received an application for an on sale liquor license. This is for Food for the Journey, LLC. They would like to operate a restaurant named Jacob’s Tavern on the site next to the Holiday Inn Express building. There’s not a building there yet but they wanted to get the liquor license as part of their process. This site is zoned PUD and a restaurant and liquor is permitted in this district. Public hearing notice was also sent to property owners within 500 feet of this site and at this moment that I’m aware of, staff has not received any comments. Background investigations were performed on the principles of the organization and no negative comments were found. However an operating manager has not been named for the restaurant. As soon as one is named, a background check will be performed on that individual as well. Staff recommends that you hold the public hearing and after that approve the request for the Food for the Journey LLC doing business as Jacob’s Tavern for an on sale intoxicating liquor license contingent upon the restaurant receiving site plan approval and a Certificate of Occupancy, as well as the appropriate insurance certificates and paying the license fee. Be happy to answer any questions. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff. Councilman Lundquist: Mr. Miller, the operating manager, would staff also recommend that that be contingent upon naming an operating manager and having that background check done as well? Justin Miller: Yes, that’s true. Mayor Furlong: Other questions. Where are they in the site plan approval process? Justin Miller: They have not submitted yet. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: Okay, so they’re trying to do this in advance? Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. This is… Mayor Furlong: I’m sorry. 6 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 Justin Miller: I think this will be helpful for them to acquire financing and get their… Mayor Furlong: Very good, thank you. Any other questions for staff? If not, at this time then I would open up public hearing on this matter and invite all interested parties to please come forward and address the council, stating your name and address please. Nobody for this one? Okay, without objection then we’ll close the public hearing. Bring it back to council for discussion. Your thoughts or comments on this. I think this will be, if we can help them making sure that we have proper conditions that need to be met before this is actually issued, if we can help them bring in a nice restaurant to town, I think I’m all in favor of doing that and given that the background checks came through very well, I would propose that we continue to go forward with this as well. Any other discussion or comments? If not is there a motion to approve. Councilman Lundquist: Motion to approve. Mayor Furlong: Is there a second? Councilman Peterson: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion? Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Peterson seconded that the City Council approves the request from Food for the Journey, LLC dba Jacob’s Tavern for an on-sale intoxicating liquor license contingent upon the restaurant receiving site plan approval and a Certificate of Occupancy. Additionally, staff will work with the applicant to provide an insurance certificate and license fee prior to the restaurant opening. A background investigation will be completed on the operating manager once designated. A license will not be issued until all of the conditions are satisfied. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. LIBERTY ON BLUFF CREEK, TOWN & COUNTRY HOMES, EAST OF AUDUBON ROAD, SOUTH OF LYMAN BOULEVARD AND NORTH OF PIONEER TRAIL, PLANNING CASE 05-11: ? REQUEST FOR REZONING OF THE PROPERTY FROM A-2 TO PUD-R; ? SUBDIVISION WITH VARIANCES OF APPROXIMATELY 91 ACRES INTO 84 LOTS, 3 OUTLOTS, AND PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY; ? SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR 444 TOWNHOUSE UNITS; ? WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT; ? CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT AND FOR ALTERATION TO A FLOOD PLAIN. Public Present: Name Address Shawn Siders Town and Country Homes 7 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 Kevin Clark Town and Country Homes Rick Janssen Town and Country Homes Jeff Fox 5270 Howards Point Road, Excelsior Rick Dorsey 1551 Lyman Boulevard Kate Aanenson: Thank you. The subject site located just south of Audubon, south of Lyman Boulevard. Actually this project was given conceptual approval by the Planning Commission in 2002 so for the last 3 years we’ve worked on not only this project but the entire 2005 MUSA and working with the property owners, the city engineer working through the frontage road issues, and the AUAR. As we worked specifically advancing this project, there’s a lot of issues that th were refined as they moved along. Most recently at your September 29, the council wanted to review some changes that they had directed the applicant to make, specifically the location of units and then some architectural details which you reviewed. Again I think for the public record the developer’s here prepared to kind of summarize those tonight. I think that’d be helpful for the public in a summary format, and then also I just wanted to remind the council too that this is preliminary plat approval. You will see it again for final plat. When it comes back in final plat, although there is a long laundry list of conditions, some of those conditions will go away as they have been met and also you will have a design booklet which will call out each unit specifically on the site. The color and material designs so you’ll all know that ahead of time if there’s things that you want to move, that that would be something to you also. You have that final approval of design. So the goal with this is to give them specific marching orders that they need to finalize to get the ultimate project. One of the things that you asked for at the last meeting was kind of a comparison chart, which is included right behind the summary report of other projects. I just wanted to briefly summarize looking at that. It’s a little complex but this model is what we use tracking for our subdivisions. It’s actually a similar model that we’ve used that the Met Council has now picked up on tracking, not only multi-family but also single family to see where we are for net density. One of the questions that you asked at your last meeting was, how does this compare to other similar multi-family products so we just added another column, kind of looking at net density. When you take out some of the edges or the primary, some of those other outlots that you may have included, now when we do a PUD, when you look at each project, while we treat them all the same, there might be something unique to each project that may not be on another. For example there might be a large open space that you wanted because there’s some trees. While it may not be in the primary district that you want to save those trees and put them in a conservation easement or an outlot, so while we try to compare, if you look at the gross density on that medium density comparison chart, it’s very similar then to other projects that we’ve reviewed so it’s really in line. Again going back to the goals of the primary district for that was put in place only, we decided that instead of trying to, with the park referendum money and trying to value the overlay district, which was at the time not only for storm water management, erosion, we thought it was a nice amenity that we wanted to have that corridor for the city. And instead of trying to take that referendum money and go out and try to get appraisals on each piece, that we negotiate those as they come in and maybe the lines moves out or back depending on what we feel is significant. So that’s how we comment on this project and we walk each project to decide how it rings out. So again the density on this one and the staff’s feeling is that it’s very comparable and treated the same as we have on other projects. I did want to, I did attach the original conditions of some things that were modified, for example on Town and Country. Additional wetland work was done by the consultant so that number was modified 8 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 to reflect the additional wetland work that was done on that project. And on page 4 of the cover sheet, there was a condition of the Park and Recreation, number 31 that I think is a little loose. We just have to tighten that up and talk about the trail. That internal trail on the private road. That that be designed subject to staff approval. Modify that. Again there’s several motions that are involved with the subdivision. The lots have changed and types of homes have been modified or moved to different projects. That does require rezoning, and rezoning for the PUD. It does require subdivision. It does require site plan review. A wetland alteration permit and a conditional use for alteration within the flood plain. We’ve worked with the developer to resolve all those issues to date and… So with that I’d be happy to answer any questions and I’d like the developer again to make just a real brief presentation, kind of a summary of the changes. With that if I can answer any questions. Mayor Furlong: Any questions for staff at this time? Ms. Aanenson, point of clarification. Under the recommendation on the staff report, just to be clear. The second item talks about a site plan review with subdivision. Should preliminary be included in there? Is that appropriate? Kate Aanenson: That’s fine. Mayor Furlong: Just for clarity. Kate Aanenson: Yes. