Loading...
CC 2006 01 26 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 23, 2006 Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman Lundquist, Councilwoman Tjornhom, Councilman Peterson, and Councilman Labatt STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Roger Knutson, Justin Miller, Paul Oehme, Todd Hoffman, and Kate Aanenson PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mayor Furlong: Thank you and good evening to everybody here in the council chambers with us and for those watching at home as well. We’re glad you joined us. I’d like at this time to ask if there’s any changes or modifications to the agenda. If there are none then we will proceed with the agenda as it was distributed with the council packet. Seeing none. First item this evening under public announcements, I’d like to make a general invitation to everyone to join us for Feb Fest this coming weekend. City of Chanhassen, along with the Chamber of Commerce and other th sponsors of our recreation programs is putting on the 13 annual February Festival this coming th Saturday, February 4. At this time I invite all residents, their families and friends to join us at Lake Ann. The event will begin at noon with activities including skating, sledding and a bonfire, perhaps on land, if not on the ice. As well as a number of other activities. S’mores kits will be sold by the boy scout troop and the Chanhassen Lions will be offering food and concessions and drinks. There will be an ice fishing contest from 1:00 to 3:00 p.m. that will include $2,500 in prizes for fishing, and $4,000 in door prizes. It’s a fun event and there’s the Friends of the th Library medallion hunt will be taking place during the time, as well leading up to the 4 this coming Saturday. The medallion, person who finds the medallion receives a $1,500 prize. Ice fishing, a raffle contest. Raffle tickets are available for adults and children at $5.00 each. You can purchase the tickets at city hall and at many businesses around the city. I’m told that the ice at a safe level right now. Todd Gerhardt: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: Between, and that with the guarantee cold weather from Mr. Gerhardt for the coming week, it will be safe so this coming Saturday. Noon at Lake Ann. It’s a fun event and hope to see a lot of people out there. That’s on the record now so official transcript. Todd Gerhardt: I’ve got control of the weather. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations: City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 a. Approval of Minutes: -City Council Work Session Minutes dated January 9, 2006 -City Council Verbatim & Summary Minutes dated January 9, 2006 Receive Commission Minutes: -Planning Commission Verbatim & Summary Minutes dated January 3, 2006 -Park and Recreation Commission Verbatim & Summary Minutes dated December 20, 2005 Resolution #2006-06: b. 2006 Sealcoat Project 06-02: Authorize Preparation of Plans & Specifications. th c. West 78 Street Extension, Project No. 04-14: Approve Westwood Church Reimbursement for Construction. d. Frontier Third Addition: Approve Assignment of Development Contract. e. John Henry Addition: Approve Development Contract Extension for Time of Performance. Resolution #2006-07: f. Approve Resolution Designating Yosemite Road as an MSA Route. g. Chanhassen Lions Club: Approval of One-Day Temporary On-Sale Beer License for February Festival, February 4. h. City Code Amendment: Correction to Chapter 18 Previously Approved by the City Council on January 9, 2006. i. Approval of 2006 Key Financial Strategies. j. City Code Amendment: Chapter 4, Fees Concerning Increasing Storm Water Use Fees. k. Old Village Hall Plaza: Approve Contract Additions Associated with ADA Ramp Including Railing and Modifications to Back Stoop. l. Approval of 2005 Pay Equity Report. m. Chanhassen Electric Substation, Located East of the Gedney Pickle Plant and North of Stoughton Avenue, Applicant Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative: Approval of a Conditional Use Permit with Variances and a Site Plan Review Application to Construct a Local Electric Distribution Substation on Property Zoned Industrial Office Park (IOP). All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. 2 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 LAW ENFORCEMENT/FIRE DEPARTMENT UPDATE: Sgt. Jim Olson: Thank you and good evening. I have for you tonight the end of year December report and the year 2005. The citation list for December. Copy of a crime alert that was put out by Beth Hoiseth and Community Service Officer report, and I’ll go over some of the monthly numbers here and a couple other items also. Total calls for service were up by 96 for the month of December, and criminal calls were down by 24 for the month compared to last year. Last year being 2004. Total calls for year to date for 2005 were up by 785, which is 6% and the criminal calls were down by 290 or 22% for the year. The CSO calls for service that they handled were up by 7% for the year. Thefts themselves were down by 133, or 30% for the year. The theft related calls, and those include internet identity theft, credit card theft, those were up by 8 for the month and by 56 for the year, and those were up by 244% for the year, so big jump in those. We saw a big increase in identity theft and credit card theft and that’s been going around not only city wide but nation wide. There’s been a lot of media attention on it. Damage to property calls for year to date were down by 68. 23%. The burglaries were up by 4 or 7 ½% for the year. Traffic stops were 300 for the month, which compares to 286 last year, and that’s up by, was up by 1,377 for the year, and then citations was 374 for the month and for the year we had 3,220 for the year 2005. Any questions at all on numbers for the year 2005 for Chanhassen. Councilman Lundquist: Sergeant Olson, good to see the criminal numbers going down. I think the traffic stops probably, or the vast majority of the non-criminal which is I suppose also a good thing. The one that concerns me as I looked was the year over year, the drug violations. Sgt. Jim Olson: Yes. Councilman Lundquist: Nature of those where we see the meth stuff in the news and everything all the time, are we, is this things related potentially to that or just tighter enforcement overall by the sheriff or, it’s a two-thirds increase year over year. Sgt. Jim Olson: We have certainly seen an increase meth wise in the city, as well as in the county. And with the drug task force, Doug Schmidtke has been very busy with enforcement along those lines. There’s also been some busts that he has done in the city here that have increased that, but meth has been an issue. Councilman Lundquist: So going forward, kind of status quo with the drug task force and other things, do we have special emphasis to look into that or what’s the sheriff’s plan going forward? Sgt. Jim Olson: The county is hoping to put on or has approved the addition of one more drug task force person from the county, which I think will be going in approximately mid-year so we will be adding another person to the drug task force to the county. Councilman Lundquist: Thank you. Sgt. Jim Olson: Yeah. Any other questions number wise? I also wanted to touch on business burglaries. We’ve recently had some business burglaries in the city and as well as county wide there’s been an increase in western part of the county as well. I would encourage business 3 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 owners to make nightly bank deposits and leave cash registers open so that they know that there’s nothing in them. Consider an alarm system and also video surveillance system, looking into those in your businesses. Evaluate your locks and doors and consider installing latch guards that cover the latches on the outside of your door. Crime Prevention Specialist Beth Hoiseth can come to your business and do a premise survey to point out