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any other questions for staff? No? Then at this time I certainly would invite the developer, representative from Town and Country Homes to come forward. Good evening. Kevin Clark: Good evening Mayor. Council members. My name is Kevin Clark. I reside at 3841 Red Cedar Point Drive and I’m here representing Town and Country Homes. A K.Hovnanian company. I guess I would like to again review what we’ve talked about at some of our recent meetings and touching on a few of the things, our goal here has been and it’s been really an excellent experience working with yourselves, planning and city staff and the numerous consultants and city engineering in what we hope to be a hallmark community for the city of Chanhassen. Bringing together all the, boy the attract of inviting wonderful amenities that this property offers with it’s trees, the bluffs, the creek and the sight lines that the topography offers. We’re looking to do this and accomplish that goal by using quality trails but also building architecture which will differentiate this neighborhood and also preserve the natural amenities to provide a truly unique neighborhood within Chanhassen. Let me just review some of the items that we touched on as we’ve come to this our most recent site plan design. Some of the areas where we’ve revised the layout from previous to account for the readjusted Bluff Creek Overlay District, that area that we had initially done a walk through over a year ago. Almost 2 years ago now has been finally delineated spring-summer of this year, and subsequently we made numerous adjustments to that as far as siting the product here and also along this area and in this area here, well the flood plain down on the, what would be the southwest. The southeast area, from our initial site plan, we had numerous retaining walls in this area. A number of other things that we were working with, street grades and such, and upon your recommendation we went back to the drawing board per se. Reviewed that. Adjusted our street grades and also reviewed 9 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 how the products were sited. We then removed some larger multi-family products to put in more appropriately, full basement product along this creek area which allowed us to blend those basement type products with this topography. Reduce the size of the buildings along this natural wetland area, and in general created a nice centrally kind of grouping there with all the products that we’re presenting in this neighborhood. By doing that we reduced the retaining walls substantially down in the area of what was 17 to 20 feet, now to I think 4 to 6 in some cases. We have two tiered walls so we’ve mitigated that tremendously. We’ve also represented that we will on approval of this site plan be working with our neighbors to the east on the Peterson property to make sure that our grades blend appropriately with them as their project moves forward in the city process also. Throughout the process, coming out of the AUAR and the numerous revisions to the infrastructure, specifically that main collector road that runs through the site. If you’ll remember originally coming out of the AUAR it was intended to come out and then go at more of a diagonal through the north corridor of the Peterson property. Upon review of other features, whether it be flood plain, wetlands and such and crossing, it was decided that that road needed to have a more northerly projectory on our east boundary and then working with city engineering we’ve adjusted for all those impacts as we designed our site plan to accommodate those new collector roads and the infrastructure that they’re currently planning on. Also, the recent public hearing, one of the items that was addressed was the mix of units and really from the air of the site plan as it looked, we’ve gone back and reviewed that. Looked at how the site plan and how the buildings were sited on there. We’ve made numerous adjustments to removing what we refer to ads the Chateau product in this area, and substituting that with a Majestic. And then I also looked at this area up here, and then changing some of the products and creating more of a, kind of a smaller collection with all the products in each of these four quadrants so we had a balance of all those areas. Just to go through a number of the other areas we’ve worked with. I think we’re looking forward to creating this neighborhood identity coming in off of Audubon with an entry area here. Continuing through to this round about feature that’s been planned by the city in their infrastructure. Creating a special identity for this neighborhood. The street patterns with the main collector road progressing through here and the main intersection. We’ve been able to site our products so there are no garages siting on any public streets. Maintaining a very aesthetic architecturally pleasing sight lines as you drive through this entire neighborhood. As our plan here shows, we’ve been able to preserve upwards of three-quarters or 63 acres of the 92 in open space, whether it be in bluff area or areas surrounding a building. Natural areas, so I think we’ve done a tremendous job of working to provide and preserve this natural amenity going forward. We’re proposing a totlot in this area. We also have a pool amenity that will be part of the association in this area here. In response to some of the concerns in this pool area and pedestrian crossing, we worked with city staff to make sure that in the design and planning of this collector road there will be designated cross areas and our pedestrian pathways will be constructed. Specifically to match up with the, to provide safe crossing to and from this planned amenity. Parking. We have in each unit, there are 2 units covered in each parking or for each unit and in addition to that we have about 922 additional sites. Parking. Both on street, in the driveway and in parking clusters throughout the neighborhood. So we have 4.08 spaces per unit. We’ve gone to great lengths again in working with the Bluff Creek overlay to preserve the trees and probably one of the other things that evolved was there was a section of land here, the Jeurissen parcel that we were able to incorporate so what we are able to speak to this whole area in continuity. Those are just the summary of a number of changes we’ve made as we brought the site plan to the condition it’s at now. I’d be glad to go through the architectural changes that I 10 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 know were in your packet. If you’d want me to. I’ll leave that to you. We’re looking forward to working forward on this project with staff, engineering and with our neighbors, the Petersons and other property owners, and look forward to advancing this project before you. I’ll stand ready to answer any questions about architecture or anything else. Mayor Furlong: Very good. Thank you Mr. Clark. Questions of Mr. Clark. I guess Mr. Clark one area, and I know we discussed this, it is related to the architecture with regard to, we discussed this at our last work session and you’ll excuse me, I forget the name of some of the different units but they’re the four square unit. The Victorian, those styles. Kevin Clark: I think you’re referring to the Premiere. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yes. Kevin Clark: That one was referring to the Churchill club. It’s upside down. Alright. Mayor Furlong: I guess I’m speaking more to the architecture versus where they’re located within the site plan. I think we made tremendous improvement on the front and the look in coming with the four different units. The question I have, I know this came up at our last work session were the rear views of these units. And specifically, basically a long wall and I know that you’ve put your money in there. Is there something we can do, or working with staff to try to build some dimension to that between now and final to break up those long walls? From just a visual standpoint. Kevin Clark: I know we did talk about this area and I think again to reiterate how we’ve landed on it from this point, one of the things we’re looking at it as I described was the really the color palette and how working with either the walls or different materials, the colors that will come with that, and then what we’ve shown to yourselves and it was a 3 different distinct architectural elevations that we’ve put together. I think yes, what I would ask is that we really defer to the architects and our color consultant to say what would be appropriate because what we want to do is speak to the market and give us the latitude to talk with them to see what we can do to introduce that. One of the things that as we’ve got this product sited is the way the buildings sit together as far as…one of the items you’d like to talk about is somehow undulating them is how we’re matching that existing Bluff Creek Overlay and basically there are two buffers that we need to account for, so we’ve been able to, you know in the context of the whole site, make sure everything works in that area and I’d be hesitant to try to start breaking the building up because of how those structures lay together along those buffer areas and how the structures come together. Mayor Furlong: And perhaps if you could hold up and pick the maroon one here. I think that’s the four square, just as an example. Just the rear view. I think the colors look good and I know you’re hiring a consultant there to pick a lot of good matching colors and work together, and that there won’t be any buildings next to each other of like color that will work together. I guess what I’m referring to as you look across there, on the two end units there’s some articulations, I’m learning. There’s some depth added there with, from an architectural standpoint, and is there an opportunity, whether it’s a similar type of articulation across the back there or the addition of 11 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 other features to try to break up that long wall view, and again working with staff, working with your architects to try to break it up so that it’s not just a solid. While you’ve done a little bit of that here, I guess what I’m looking for is a little bit more. Kevin Clark: Right, and you mentioned it in your earlier comments that certainly we focus our energy on the elevations. On really the sides and the front because going back to the site plan, all these, really you’ll have to stand in the woods to see the back of all these, so what we’re looking at is where is the value from the neighborhood, both the customer and the community as they drive through there, where will that be better suited? Mayor Furlong: And I think you’ve done a good job there. What I don’t know from current existing landscaping, trees and such, as you come from the, as you look at your site plan here, as you come from the east curving in there, you’re going to see a number of these units across the primary zone of the Bluff Creek corridor. And so something to look at if you would between now, as I say, and final plat, as a way to improve upon what I think is, you know you’ve already made some great improvements so I don’t want to discount this but at the same time take a look at that if you would. Kevin Clark: We certainly will. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? At this time. No? Okay, very good. Thank you. At this point then I guess we would bring it back to council for comments and discussion. Your thoughts and comments. Councilman Lundquist. Councilman Lundquist: It’s been an interesting time through this and I would echo your comments to the developer and staff on improvements that have been made. We’ve come a long ways. Especially in the last couple of months on this thing, so I don’t want to discount that either. I’m still oh, up in the air I guess I should say. We’ve had some, you know some issues on the, this property right now is guided for a mixed use there, or do a guidance. So we’ll be giving up some industrial here, which is kind of near and dear to my heart and when I look at this, you know we’ve used the density transfer tool to put it all together. When you look at this, the pads, the building pad, the area itself, being that density at 11.2, it’s a lot of, it’s still a lot of units. It’s a lot of stuff packed into a little area. Granted it’s a difficult site to work with and we’re preserving the bluff and the open space and all those things are all good things. We’re doing the density transfer using the tool properly for what we’ve put it in place for. But that, it’s still a lot of houses packed into, or a lot of units packed into a little area so. You know I guess there’s still some things that aren’t perfect in my mind but again it’s come a long ways and I do have confidence that the units would be, or the development might be the best high density or medium density thing that we could put in there, but I’d be interested to hear what fellow council members viewpoints are and at this point I guess I’m still up in the air as to next course of action. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Councilman Labatt, thoughts. Councilman Labatt: My computer keeps locking up on me so I’ll wing it here. You know this has made it’s full circle here. I wasn’t really happy at first when this first came up and a lot of the comments we all exchanged about the roads and the, now that the features and the changes 12 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 have been made over the last several revisions have pleased me. As I look at the net density, I don’t, thanks Todd. You know the adjusted, I’m not going to look at the adjustments. I’m looking at the net density and this is 11.24, which is on the low side of a lot of our recent developments in the last, my 7 years on here. And the gross is very similar to what we’ve done. We’ve done a few lower ones. So the density doesn’t bother me. The changes that were made in the configuration of the development and the improvements that were made are nice. I think Mayor, your point of the idea, the Premiere homes up there on the north with, and working with the back of those to change the monogamous look to it. I mean when you’ve got 8 windows across the structures, it still looks like a military barracks and I think that Mr. Clark got our point of add some features there. Make it look nicer for when you’re coming down that new road. Other than that I think the work session last, 2 weeks ago, the questions I had and to the configuration of the development were answered. I am pleased with the park and when you look at some of the parking issues and especially during the winter time, and some of the other developments of this style and the problems that has caused, obviously this developer’s taken the time to look into that and create extra parking spots. But I like it. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Other comments? Councilwoman Tjornhom, thoughts. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yeah, I kind of wish the product that we were looking at today is what we first saw a couple months ago. I’m beginning to become a person that is really into the life cycling of neighborhoods and I think with the spaces that we have left we have to be wise in making sure that we make sure we’ve covered our bases with this life cycling idea and I just don’t see it here with this project. I don’t see the price point. 230 is starting for the Chateau and I think, correct me if I’m wrong but for, I don’t want to say low income housing but for. Mayor Furlong: For affordable. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Affordable housing, I think it’s like 193 or something. That’s where it’s starting or I thought that’s what I read. And so if that doesn’t work for that, and also I wanted, hoped to see something more for empty nesters. Something more rambler style than the level townhouses. Maybe a blend of the whole thing mixing everything together instead of having this one concentration of townhouses, we’ve got a stairs and so for me to change the zoning, I had to see something better. I had to see something more unique maybe because in my mind this is going to set the tone and set the bar for what happens for the future development in this area and so at this point I don’t think I can vote yes. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Councilman Peterson. Councilman Peterson: Yeah, I’ve probably struggled over this one more than I have most. When this was before us a few years ago I was, I was very concerned about the rezoning from industrial to anything less than industrial for all the reasons that we spoke of before. Because of that I set the standard pretty high. I set the bar high. I think for all the right reasons too. So I’ve been waving the flag about architectural design and distinctiveness all the way through, and I think we have come a long way to achieve a product that is, it’s a good product. It’s, you know if it was a straight development without a PUD, without zoning, then I would be pretty happy with it. The things that concern me are the density. This will be one of the biggest, probably the 13 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 second largest development we have in the city as far as size of acreage and the number of units. And so it’s a combination, to your point Steve, the density isn’t that different than other ones we have but the sheer scope of the project is significant. You know it’s twice the size of the farming community I grew up on. To add perspective I guess. You know so. Councilman Lundquist: In acreage or in units? Councilman Peterson: Both. Both. You know it’s a development that, I think I used the word a few weeks ago that I wanted something that wowed me. It wows me today a lot more than it wowed me a few months ago and I think that is, as you all have shared, that’s very commendable. The developer and staff have worked hard to get a product that is better than it was before, and that’s what the Planning Commission is tasked with and that’s what we’re tasked with, to bring products that get better. But, the question I’ve been asking all the way up through this very second is, is have they met where the bar is set for me? I think because of the massiveness of the development and the architectural designs that I think are a little bit below my standard yet, I’m concerned. So Mr. Mayor I’d like to hear your comments and what your thoughts are on it even before I make up my ultimate mind but I wanted a product that is absolutely outstanding for this area and I don’t think we’re at outstanding, but I don’t know if I’m asking too much and I guess that’s what I’m looking for feedback on. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. I think that, and I will echo Councilman Labatt’s and other’s comments as well and thank the staff and the applicant for getting us a proposal that we’re looking at this evening. I think where we were back in July, it was not there. There wasn’t the comfort there and the standard that we need to ask ourselves, are we getting the best possible? We don’t as a council get to choose who develops property. It’s the property owner. That’s America and I kind of like that because I own property too. That being said, I think from a standard standpoint, are we getting the best possible out of the developer? And the comment that I’ve used before in our work sessions is, is this going to be a development that’s going to be on their next marketing literature? Is this what they’re going to be proud of? To say look at what we did in Chanhassen. To me that’s a standard that, it’s a qualitative standard but nonetheless it’s a standard that I can look to, are we getting the best? Can we do a little bit more? Earlier tonight I was asking for some more. I think they’ve done a good job and they’ve gone the extra step in terms of getting consultants in for color. We’re not seeing all these buildings are not the same white or beige or gray. There’s variety, just like we have in other neighborhoods in our city, there’s variety of colors from house to house, and there will be variety of colors here as well. Councilman Lundquist talked about land use and that was a concern and it’s a valid concern. It continues to be a concern of this council in terms of changing land use. In this particular case our comprehensive plan showed a either or guiding for this development. Either medium density or office industrial. I agree with Councilman Lundquist that our office industrial, we’ve got to make sure if we’re going to give up some of that out of our comprehensive plan, where are we going to get it back, and as we know at a recent work session we sat down with staff and identified some specific properties that had the likelihood potential to offset the 40 plus some odd acres here that will be developed and counted as medium density going forward. So I think as, while there isn’t a desire at this point to change land use guiding, as part of our comprehensive plan, we were able to identify specific parcels to offset that. I think Councilman Lundquist to your point of raising that question, all of us can feel a little more 14 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 comfortable doing that. The comment on density, as I look at that, I tried to get a sense and a feel of what we were looking at and in looking at staff’s comparison with regard to how the density of this area within the building area of buildings compared to some of the other ones. The most recent one that I looked at was in the Arboretum Village. The Pulte development. And there, as I understand it, that, the net density on the chart is about the same, to Councilman Labatt’s point, it’s about the same, little bit less than some of the other ones that have been done in the city. But driving through there, one thing when I think of Pulte, my immediate thought goes to the northeast corner of Highway 5 and 41, which is probably the most dense area. th Because clearly the twin homes north of West 78, but this number that we’re seeing here is the average including the twin homes and so when you think of the area of that neighborhood, that development that’s in that northeast corner of 5 and 41, that’s more dense than what you’re going to see here. I drove through there. It’s a neighborhood. It’s, there are people walking around. There are cars parked. There are people, you know it’s a neighborhood. And you had this feel while you were there that you were in a different place than perhaps driving through Longacres or other parts of town as well, so I think, to Councilman Lundquist’s point, what’s creating that sense in this development is really I agree, our proper use of transferring density from the rest of the area, the 90 plus odd acres into the middle so that we can create on the north side, preserve the primary zone for Bluff Creek on the south side where there is developable area along our border with Chaska, a green zone. So as you’re driving up from Chaska there’ll be a visual break with the trees before you hit development within Chanhassen. All these things I think we have, as a council and again with the developer and with staff, we’ve worked to push this to move this forward over these summer months. I think we’ve made some great progress. I think we’ve raised some good issues in terms of land use. I think the issue of density transfer is one that we should always be checking. If we could take these buildings, push it out, but we’re not going to change the number of units on this 90 acre parcel. What we’re going to do is we’re going to give up part of the primary zone of Bluff Creek corridor. I haven’t seen a compelling reason to do that and when I compare this to other developments that we have in town that are neighborhoods, they’re homes. People live here and enjoy living there. I view it as what are we getting from a city, and you can talk about driving through or driving to. I think what we can look at as a council is the driving to. Are we going to see areas of green? Are we going to see preserved areas as well as developed areas in our city? We’ve done a good job of that as a city over the years. This is another one of those areas. We’re not clear cutting. We’re preserving the natural features of the area and using the development tool of transferring the density, not from a negative result but from an overall positive result. Councilman Peterson you said, you know we set our bar. We set it high. I think are we asking too much? I think we need to ask all that we can out of each developer individually and if we achieve that, then we’re asking enough. And that’s what we as a council, recognizing that property owners have rights and I’m glad that we all do. That we need to push and I’m not saying let up. There was one area that I raised earlier. I think that we can, if there’s an area to make an improvement, we should continue to do that even if it is on the back of the house. That’s what we should do. So I think we’ve come a long way. I am very pleased with the progress that has been made over these last few months as everybody has worked hard to get something. I know the council’s put in a lot of time and given the developer a lot of feedback. I think they’ve responded to the issues raised as they were raised and we’ve had a chance to look at this within the comprehensive plan. I think it’s a worthwhile development. It will be an asset to our city and I support it subject to the conditions contained within the staff report as well as the additional comments made this evening. So Councilman 15 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 Peterson, those are my thoughts or comments and I certainly would be happy to listen to others or, if you have other comments to share, or Councilman Lundquist. Anyone in particular with regard to this development. Councilman Peterson: I don’t know if it’s a sign but my computer, on this project is locking up. I can’t open it up. Councilman Labatt: You need to get to 134? Councilman Peterson: Uh huh. Councilman Labatt: Yeah, that’s all I can get to. Todd Gerhardt: You want to hand my report down to him. Mayor Furlong: Other thoughts and comments from others on this. Councilman Lundquist: Todd, we talked a little in work session about tax capacity and generation for medium density versus office industrial. About having exact numbers. Can you give us a feel for just in general revenue generation from a development such as this with this kind of density versus an office industrial. Todd Gerhardt: Well, depends on what areas you’re taking in. The 11 units per acre are going to generate more in tax dollars. When you look more at the 6, I believe it was a push with the office industrial zoning. But 11 units per acre will generate more, so you get a lot of open space in here. Probably would not be able to put any office industrial in those areas in the green with the exception of the one to the south. You do have a heavily wooded area there. You probably are going to have a buffer area when you go up against residential so odds are you probably wouldn’t develop in that area. So in this case I would say probably the multi-family would generate a little bit more. But then again you’ve got to take into account a little bit more in community service. Schools and our park system. Councilman Lundquist: And then that’s the next question. The comp plan is used for a lot of things like the school developments and things. This doesn’t, I guess our intention would be if this one gets approved then we’ve got to offset that somewhere else so we don’t get too skewed one way or the other. Mayor Furlong: You’re saying with land use? Councilman Lundquist: Yes. Mayor Furlong: That was one of our work session topics. A few meetings back. Councilman Lundquist: And our options from here, if this one gets approved, as far as architecture and colors and all of those things, we’ve still got full control over what goes. 16 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 Kate Aanenson: What the condition reads now is that you will approve the color palette to represent the direction that you’ve given but you’ll get final approval on the, you know the buildings will be sided but they’ll be called out and then the architectural color palette and materials, you’ll approve that… Councilman Lundquist: So we’ve still got control over architecture and color palette. Kate Aanenson: Yes you do. But I think just to be clear, …it’s going to be similar to what’s here. Councilman Lundquist: Agreed. Mayor Furlong: Other thoughts, comments. I guess as we proceed with the possibility of a motion here, a couple things that came up. One is clarifying preliminary within the site plan. And then the other condition was 31 or 32. Kate Aanenson: Correct. 31. Mayor Furlong: 31? Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: To state that the internal private trail be designed subject to staff approval. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, and Mayor if we could clarify I think Councilman Lundquist…referred to the first condition. Mayor Furlong: Condition 1? Kate Aanenson: Yeah, design plan showing the color and architectural, and I just need to clarify to say at the time of final plat, just to be clear that that’s our intent for approval. Mayor Furlong: And that condition 1 addresses Councilman Lundquist’s concern Mr. Knutson? Kate Aanenson: Yes. Based upon approval at final plat. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Okay, is there any other discussion? Councilman Labatt: Condition 1 is maybe changed at the time of final plat. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Councilman Labatt: Condition 32 is going to be, instead of carefully planned it’s going to be say designed? Kate Aanenson: No, 31 about the trail. 17 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 Councilman Labatt: Or 31 is going to be changed, you’re changing here to say you carefully planned or from that to say should be designed. Mayor Furlong: Designed subject to staff approval to allow for convenient access. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Councilman Labatt: Is there another amendment or just those two? Mayor Furlong: I think…that we clarify that it’s preliminary plat. Preliminary site plan. Councilman Labatt: Right, yeah. Mayor Furlong: Any other concerns, requests? Okay. Is there a motion? Councilman Labatt: Mayor, I will recommend that we approve the request to rezone from A2 to PUD-R, site plan review for subdivision of 6 blocks and 69 buildings including 444 units, 3 outlots A and B which represent the overlay district and C which is the association pool and 7 common lots of 91.02 acres, conditional uses for the development of Bluff Creek Overlay District and alteration of the flood plain, and a wetland alteration permit as stated below and showed on the site plans and construction plans dated 9-06-05. And the conditions as outlined in the staff report with the noted that this is a preliminary site plan and number 1 is going to be at the time of final plat. And number 31 is that the design is subject to staff approval. Did I hit them all? Mayor Furlong: Think so. Councilman Labatt: You had number 2 highlighted there. Mayor Furlong: No. Councilman Labatt: Okay. Is this where we also adopt the findings of fact Roger? Roger Knutson: Yes. Councilman Labatt: As outlined in the staff report. Okay. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second? Councilman Lundquist: I’ll second. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Made and seconded. Is there any discussion on the motion? Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded that the City Council approve the request for rezoning from A2 to PUD-R; site plan review with subdivision of 6 blocks 18 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 and 69 buildings including 444 units, 3 Outlots (A & B which represent the Overlay District, and C which is the association pool), and 7 common lots of 91.02 acres; conditional uses for the development in the Bluff Creek Overlay District and alteration of the Flood Plain; and a Wetland Alteration Permit, as stated below and as shown on the site plan and construction plans dated 9-06-05, subject to the following conditions: Planning Recommended Conditions of Approval 1.Provide design plan that shows the color and architectural detail for each unit on the site. 2.The assessment for the AUAR will be paid at the time of plat recording. The assessment amount, based on gross acreage of 15.5 %, plus wetland delineation and cultural resources inventory is $22,709.00. Engineering Recommended Conditions of Approval 3.The final plat can not be presented to City Council for approval until City Project 04-05 is awarded. 