strengths or weaknesses of your overall security measures and her phone number is 952-227-1610 and that is at no charge to business owners or residential owners here in the city. She’ll come out to both business and residential, and I would encourage them to do that. We’ve also had, been fortunate to have a warm winter so far and I just want to touch briefly on just ice safety. It sounds like Lake Ann is doing well but, and having a warm winter you know others may disagree with me on this whether that’s been fortunate or not but for me I’ve enjoyed it. But be cautious on the area lakes and waterways and there have been some near tragedies in the state recently involving vehicles, snowmobiles and four wheelers. Area sporting good stores can assist with questions about local ice thickness and give you a hand with that so. Any other questions for me at all? Mayor Furlong: Anything for the Sergeant? No? Okay, very good, thank you for the update. Sgt. Jim Olson: Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Proceed now with our update from our Chanhassen Fire Department. Good evening Chief. Chief Gregg Geske: Good evening. We did have our elections last month and both our Assistant Chief and our Chief stayed the same, as you see I’m here tonight but also. Mayor Furlong: Congratulations. Chief Gregg Geske: Thank you. This month we’ll also be doing our appointment of our officers and that’s on a yearly basis that we renew the officers that we have. Tonight I’d like to talk about a couple calls that we had last month. A lot of times you know everybody has smoke alarms and such. Carbon monoxide alarms and a lot of times we’ll go to carbon monoxide alarms and we, a lot of times they’re false calls or we get readings from somebody running a vehicle in the house, and last month we did have a couple that were actually, one was a rather high reading. Well one call that we had, the night before New Year’s Eve day was the carbon monoxide alarm went off. We did register readings there and we called in Minnegasco and they actually red tagged their furnace, so the furnace was kicking out carbon monoxide on that call so, and then New Year’s Eve, or Christmas Eve morning we had a call and that was in the paper. I think there was a letter in that regards in the council diskette there and at that call we actually saw readings that were higher than what our carbon monoxide detector can read on our, which pegged out in the thousands. Calculating the readings we were between 50,000 and 100,000 parts per million in the pool room where the problem existed, and you only last for about a minute to two minutes in there so luckily the people did witness that they were having problems and got out and so it just, it kind of re-emphasized the purpose to have a carbon monoxide detector. I know at that location they didn’t have one and I think they got a lot of them for Christmas and just want to bring those up. You know we have seen those carbon monoxide calls and a couple of them are serious here and to get the carbon monoxide detectors so. 4 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Mayor Furlong: Just a quick comment there too. And there were letters in our packet this evening that were, really touched you when you read through, especially from the father but it’s, it also emphasized that it’s a group of people that respond. It’s not only the fire fighters that were there but also the dispatchers that thought quickly and helped saved some lives mostly. Chief Gregg Geske: Yeah, right from when they called and they realized definitely right away what was happening. Got them out of the house because the longer they stayed in, two of the people from that house actually did go in the hypobaric chamber to reduce that carbon monoxide level so it was a serious call and any less time that they are in the house so it was a great job right from dispatch to the deputies showing up on the scene and the fire department, so did a good job of thanking everybody that was involved. And that’s about all I have so. Mayor Furlong: Any questions for the chief? Is the recruitment, are you recruiting again this spring? Chief Gregg Geske: Well we just in the past year here we did take on 9 individuals so right now we’re going to keep where we’re at and monitor losses of fire fighters and stuff but pretty much get the 9 people through the probationary process and then we’ll be looking at adding but we’re always interested for people to put in their applications so if you have any interest, feel free to call city hall and put in an application for the fire department. Mayor Furlong: Great, very good. Chief Gregg Geske: Thank you much. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Mayor Furlong: We do have one scheduled presentation which I’ll turn the microphone now over to Councilman Labatt. Councilman Labatt: Thanks. I do have, I’ll do it from here rather than out front but Chief Geske, okay he’s still here. As we all know, at least the council, my father passed away on th December 11 and my mom wanted me to make a donation on behalf of the Labatt family to the Chanhassen Fire Department for their years of service of responding to my father’s diabetic issues and prolonging his wonderful life. I also wanted to point out before I read the letter here, just having been a part of it and to sit through the numerous calls over there, we have a fine fire crew here. Paramedic crew and police officers. Deputy sheriff’s and the night that this happened two deputies responded. I can not recall the name of the second deputy but Derrick Lee, the night shift supervisor this night spent about 3 ½ hours with my family and really showed the true professionalism of all the members of the sheriff’s office on behalf of Bud Olson. And I just want to point that out to everybody that we do have some fine deputies that work for us and our fire crew, but I want to read a letter here from my mom to the Chanhassen fire crew and Chief Geske. The Labatt family would like to thank you for your years of support and service. 5 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Your many responses to our 911 calls truly meant an extended life for Terry. Dick Wing, who is a fire fighter, honored our family with playing the bagpipes in a tribute to Terry and declined his honorarium so we are passing on to the Chanhassen Fire Department. In addition we have added a sum of money to make as a token of our appreciation this money will be used for your determination, and I think she’s talked to Assistant Chief Randy Wahl when she talked about this and about using it for training for the fire crew. So I just wanted to pass this on to Chief Geske and Todd Gerhardt and they’re a great crew. Thank you. Todd Gerhardt: Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Thank you very much Councilman Labatt. And to the Labatt family. At this point is there anybody else from a visitor presentations? Seeing none, then we’ll move on with our agenda. I’d like to pick up at this time item 1(n) that was pulled for separate discussion from our consent agenda. N. CHRISTENSEN SUBDIVISION, NORTHWEST OF 6710 GOLDEN COURT, APPLICANT ROBERT CHRISTENSEN: REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE PROPERTY INTO 2 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS WITH A VARIANCE TO ALLOW TWO FLAG LOTS. Councilman Lundquist: Couple of things on this one Mr. Mayor. Just looking at this area, Kate can you just go over in about 5 minutes or less kind of the construction with the variances and the history of what’s going on here. Kate Aanenson: This is the Christensen property. That’s being requested for subdivision. This rd item did appear on the Planning Commission on January 3 and there were 3 issues that were raised, and I’ll go through those in a minute but I’ll give you a little background. This area, there were quite a few underlying property owners. Back in 1995 Mr. Rabe’s proposed what is now called the Golden Glow subdivision, and there