4.Before site grading commences, the three existing buildings on the property must be razed. 5.On-street parking may be used to satisfy the parking requirement with the following stipulations: On-street parking is prohibited between November 1 and April 1 between the hours of 1:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m., consistent with Section 12-16 of the City Code: Winter Parking Regulations. Credit for on-street parking is not allowed along the curve of the public streets. 6.The developer’s engineer must work with Peterson’s Bluff’s engineer to ensure that the proposed grading on each property matches at the property line and to eliminate and/or decrease the height of retaining walls to the maximum extent possible. 7.Ground slopes shall not exceed 3H:1V. 8.The final grading plan must show the proposed top and bottom of wall elevations for all retaining walls. 9.Retaining walls over four feet high must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota and require a building permit. 10.The existing driveway at Audubon Road must be removed. 11.All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. 19 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 12. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings must beat least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. 13.The last public storm water structure that is road-accessible prior to discharging to a water body must have a 3-foot sump. 14.The applicant shall include a drain tile system behind the curbs to convey sump pump discharge from homes not adjacent to ponds. 15.The style of home and lowest floor elevation must be noted on the final grading plan. 16.Blanket drainage and utility easements are required over all common lots; however, the following storm sewer segments shall be owned and maintained by the homeowners association: a.Northeast and west of Lot 5, Block 1. b.Within the private cul de sac to Lots 1-4, Block 3. c.The connection between the private drives to Lots 9, 10, 11 and 12 Block 1 and the public lateral within Street A. d.The connection between the private cul de sac to Lots 1-4, Block 3 and the public lateral within Street D. e.East of Lot 7, Block 4. f.Northof Lots 11-13, Block 5. g.West of and between Lots 2 and 3, Block 6. 17.The plat must be signed by a Land Surveyor registered in the State of Minnesota. 18.A minimum 75-foot long rock construction entrance must be shown on the plans. 19.Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. 20.An easement is required from the appropriate property owner for any off-site grading. 21.If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. 22.Utility services for the buildings must be shown on the final utility plan. Sanitary services must be 6-inch PVC and water service must be 1-inch copper, Type K. 23.Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance. 20 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 24.Upon project completion, the developer must submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. 25.All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant is also required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. 26.Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will be required prior to construction, including but not limited to MPCA, Department of Health, Carver County and Watershed District. 27.The benchmark used to complete the site survey must be shown on the grading plan. 28.Intersection neckdowns are limited to public street intersections only. Park and Recreation Recommended Conditions of Approval 29.Full park dedication fees shall be collected per city ordinance in lieu of requiring parkland dedication. 30.The trails on both the north and south sides of collector road “A” are widened to 10 feet. 31.The internal or private trail north of Block 1 be designed subject to staff approval to allow convenient access to the Bluff Creek Corridor. 32.Other internal or private trails connecting residents to amenities within the PUD be enhanced. Wetland Alteration Permit Recommended Conditions of Approval 33.Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). 34.The applicant shall work with staff to address comments received from the reviewing agencies, including conducting MnRAMs for impacted and replacement wetlands for use in sequencing flexibility for impacts on wetlands A, D, E, J and L. Details regarding the stabilization of areas upslope of mitigation area M2 shall be included in the replacement plan. More detailed plans for mitigation areas M1 and M2, including cross-sections, shall be submitted. The applicant shall consider restorations of wetlands A, F and G for new wetland credit. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 35.A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan shall be submitted. The replacement monitoring plan shall include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species, 21 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 particularly hybrid cattail, purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans shall show fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. 36.A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands, with the exception of Basin C. A wetland buffer 20 to 30 feet in width (with a minimum average of 20 feet) shall be maintained around Basin C. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City’s wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. 37.All structures shall be set back 40 feet from the edge of the wetland buffer. The wetland buffer setback should be shown on the plans. 38.The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. 39.Clay diversions shall be used to divert runoff around the wetlands on the south side of the development to the temporary sediment basins downslope of them. Water Resources Subdivision Recommended Conditions of Approval 40.Bluff areas (i.e., slope greater than or equal to 30% and a rise in slope of at least 25 feet above the toe) shall be preserved. In addition, all structures shall maintain a 30-foot setback from the bluff and no grading may occur within the bluff impact zone (i.e., the bluff and land located within 20 feet from the top of a bluff). 41.No alterations are allowed within the primary corridor or within the first 20 feet of the setback from the primary corridor. All structures shall meet the 40-foot setback from the primary corridor. 42.A copy of the LOMA shall be submitted to the City prior to alterations within the floodplain. In lieu of a LOMA, the applicant shall obtain a conditional use permit for alterations within the floodplain. 43.The developer shall determine the base flood elevation (100-year) to ensure that the structures will meet all floodplain elevation requirements. 44.The grade stabilization structure at the north end of Basin A is in disrepair and shallbe replaced. Before the development incorporates this structure into the permanent storm water management system, the structure shallbe assessed and a plan proposed and approved by the city for the repair or replacement of the structure, as well as long term maintenance. The 22 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 applicant shallwork with the property owner to the north to get permission to repair or replace the structure. 45.Drainage and utility easements with a minimum width of 20 feet shallbe provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water infrastructure. 46.A complete Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shallbe in place before applying for and receiving NPDES construction permit coverage from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). 47.Minimization of the amount of exposed soils on the site is needed; phasing of the development shalllimit the disturbed areas open. 48.All emergency overflows need temporary and permanent stabilization and shallbe shown in a detail or on the SWPPP. Energy dissipation (riprap and geotextile fabric) shall be installed within 24 hours of installation of flared end sections and outlet structures. 49.Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days 50.These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. 