was numerous options in looking at how all these properties can be assembled because as part of the challenge of the planners is to make sure we’re not land locking somebody to this, or providing access to one person at the detriment of another. At the time that that subdivision, Golden Glow was done in 1995, it was then the Kerber property was not subdivided. That now has also been subdivided and did provide access to, so you’ve got the Steadman home, the Christensen and the Martinka property. So this subdivision, the Burlwood subdivision provided additional access. At that time that we looked at the plat in 1995 with Golden Glow flag lots were permitted. So looking at that, there was a private street requested actually on the back of the Golden Glow but staff recommended that that be a public street, so at that time the prevailing development pattern, a lot of the flag lots, and we agreed that that’s how that would come in. It couldn’t be developed until such time that these other properties came forward so to date the rules, the lot was provided, it’s in excess of an acre lot. Very well reasonable to subdivide and we have the two, look at two lots there. So at the Planning Commission meeting the issues that were brought forward was the cul-de-sac and having another driveway. So you look at the existing subdivision, there is two driveways in Mr. Martinka’s property which is to the south, who also can further subdivide via access to a public street. And this, both driveways, if you can zoom in on that a little bit Nann please. There will be moved, there’s a condition that they be 10 feet apart and then when Mr. Martinka to the south 6 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 subdivides that driveway, will also be moved to follow that house and then one more house to the south. So they meet all the conditions except for flag lot, which the rule changed when we originally looked at this. Again we always try to anticipate development of properties and what’s the best way to provide access. So in looking at the variance request on that, staff felt like…condition of the recommendation of the findings of fact which are found on page 8 of the staff report. You know based on the fact that we provided a reasonable access when we did the previous subdivision. It’s impossible to provide access off the flag lot, we felt it was reasonable and that Mr. Christensen was placed undue hardship based on our changing of the rules. Again we do allow for private streets. We didn’t want to do the private streets. Sometimes that, we’ve learned sometimes that not always a solution so with that we had recommended approval of the variance. And there was another question that was brought up regarding, which is the front part of the lot, the ordinance does say the part closest to the street, if you look at the dimensions, the dimensions, this would be up close to the street. It is a front. It does meet all the setback requirements. And then the third condition that was raised at the Planning Commission was the height in the shoreland district, and we have changed when we updated our city code to make all residential property consistent with the shoreland district so we don’t run into that and that’s 35 feet so that would be consistent with that when the building permit comes in we would check that. The Planning Commission did recommend approval of this subdivision with the variance with the findings in the staff 6-0. Councilman Lundquist: So do you, if you put that picture back up. Kate, draw where, when this property subdivided, what each of those two lots looks like. Kate Aanenson: So this would be the existing home. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Kate Aanenson: And then there’s a private driveway that goes to Mr. Martinka. And then this would be the new, the flag lot. Councilman Lundquist: Okay, so that’s the flag lot is the new. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Kate Aanenson: Correct. So then, then you know you’d come off that common driveway and we’ve learned sometimes that causes issues so we felt at that time the prevailing pattern would be best just to leave it the flag lot, which again was in place in 1995 and the road needed to be put in place with the Burlwood subdivision which just happened recently so it’s kind of a timing issue too. Councilman Lundquist: So the flag lot essentially, or the flag on that lot essentially just has a driveway on it? Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. 7 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Councilman Lundquist: For the new lot. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, and then the question was the setback. The closest to the street, the dimension which is this fascia, would meet the 30 foot so it is consistent with the zoning ordinance. So again the only variance would be the flag lot. Councilman Lundquist: Creation of a flag lot. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Which we kind of laid out ahead of time. And I think you know Mr. Martinka then moving that driveway when he’s ready to subdivide. Councilman Lundquist: So when he develops it, when the Martinka property divides then Lot number 8, that other driveway will go away? Kate Aanenson: It should, yeah. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Mayor Furlong: You comfortable? Councilman Lundquist: Yes sir. Mayor Furlong: Anything else? Are there any other questions for staff on this? No? Okay. Is there any discussion on it? Councilman Lundquist. Councilman Lundquist: No, I’m comfortable. Mayor Furlong: Okay. If there are no other issues, or if there, Mr. Gerhardt said there were some people here. If they’re interested in commenting on it were you aware Mr. Gerhardt? Todd Gerhardt: I think the applicant was here. I don’t know if the, no changes. I think they were in agreement with staff report. Mayor Furlong: Okay. I don’t want to shut anybody out but if there’s new information or something you want the council to consider, be happy to listen to it now. Otherwise we’ll move forward. And I don’t even know who I’m looking for in the group so. Kate Aanenson: Mr. Christensen is back there. Mayor Furlong: Okay good, alright. Okay, you okay with the staff report Mr. Christensen? Robert Christensen: Yes. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright, good. Thank you. With that if there are no other questions from. 8 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Councilman Lundquist: I would move approval of item 1(n) as published. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second? Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on that? Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to approve the preliminary plat to subdivide the Christensen property into two single family lots with a variance to allow flag lots, Planning Case 05-44, as specified in the staff report dated January 3, 2006. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: 2006 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 06-01. Public Present: Name Address Mark & Pat Ruhland 6275 Yosemite Avenue Lee Clasen 6351 Yosemite Avenue Brian & Julie Evers 1799 Koehnen Circle Kent Louwagie Bolton-Menk, Inc. Marcus Thomas Bolton-Menk, Inc. rd Richard Cullen 1630 W. 63 Street rd Barbara Solum 1630 W. 63 Street rd Emma St. John 1621 W. 63 Street Tracy & Chuck Cool 1601 Koehnen Circle E. Adele Pint 1641 Koehnen Circle E. Mike Schmidt 6470 Yosemite Avenue Chris Charlson 581 Big Woods Boulevard V.C. Wertz 1620 Koehnen Circle Jean Bogema 6371 Yosemite Avenue Lance Ford 1711 Koehnen Circle East Bruce Koehnen 1830 Koehnen Circle rd Willard Johnson West 63 Street Paul Oehme: Thank you Mayor, City Council members. Tonight staff is requesting the council open a public hearing for the 2006 street improvement projects. Staff is requesting that the Koehnen area be discussed tonight and that the public hearing be continued until the next City th Council meeting on February 13 to discuss the other project items in the project, in this project. The streets in this year’s project have been planned for several years. Streets were identified in the city’s pavement management program and due to the problems that we had with utilities in these areas. The streets considered for improvement can no longer be maintained effectively 9 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 with minor preservation of pavement techniques such as seal coating and such. We did receive several comments from property owners in this area too and we, staff has forwarded those comments onto the council. They are in your packet. At this time I guess I’d ask Mr. Marcus Thomas, the consultant on this project who drafted the feasibility study, give just a brief overview of the Koehnen area street improvement project. Marcus Thomas: Good evening Mayor and council. My name is Marcus Thomas. I’m a project manager with Bolton and Menk Engineers. First and foremost thank you for allowing Bolton- Menk to assist the city with this important project. We’ve enjoyed working with the staff on preparing the feasibility study and report. Their input and guidance has been very valuable for us in preparing the report and similarly the input that we’ve gotten from the residents thus far has th been very valuable too. We’ve had an open house that was held on December 8 where we were able to solicit public input and there are future opportunities if this project were to move forward for other informational meetings with the residents so we look forward to continuing to work with your staff and with the residents. In the report, and I’m not sure if, how the council has the report and all the associated figures with this evening. I’ll be referring to the figures in the feasibility report but I’m going to focus on that portion of the report that discusses the Koehnen area, neighborhood. Figure 1. We illustrate that neighborhood on Figure 1 of the report. In general there were a number of infrastructure improvements that we were proposing throughout the neighborhood. I’ll go into some in more detail in just a bit but some of the more significant items of general improvements include the addition of concrete curb and gutter throughout the neighborhood along the street corridor. We established a goal to establish a consistent 30 foot wide standard street width throughout the project area where allowable. When I say where allowable I mean above and beyond the average widths of about 27-28 feet that exist out there right now. If we can get a standard 30 foot wide street width without significant impacts to significant boulevard improvements such as mature trees, etc, we would like to do that. Yosemite is one exception where our goal is to establish a 32 foot wide street width, to qualify for state aid, municipal state aid funding. As a state aid route Yosemite Avenue is eligible for this funding if it meets the applicable design criteria. Just also point out that this funding that would be received for this roadway would go into pay for the over sizing of Yosemite Avenue, above and beyond what the city would normally do on a local roadway. Over sizing being the additional width and the additional pavement thickness. Other elements considered are the addition of storm sewer throughout the project area including the construction of 3 pond areas that would ultimately collect runoff from the storm sewer system. We are proposing the complete replacement of the watermain throughout the neighborhood in conjunction with this project. There’s been numerous documented breaks of the watermain system throughout the neighborhood, and we see road improvements ultimately outlasting the existing watermain in the area, so we want to make sure that we improve that watermain as well. And finally we propose partial replacement of the sanitary sewer throughout the neighborhood in specific locations that we found were in need of repair. With that I’ll refer you to Figures 25 through 27 that detail the improvements along Yosemite. Figures 25 through 27 in your report illustrate the improvements along Yosemite Avenue. In general the, we propose to reconstruct the roadway along it’s existing alignment from the house at approximate address 6481 at the south end, all the way to the northerly city limits in Chanhassen. The improvements would include the construction of rd two independent storm sewer systems, one at the south end, south of West 63 Street. That would collect runoff and then ultimately route it into a new pond on the east side of Yosemite at 10 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 the south end. And a second storm sewer system that would extend north from Creek Run Trail north ultimately through a storm water treatment manhole and into an existing ditch at the north half of the corridor. Along Yosemite we propose to replace the existing watermain along the east side of the street. And we also propose to replace most of the sanitary sewer along this corridor to address problems that we found, including indentations in the pipe and significant sags. Through the report you’ll notice that the sanitary sewer delineated in red, which is kind of difficult to see in the screen here but those are the segments of sanitary sewer that are proposed rd to be replaced. For West 63 Street I’ll refer you to Figures 28 through 29. Feel free to interject any questions or comments that you have as I go along. I’ll try to be concise. Mayor Furlong: Oh, Councilman. Councilman Labatt: Where Yosemite terminates at the Shorewood city line, how wide is it there? The road. You’re going to, you’re starting at 32 feet? Marcus Thomas: Yeah, the proposed width is 32 feet, but then as we get to the Shorewood city line we do taper back to the existing street width, which is approximately about 27 to 28 feet along Yosemite. So if you look at Figure 27 you can see how the road kind of narrows into that existing street width. Councilman Labatt: Okay. Mayor Furlong: I’m sorry, go ahead. Todd Gerhardt: I was just going to add that I think the City of Shorewood’s considering establishing their portion of the road as MSA tonight at their council meeting. Paul Oehme: I can interject and answer that question. I did have a conversation with their City Engineer and it’s my understanding that they would be considering establishing Apple Road in the City of Shorewood as a MSA road. Todd Gerhardt: So if they were to upgrade Apple from Yosemite to Powers in Chanhassen, that would have to be a 32 foot width also? Paul Oehme: That would have to be a minimum of 32 feet wide, correct. Todd Gerhardt: Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Also I noticed on Yosemite here on some parts it looks like there’s some retaining walls that are going to be put in. Are those existing or are those going to be added? Marcus Thomas: Those would be added. Those would be proposed retaining walls. Mayor Furlong: And about how high are those? 11 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Marcus Thomas: They vary in height from approximately 4 feet up to about 9 feet high. Those retaining walls are. Mayor Furlong: What’s there now, just a hill? Marcus Thomas: Yes, there’s a very steep hill right now. Again on the east side of Yosemite, given the existing narrow width of about 27 feet, it drops probably at about a 2:1 to 3:1 slope down from the roadway along the east side of Yosemite. With the wider road extending out along that slope, we need to bridge that drop as opposed to carrying fill out further into the properties. We’d basically construct a retaining wall to accommodate the wider road there. Mayor Furlong: Is there a requirement for fencing or anything… Marcus Thomas: Yes there is. There’d be fencing on any wall that would exceed 4 feet in height. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. rd Marcus Thomas: You’re welcome. I’ll continue with West 63 Street again on Figures 28 rd through 29 in your report. West 63 Street is proposed to be reconstructed along it’s existing alignment from Cardinal at the west end all the way to Yosemite at the east end. Again we’d be rd constructing storm sewer along West 63 Street. Here we would have two different systems. The one at the west end inbetween Cardinal and Blue Jay would ultimately collect runoff and rd route it into a proposed storm water pond immediately south of West 63. At the east end between Audubon Circle and Yosemite Avenue there’s a second storm sewer system that would route water east, ultimately into the Yosemite Avenue system. Again we’d propose the complete rd replacement of the existing watermain along the south side of West 63 Street, and along West rd 63 Street we found that there was no necessary sanitary sewer improvements that were required. Moving onto Audubon Circle on Figure 30 of your report. Audubon Circle is proposed to be reconstructed along it’s existing alignment. We would be deviating from the standard 45 foot radius for the cul-de-sac bubble at the north end, and instead matching the existing 35 foot radius that’s in place right now and that’s a direct result to input from residents regarding existing trees along that cul-de-sac that would be impacted by the larger radius cul-de- sac so we’re going to stick with the existing 35 foot radius there. Along this block of Audubon we would be constructing storm sewer that would flow into a pond immediately north of the cul- de-sac. Again we’d completely reconstruct the watermain along this block with exists along the west side of the street. And on Audubon Circle again we found no need for any sanitary sewer improvement. Blue Jay Circle is illustrated on Figure 31 of your report. Blue Jay Circle would be a, it’s roadway would be reconstructed. Again acknowledging the potential impacts to a larger cul-de-sac bubble, up to the standard 45 foot radius, we’re proposing simply to match the existing radius in the cul-de-sac. We would propose to construct storm sewer that flows, rd ultimately flows into the West 63 Street storm sewer system. The existing watermain along the east side of the street is proposed to be replaced and we propose to replace the sanitary sewer along this entire block to address the significant sags and deflections that we found in this pipe. In conjunction with replacing that sanitary sewer we also wanted to acknowledge a comment from the resident at 6271 that has indicated that he’s got a very flat sanitary sewer service that 12 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 backs up on him on a regular basis, so in conjunction with replacing the main line pipe, we’d like to look at the potential to lower that pipe giving him a little bit more fall and hopefully improving his situation. Figure 32 illustrates improvements along Cardinal Avenue. Cardinal rd Avenue is proposed to be reconstructed along it’s existing alignment from West 63 Street at the south end all the way up to the northerly city limits, similar to Yosemite. The improvements proposed would consist of a storm sewer system flowing south from Koehnen Circle East rd ultimately into the West 63 Street storm sewer system. We propose the complete replacement of the existing watermain along the east side of the street, and the replacement of a section of sanitary sewer immediately south of Koehnen Circle West where we found some significant sags. rd Mayor Furlong: Mr. Thomas, on Figure 32 here where West 63 comes up to Ringneck Drive, will the curbs and gutters align with the existing roadway there? Marcus Thomas: Yes. Yeah, the existing width of Ringneck at that point is really close to that 32 feet, so it will be a smooth, it should be a very smooth transition at that intersection. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Marcus Thomas: Did I say 32 feet? It’s not 32 feet there. It’s closer to 30 feet there. Okay moving onto the Koehnen Circle East, on Figures 33 and 34 of your report. Koehnen Circle East is proposed to be reconstructed from Cardinal Avenue at the west end to it’s terminal point at the east end at the cul-de-sac there. Again what we found is that the city standard radius for a cul- de-sac wouldn’t be so suitable for these existing conditions so we’re proposing again to match the existing radius of 40 feet at that bubble to minimize boulevard impacts. Construction along Koehnen Circle East would include a new storm sewer system flowing east from Deer Ridge and ultimately into a new proposed pond just southeast of the cul-de-sac bubble. Again we’d be replacing the watermain in it’s entirety along this block, along the north side of the street, including the loop that heads from the cul-de-sac south into the Audubon Circle system, that watermain would be replaced. And finally on Koehnen Circle East, no sanitary sewer improvements were deemed necessary. Last but not least, Koehnen Circle West as illustrated in Figure 35 of your report. Koehnen Circle West is proposed to be reconstructed along it’s existing alignment west of Cardinal Avenue. Again matching the existing cul-de-sac radius to minimize impacts. We propose a storm sewer system that would flow east into the Cardinal Avenue storm sewer system. We propose the complete replacement of the watermain system along the south side of the roadway. And we propose to replace the westerly segment of the sanitary sewer system to address some significant deflections that we saw along that pipe. With that I’d like to get into a summary of costs but I just wanted to pause, give the council an opportunity to ask any questions that you might have at this point of the proposed improvements. Councilman Lundquist: Mr. Thomas, the, along Yosemite, widening that road, if we left that at the current 27, would those retaining walls and fences and that need to go in? Marcus Thomas: I think if we matched the existing street width we could certainly minimize those walls. In many cases probably eliminate them in their entirety. Unfortunately we’ve got a 13 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 minimum width to meet in order to be eligible for the state aid funds, that’s kind of what’s dictating that so, but the answer to your question is yes. Councilman Lundquist: And from an engineer’s perspective, the drawbacks of or the other side of leaving those cul-de-sac’s at the current radius, what’s the, Paul or Mr. Thomas, what’s the, what are we missing there? What are we losing out on there, if anything? Paul Oehme: Well I’ll let, Kate can address that. We’re matching the existing cul-de-sacs because of one, the comments we received from the property owners but two, we had limited right-of-way out there. Typically under new plats the right-of-way in those areas is significantly wider than our typical 60 foot right-of-way width, so in order for us to include our standard cul- de-sac, which is 45 foot in diameter, we’d have to purchase additional right-of-way and due to the setbacks of the houses in these areas too, we did not think it would be advantageous for the city to pursue that at this time. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. And the 45 foot diameter cul-de-sac, where does that number, it’s a standard from somewhere. Where does that come from and why is that number? Paul Oehme: We work with the fire department on those cul-de-sac radiuses. Those are, our cul-de-sac radiuses are to facilitate turn around’s by our larger pumper trucks and our ladder trucks. So the cul-de-sacs in question here are on a very short cul-de-sacs. They’re 400 foot cul- de-sacs. Marcus Thomas: Yeah about that. Paul Oehme: And in these type of situations, if we do need to bring larger fire trucks in, they can drive them in and we can back them out. That was I guess. Councilman Lundquist: So the drawback is once they pull in they can’t turn around. They’ve got to back out. Paul Oehme: Exactly. Councilman Lundquist: And is that fire trucks only or are there other, school buses and everything else get down there okay? Paul Oehme: Yeah, we have never, to date we have not talked to the schools. The school district about these particular streets but I am not aware that school buses would be able to make a turn around on this cul-de-sac. I don’t know exactly how the school picks up the children in this area but. Mayor Furlong: I guess I can respond to that just from observation. The school buses stick to rd West 63 and Yosemite generally. Now that might mean, at least the larger buses. There might be the smaller buses, more van style but that would probably be able to handle the existing. 