51.Temporary sediment basins shall be constructed and could be located in the proposed permanent storm water pond locations. If Pond A does not get excavated prior to disturbing the contributing area; a temporary basin shall be constructed approximately in the areas of Street D and Lot 5, Block 3. Temporary basins shall be labeled on the SWPPP. A detail shall be provided for the temporary outlet structures for the temporary basins. Clay berms shall be used to temporarily divert runoff from the construction site to the temporary basins prior to discharge. Additionally the clay diversions shall be used to divert runoff around the wetlands on the south side of the development to the temporary sediment basins downslope of them. 52.Chanhassen Type 2, Heavy Duty silt fence shall be used around all wetlands, streams, creeks, bluffs and ravines; Chanhassen Type 1 silt fence shall be used around the remaining areas. The inlet control (for area inlets, not curbside) detail shall be mono-mono heavy duty machine sliced silt fence with 4 foot maximum spacing for metal T-posts. A rock berm 23 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 placed around the silt fence shall be at least 2 feet wide and 1 foot high of 1½ -inch clear rock. Wimco-type inlet controls shall be installed in all inlets through out the project within 24 hours of inlet installation. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as-needed. 53.At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $288,050. 54.The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Construction Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (dewatering permit), and Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. Forestry Recommended Conditions of Approval 55.Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to construction around all areas designated for preservation. 56.A walk-through inspection of the silt/tree preservation fence shall be required prior to construction. 57.A turf plan shall be submitted to the city indicating the location of sod and seeding areas. 58.Dedication of Outlot A and B shall be made to the city or a conservation easement shall be established over said outlots. Inspections and Fire Marshal Recommended Conditions of Approval 59.A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV, and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 60.There are a number of additional fire hydrants required and some will be re-located. 61.Fire apparatus access roads and water supply for fire protection is requiredto be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided. 62.Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersection when construction of the new roadway allows passage by vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota Fire Code Section 501.4. 63.No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 24 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 64.Submit street names to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. The Chanhassen Building Official and Fire Marshal will determine which streets will need naming. 65.“No parking fire lane” signs will be required. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of signs to be installed. 66.Submit cul-de-sac design dimensions to City Engineer and Fire Marshal for review and approval. Building Recommended Conditions of Approval 67.Accessibility will have to be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these requirements. 68.Buildings over 8,500 sq. ft. in size must be protected with an automatic fire protection system. The State of Minnesota is in the process of revising Chapter 1306 of the Minnesota State Building Code regarding fire protection systems. It is not yet entirely clear how these changes will affect residential construction. It is important that the developer meet with the Inspections Division prior to final design to determine what ramifications, if any, the new requirements will have on the project. 69.The developer must submit a list of proposed street names and an addressing plan for review and approval prior to final plat of the property. 70.Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. 71.A final grading plan and soils report must be to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. 72.Walls and projections within 3 feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire- resistive construction. 73.The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by the Building Official. 74.The developer and or their agent shall meet with the Inspections Division as early as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures.” All voted in favor, except Councilwoman Tjornhom who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. Kevin Clark: Mayor, council. Thank you for your confidence and for staff’s continued guidance and collaboration with us and we look forward to bringing this before you as a final plat. 25 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 Mayor Furlong: Thank you. We look forward to the development as well. Thank you. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: Mayor Furlong: That completes our items of new business. We move now to council presentations. Any comments or discussion? Councilman Peterson: Mr. Mayor, just kind of a general update on Southwest Metro Transit. We are continuing to struggle for funding with, between the State and the Feds. We’ve got a dozen or so buses we’re struggling to find financing with. Met Council, depending upon what day you literally ask them and who you ask, it’s been a continually ongoing challenge and saga as to whether or not what funds are going to be there. They have buses that are literally pending being built in an assembly line with yet to be funded so it doesn’t put us into a crisis situation but we’ve got buses that are 2 or 3 years past their normal life cycle so we’re, we are anxiously awaiting a formal decision from Met Council. It actually should come within the next week or so. So hopefully by the next, by the next meeting we’ll, I’ll give you positive feedback. The good thing and the thing you might have already presumed is that our ridership continues to go up exponentially with gas prices and so our lot, park and ride lots are full and our buses are full, which is a good thing because that means their cars are off the streets. So, but I look forward to giving you better feedback hopefully in 2 weeks. Mayor Furlong: Very good, thank you. Councilman Lundquist: So what’s the restocking fee on a bus? Councilman Peterson: More than you want to know. Mayor Furlong: More than 15%? Todd Gerhardt: Is it an interim, you know a couple of months? 6 months? A year? You’re not getting any direction probably. Councilman Peterson: Yeah. Nobody wants to put their initial on a multi million dollar agreement when the funding is just, everybody is trying to grab funding and that’s, it’s who’s screaming the loudest and we’re starting to echo in the chamber now so. Todd Gerhardt: So there was no commitment guarantee that this is part of the request right now. Councilman Peterson: That’s correct. Funds were allocated under some of the last bonding and some of the last decisions, but they weren’t allocated yet so the allocation that we’re dealing with now, the funds are there. It’s a matter of whether. Todd Gerhardt: Determining the allocation out to the different opt out communities. Councilman Peterson: Exactly. 26 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 Mayor Furlong: Any other council presentations? Or discussion among council members. No? Very good. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: Todd Gerhardt: Again the rains came last Wednesday. I spent approximately 4 to 5 hours out coordinating volunteer firemen, utility workers, and saving a basement and comforting a few of our residents here in the community. Some of the key things that we found out of that is that we did order a pump, approximately $5,000. 4 inch submersible pump that if the pond does rise again we don’t have to wait an hour and a half for a pump to arrive from Victoria or Carver. So there, we had the need the following day off of Yosemite also where we started to see water rise into an individual’s basement so we were able to pump that one out also. The other thing, the pond off of Longacres Drive and Moccasin, we found that we’ve really got to get into that storm water pond and make sure it’s cleaned out. We saw reed grasses that clogged the outlet which really made the water rise in that pond. We’ll also be re-looking at storm water calc’s that went along with the Longacres neighborhood and how that compared with the Yoberry, Highcrest Meadows, just to give some people comfort. Also give us some direction, if we need to make some modifications to that pond and maybe the size of the outlet as it discharges out of the pond. We also found that, we have to look at some of our other emergency outlet areas. There’s been some additional grading and filling of those areas so we’ve got to make sure that those are operable and one of the areas was over in Stone Creek neighborhood that got fairly close to several people in that neighborhood so I think we’ve temporarily fixed that one in cleaning out, or digging a ditch to allow the pond to drain, but I know the water is still flowing. Talked to a resident today over there and they were amazed how much water is still flowing through the system. I will e-mail out to you calculations on the amount of rainfall that we’ve seen. Right now I believe it was over 8 ½ inches in the last 2 months and I think we average somewhere around 3 to 4 for this time of year so we’re about 230% above normal averages for rainfall right now. We are continuing to meet with the Longacres neighborhood. Stone Creek and resolving those issues. Reassuring them that we are watching it when the heavy rains come. We had utility workers, they were out flooding and occasionally went back. I think we got some more rain at 3:00 and watched it so they are concerned in the area. I do have to take my hat off to Bill Coffman. He was out there in the rain. He’s the developer for Yoberry, Highcrest Meadows development and has spent over $100,000 of the development money in correcting water damage that occurred in their basements in that area so, and again he met with the, we had a meeting today with probably 4 or 5 residents from the Longacres to reassure them. Tell them what our next steps are. They’ve also stepped up their construction. I think they brought in an additional crew working Saturday’s now so spending overtime in getting those streets and storm water basins in. He is thinking about a third crew right now and so he is putting the effort in and spending money to get this work done. We don’t believe that we’ll have enough decent weather to get streets in but we will be able to get the storm water system in and the ponds installed prior to winter, or closing for winter construction. Councilman Peterson: Isn’t that somewhat problematic to get a storm water system ready but you’ve got Class V that’s just going to drain into it? 27 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 Todd Gerhardt: We’ve got letters of credit. The key thing is to get those catch basins in. You will get sediment that will go in there and go into the pond but we typically make them clean the pond out to the elevation that’s approved in the plan. So they’re aware of that. But Pinehurst development off of Galpin and Lake Lucy were able to get partial storm water ponding in and I drove by that development on Wednesday night and it was, I’d say probably 2 to 4 inches of overflowing on Manchester Road. The last storm it went over and silted in quite a bit of the neighborhood. The storm water catch basins that they had at that entrance worked and the water did not overflow the road, and so it will work even though the road bed isn’t in. But you will have problems with silt going into their storm water ponds and we’ll make sure that they clean that out before we take them back. Mayor Furlong: Can we, in that regard too. If they don’t have the streets in before construction season closes, is it worth while or I guess I would ask, you know can we walk the site with them and if we need to double up on silt fencing and some of the drainage areas or things in anticipation of trying to reinforce containment on that site going into the winter, winter snows and then specifically the spring thaws. To make sure that we’re comfortable. I mean it’s good to hear that Mr. Coffman is cooperating and obviously he is and so I don’t think it would be a problem with him too but just making sure that we can double up as much as we can. Todd Gerhardt: They had, where they have those areas rough graded, I’d say they’ve got 20% of the fiber blanket down. We’ve talked to them today about trying to get the fastest growing rye grass, oats, whatever it might be to establish, get some cover on there. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency will, has a requirement that you have to have your entire site mulched before thst November 15, or December 1. One of those two dates. If not, fines can be levied and so they st will have to have that mulch and seeded before let’s say December 1, and I know that they have levied fines in other developments in the Twin City area for not having that done. And as the silt fence, we had discussions that they will be hauling some dirt and hauling Class V in for the road bed and reassured them that they have a double later of silt fence but again the amount of water that came just knocks that down so we asked them to make sure when they’re done hauling, that that silt fence is re-established after work hours. Mayor Furlong: Yeah, I don’t think anybody’s anticipating similar rainfall but it’s happened twice. It could happen 3 times. And just given the, you know if we get a winter with heavy snow and we get a January thaw or other things that can happen and have happened in the past, doing what we can to try to contain any problems. Or eliminate them. Todd Gerhardt: I can tell you working with Carver County Water and Soil District, I’m trying to think of the gentleman’s name. Yeah, and he is doing an excellent job of inspecting all our projects. I think he’s here, if not daily at least once a week he’s inspecting all our projects, plus our building inspectors monitor all the silt fence and won’t hesitate to issue stop work orders if they’re not installed or repaired. With that, that’s all I have. Mayor Furlong: Okay. I guess one comment too, for Mr. Gerhardt and others. I know that during this last storm you were out there personally in the Longacres neighborhood and requested the help of the fire department. We all saw the picture in the paper and we appreciate 28 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 your taking a specific personal interest and doing what we can while the rain was coming, still coming down, helping residents so thank you for that. Todd Gerhardt: Sure. Mayor Furlong: And we also thank the fire department and everyone else, the city crew. The city public works department that they were out there in the rain trying to minimize any problems while this was occurring so thank you. Todd Gerhardt: I think we had a strong presence in the neighborhood. I don’t know if anybody got to sleep at 10:00 but our volunteer fire department does a great job. Not only did they help there. We had 2 fires, one at the cinema, a house fire and also a medical so they were taxed that evening too so. Mayor Furlong: Well we appreciate their efforts and we’ll extend that to the Chief next time we see him as well. Todd Gerhardt: I will. Councilman Lundquist: Mr. Gerhardt, is the Sierra and Conestoga area, they’re still on the list of having overflows as well? Todd Gerhardt: They are on our list and that one is, didn’t forget it. We haven’t even tried to tackle that one yet. We’ve got to figure something out there. That’s a difficult one. If you’ve got any ideas I’m lost on that one so. Councilman Lundquist: …it was still sitting there from the first time… Todd Gerhardt: Well, we’ve got to work on that one. That is on our list and not that the other ones are higher priority than that one because I think that one is definitely going to be a continuing problem and we’ve got to figure something out there. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Gerhardt or staff? CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. Councilman Lundquist: Mr. Mayor, on that correspondence I would echo your congratulations to Mr. Iskierka on his Eagle Scout project. As you said us Eagle Scouts have to stick together. Mayor Furlong: Absolutely. I could start including the fact that you’re also an Eagle Scout in those letters. Councilman Lundquist: Just having known the task, it’s good to have young people that come out and do those things in the community too so. 29 City Council Meeting – October 10, 2005 Mayor Furlong: Excellent, thank you. Any other discussion on the correspondence packet or questions? Seeing none, we will continue our work session was recessed and we will continue our work session meeting prior to the meeting this evening. Our council meeting. If there’s nothing else to come before the council this evening is there a motion to adjourn? Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m.. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 30