14 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Paul Oehme: Yeah, another drawback smaller cul-de-sacs, the driver runs, goes down to the street, he doesn’t want to and there’s limited opportunity for him to turn around in the street as opposed to driving in somebody’s driveway and backing up and turning around so the larger cul- de-sacs allow for that turning movement as well. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. And the MSA designation, even though we only take it to our city limit or nearly our city limit, no issues there with not having, I mean as I look at the definition of MSA, doesn’t it have to connect those two roads so if Shorewood doesn’t do their piece, then there’s no need for us to do our’s, is that a fair statement? Marcus Thomas: That’s correct. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. That’s all I had. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other questions at this point with regard to the project. Is there, I know this is something that we discussed earlier when we were discussing this project last year with regard to Yosemite and it’s, the length of the project down towards Lake Lucy Road. Right now these plans don’t show any improvements south of, whichever that property is on Yosemite. Is that something that we’re still considering looking at or are there some limitations? Todd Gerhardt: Mayor and council, City Engineer Paul Oehme and I talked this afternoon on that. That area was kind of outside of the assessment area. One of the things that we could do to add to this project is a mill and overlay to finish that out to blend the two units, or the roadway into Lake Lucy to match it up. Mayor Furlong: Alright. Todd Gerhardt: So right now it’s not included in that, what was the property owner’s name? Mayor Furlong: I don’t know that there are any, on the south end of Yosemite? Marcus Thomas: I guess I’m not sure. Todd Gerhardt: How far away are we from Lake Lucy? I think it’s about 600 feet or so. Mayor Furlong: To the extent we’re looking at that, you know as long as we’re, and if you can look at what the options are and what we can do. Paul Oehme: Okay, we can easily add that in. We might have a problem with the assessment methodology if we continue it on from there with the adjacent property owners but we can easily add it into the project at any time. One of the other reasons why we did not consider adding that section of roadway into this project was due to the fact that there are no public utilities along that corridor there to service those properties so we had envisioned leaving that section out consistent with the roadway section. We didn’t want to improve the roadway with curb and gutter at this time and 5 years down the road we have to rip it out to put in utilities. 15 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Mayor Furlong: For utilities so if that property divides. Paul Oehme: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: Okay. But at the time that that property divides, when it does, that will be the time that utilities would have to be installed and that would be the time to. Paul Oehme: That would be the time to improve the road as well. Mayor Furlong: To the level that we’re doing the rest of it. Paul Oehme: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any other questions at this point in terms of the scope of the project? At this time. Okay. Continue then. Marcus Thomas: I guess I just wanted to conclude going over a summary of the project costs and potential assessments for the improvements. I think page 25 of the report has a lot more detail of costs but I summarized it in this table that I’m showing on the screen here. The overall cost of the Koehnen area improvements has been divided as such. Street improvements along Yosemite Avenue only are estimated at approximately $486,778. Street improvement costs to the remainder of the roadways within the Koehnen neighborhood are estimated to have a cost of $1,074,000. Watermain improvements throughout the neighborhood are estimated at $545,000. Sanitary sewer improvements within the neighborhood are estimated at $186,000. And storm sewer improvements within the neighborhood are estimated at $586,000 for a total estimated project cost of $2,877,348. On page 26 of your report there’s discussion of what has been the city’s standard assessment practice on past projects similar to this one. In general the past practices the city has assessed 40% of the assessable street costs of a project to benefiting properties within the area. For this project, again we’ve got over sizing costs along Yosemite. That would be subsidized by municipal state aid funding so those over sizing costs would not be included in the assessable cost. In general what the 40% of the assessable street costs boils down to is a total assessment amount of $475,700. Again that is the portion of the assessment out of the total project cost of approximately $2.9 million dollars. Just wanted to remind the council and everybody that following this project that utility improvements such as watermain, sanitary sewer, storm sewer are not assessable improvements. They’re paid for by their respective utility funds so given the assessment amount of $475,700, divided amongst the 67 benefiting units within the Koehnen neighborhood, we’ve come up with an assessment rate of $7,100 per benefiting unit within the neighborhood. With that I guess that pretty much concludes, well. Paul Oehme: One note would be that again with, these are just assessments. These are only estimated assessments at this time, projected assessments. Once this project were to be moved forward, like to get bids from a contractor, we’d look at you know how the bids come in and all of the indirect costs, including engineering fees to look back at those actual costs and then adjust the assessment accordingly based upon the actual dollar amounts that the city, the project would actually cost. So that number could fluctuate. 16 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Councilwoman Tjornhom: Fluctuate up or down? Paul Oehme: Correct, depending upon how the costs of the project, the contract costs come in. Mayor Furlong: The amount is per benefiting property. How was benefiting property defined? Paul Oehme: The property, benefiting property is property that abuts the project and has the driveway at the property itself so if a property owner does not have a driveway onto the construction street, streets being constructed, you would not use that street. It’s just the property that has a direct access on it, and that’s been consistent for other projects that we have done recently as well. Councilman Lundquist: So that’s the long of saying if you live on a corner lot you don’t get hit twice, right? Paul Oehme: Correct. Mayor Furlong: How about if you have a subdividable parcel? I know we’ve dealt with that in the past with other projects. How have we dealt with that? Paul Oehme: Well in this situation, it’d be very tough for us to look at how many lots you could really subdivide. We’d have to do a really in-depth study on exactly how many lots, potential lots could support if it subdivided so we did not take it to that level. We just looked at how many lots are out there with access and made a determination to use that methodology. Mayor Furlong: Is that consistent with how we’ve done others? I think we had that situation with Lake Lucy Road project last year and other projects in the city. Paul Oehme: Yeah, Lake Lucy Road is a little bit different. If I recall right, we looked at the sewer and water extension under that project and looked at spreading the costs over for those improvements to actual properties that could be subdivided. When Lake Lucy came to be assessed for those improvements, we did not look at you know how many lots could potentially be subdivided for the street improvement. We looked at it just for the sewer and water. Mayor Furlong: Right, okay. Thank you. Okay, any other questions at this point? From the council. If not, anything else at this point or should we? Marcus Thomas: I’ll stand for questions and you can follow through with the public hearing. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Why don’t we open up the public hearing then and to the extent that the questions can be answered this evening, we’ll try to do that. And if it’s a question that needs some more research or information, we’ll be able to get back to people as well. So at this point I’ll open up the public hearing. Given that the, I don’t know given the nature of it, would it make sense to divide it up by street or the improvements along Yosemite unique enough to deal with Yosemite first and then the rest of the streets or? 17 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 rd Paul Oehme: We can discuss Yosemite first and then talk about the 63, Koehnen area. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Just so we don’t bounce back and forth. Why don’t we try that and see how it goes and we’ll change if we need to so, we are opening up the public hearing. What we’d like to do is start with property owners along Yosemite. We invite them forward at this time. Please state your name, come to the podium. Please state your name and address. Good evening. Mike Schmidt: Mike Schmidt. I live on 6470 Yosemite. You had a total here of $2.8 million dollars. Our letters that we got were $3.8 million. Marcus Thomas: I think this letter acknowledges the Chanhassen Hills assessments as well. Paul Oehme: Yeah, the letter that you received was for the total project. Just not for the Koehnen area. It included the Chanhassen Hills and park improvements associated with the larger project itself. Tonight we’re just talking about the Koehnen area improvements along rd Yosemite and 63. It does not include those other project areas. Mike Schmidt: Where are all the retaining walls going to go? That’s kind of a hazard isn’t it? Marcus Thomas: Retaining walls are, again I’ll refer to the council’s packet and figures…26. rd The retaining walls…here’s one at the intersection of West 63 Street. Another one of Creek Run Trail. And again where those walls exceed say like at 4 feet, we would be proposing fencing. Mike Schmidt: And you’re making it wider just to get the money from the state? Marcus Thomas: The state has minimum design requirements. Mike Schmidt: You’re getting the money just to get the money from the state? Marcus Thomas: Well the city’s designated the route as a state aid route and… Mike Schmidt: This will be a through street then. Marcus Thomas: Well the street designation won’t change. Mike Schmidt: We’re going to have more traffic and it’s going to go faster. Mayor Furlong: Mr. Schmidt, I guess if you can address your issues to the council, it would help the discussion. Mike Schmidt: We have a through street now and we’re going to have more traffic and the traffic will go faster because the road’s wider now. I mean I can see the plow coming. And they go by pretty fast now. Luckily I don’t have any kids out there, but there are families there that do have kids. 18 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright, thank you. Mark Ruhland: Hello. My name is Mark Ruhland. I live at 6275 Yosemite and of course we would be directly impacted by the work here. I’m speaking on behalf of my neighbor as well, Mrs. Lee Clasen. Just a couple of comments. Like Mr. Schmidt just said, we don’t really feel there’s a need to accommodate any higher traffic volume on Yosemite. The area is pretty well built up. There’s really no more room for any existing housing to go in. There might be a few stray lots here and there but there’s no need to be able to accommodate any increase in traffic or volume. In fact what we would like to see is a reduction in speed. We feel that there is quite a bit of speeding going down that street as it is and I’m not sure what can be done to accommodate that but widening the street is probably not going to make that happen. It will just speed things up. So and the other thing I’d like to propose or suggest is, what happens if we give up the MSA funding and keep the width of the street the same as it is now? I’m sure we lose some of our funding but presumably the cost of the project is also going to go down. And so I guess it would help me to know some of those rough numbers there. If we can reduce the cost of the retaining walls and some of the other side work that’s going to be necessary, how does that compare with the loss of the funding? And so that… Mayor Furlong: Okay. Is that something we can address right now? One of the comments made, and I guess the question is, the funding sources here on the street for Yosemite include a portion of it being assessed, a portion the city picking up and then the widening and the MSA dollars. Maybe we can talk a little bit about how that calculation was made and because that may answer Mr. Ruhland’s question there. Paul Oehme: Maybe I can take a shot at that Marcus. I think again the MSA funds were envisioned to utilize, be utilized for the widening of the street and then the extra pavement section that would be required to be used as this road is designated as a MSA route. The cost would also include some of the city cost at 60% of the cost for the improvements as well instead of coming out of the general fund or the pavement management fund system. We were looking at even taking some of those, some of the MSA funds to offset some of the city costs as well. If this road would be just put back to it’s existing width, normal pavement sections and everything else, we would have to sit down and take a look at you know what those costs implications would be. Right now I don’t in the way the budget is right now, it’d be hard for me to see us staying within the budget and taking on those additional costs without going above and beyond the budget number. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, City Council members. On page 25 it has a breakdown of the estimated project costs and in there you have the percentage for MSA for Yosemite, so you’re looking at about $486,778. And Marcus I believe we’re not assessing for the retaining walls and that the retaining walls are included in that dollar amount? Marcus Thomas: Yeah the intent of those state aid funds is to capture those additional costs associated with the wider road like retaining walls and such so, those additional extras to make it a state aid route are paid for by state aid money. 19 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Mayor Furlong: The calculation of the assessment portion along Yosemite then, if the state aid money is being used to widen it, then that tells me if we build it to it’s current width, would the assessments change? Paul Oehme: No. Because, help me out here but if we would put the road back to it’s existing width, I mean those costs theoretically are the costs passed onto the property owner at 40% so the assessment amount would not change because the city is picking up for the over sizing of the street and the retaining walls and everything associated with making it an MSA route, so no. The assessment amounts wouldn’t change. It would just be the funding mechanisms, the city portion, the 60% that we’re paying for. That’s the offset. That’s the numbers, whatever that number is, that’s the number that the city would still have to make up under the pavement management fund or some other funding mechanism. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Todd Gerhardt: And just to add to that, the $486 that’s allocated for Yosemite, right now we do not have, the city would take out the retaining walls and the extra width of the road. We have not allocated that extra money. Say it’s 20%, you’re going to take about $100,000 out of there so you need to find $386,000 of additional money if you don’t follow the state aid standards. If you use the 20% ratio. So that leaves $386,000 that the city would have to come up for it’s portion of Yosemite. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Is there any comments, we’ve had two individuals. Now Mr. Schmidt and Mr. Ruhland speak about the issues of speed and traffic. Do we have any other experiences Mr. Oehme or Mr. Thomas with regard to traffic or speed? Paul Oehme: Well Yosemite is a through road right now and we did take traffic counts this fall and they are at the low level of a collector roadway. You know speeding is an enforcement issue. With a wider street, wider streets do enable or make it a safer condition as well for pedestrians and the traffic quality as well so wider streets, you know it’s, I don’t, you know when this length of road that we’re talking about, the street at Lake Lucy Road is still going to be 28 feet wide. The street Apple Road in Shorewood is still going to be 28 feet wide. The section in the middle, that’s the only part we’re talking about is going to be 32 feet wide. It’s not that long of a road where I would anticipate a great deal of speed being able to, the traffic…to really generate a lot of speed in the short amount of distance. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. We still have a public hearing, and again at this point if we could have residents along Yosemite or other interested parties speak about Yosemite to come forward at this time. Okay. I guess what I’d do then is I would open it up to other residents or interested parties on any of the streets that are included in this project area. That we’ve been discussing this evening. Please come forward. Yep, please. Tracy Cool: My name is Tracy Cool. I’m at 1601 Koehnen Circle. Mayor Furlong: Pull the microphone closer to you so people at home can hear you too, thank you. 20 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Tracy Cool: Okay. Tracy Cool, 1601 Koehnen Circle. Our big concern is when we get the pond and we have little kids and I also, I don’t know what you have. We have little kids. I’m not too happy about the retaining walls on Yosemite because we’ve still, you know we have all the kids in the neighborhood and to me you know that’s just a big green light for them to go climb. So that I’m not, I wasn’t too happy to hear about how high the walls would be over there, but my big concern is how deep is this pond going to be. It’s now going to be in my back yard and you know, we have a sump pump that runs all the time now. How deep is it going to be? Is it going to flood into my house? Am I going to you know have foundation trouble? You know my property level has now gone down. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Fair question so maybe we can talk about the pond. Tracy Cool: There’s safety, you know mosquitoes. Are we going to, you know we already have a pond that’s across the street that they put in when they built the new houses. You know we’ve dug kids out of those. Have to keep our kids away from that. We already have issues with mosquitoes. We’ve called before, we’ve had them come out and spray for mosquitoes. I know it gets to be…and we do get a lot of runoff in our yard and it does back up so I mean I understand there’s issues there. I’m just not thrilled about the pond. Marcus Thomas: Figure 38 of your report council illustrates the pond that the resident speaks of. It’s the one on the left side. This pond is proposed to have a dead storage depth of about 3 to 4 feet, or what we sometimes refer to as a normal elevation of 3 to 4 feet. Above that depth we propose approximately a 10 foot wide shelf or safety bench before increasing the depth of the pond up another approximately 4 feet, so on average the pond is going to be about 3 or 4 feet deep. On a large storm when the pond bounces it could be up to approximately 8 feet deep before it subsides again. Mayor Furlong: And you said a ledge, where’s the, is that within the water itself? Marcus Thomas: Yeah, typically design, yeah it’s within the water itself. Typical design standards for the ponds, I like to have a nice kind of a broad, flat area before it drops down just, it’s called the safety bench for that reason. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Paul Oehme: It’s also an area where vegetation would grow, cattails and what not and it kind of screens the pond as well in the future so it kind of prohibits children, people from actually going into the pond… Mayor Furlong: Okay. Anyone else? Sir, good evening. Todd Gerhardt: And I just wanted to add a point to the pond. We’ve got over a thousand of these ponds in Chanhassen and they’re pretty much all located in residential areas and they’re a typical design like this. You have the ledge and then it drops down. In your neighborhood Mayor, my neighborhood, I’ve got 3 of them and kids all over the place that play in the park so, 21 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 they’re in our parks. They’re all over the place. They’re a necessity to pre-treat the water before they go into our lakes and streams so. V.C. Wertz: V.C. Wertz, 1620 Koehnen Circle. I’d like to address the city manager. How many kids have you pulled out of those ponds? Todd Gerhardt: Knock on wood, I’m not aware of any to date. V.C. Wertz: We have a new one that Mrs. Cool is talking about right in our back yard, excuse me. And I’ve pulled out 2 kids out of there. So they are a danger, but more than that, who’s going to spray for mosquitoes? And how often? Is there going to be a fence around it? And how high is the fence? You’re shaking your head. Todd Gerhardt: We typically do not put fences around storm water ponds. The reason for that is that silt goes into these ponds so you have to go back and maintain them over a period of time. And as to the mosquito control, we all pay property taxes into the Mosquito Control District. Periodically they come to Chanhassen and spray. You’ll notice the helicopters flying around putting out the briquettes and pellets, so through the Mosquito Control Agency we’ll. V.C. Wertz: And how often are they supposed to be spraying in our area? We’ve never seen them there. Todd Gerhardt: Well you know they’re concentrating to the larger areas. You know trying to get the numbers of mosquitoes. You’re not going to go into the smaller ones. V.C. Wertz: I see, so then we put up with our mosquitoes so you can have your pond. Todd Gerhardt: Well, the ponds are designed to pre-treat the water that go into all of our lakes and streams. V.C. Wertz: We’re not talking about the other ponds. We’re talking about the pond in our neighborhood. Now where that pond is going is the wetland. Why do we need the pond when the wetland does the same thing the pond is going to do? Todd Gerhardt: You want to pre-treat runoff from your roads into your ponds first to take the sediments, the sand, silt and soils, whatever may be on the streets, you want that to go into your ponds first before they go into your wetlands and then it goes into the wetlands, then into your streams and then ultimately into the lake. V.C. Wertz: So you’re going to take the wetland out and put a pond in? Todd Gerhardt: We’re not taking the wetland out. We’re putting in a pond to pre-treat it to go into the wetland. V.C. Wertz: And how big is the pond going to be? 22 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Todd Gerhardt: Marcus. Marcus Thomas: You’re referring to the pond that’s adjacent to your street sir? V.C. Wertz: Right. Marcus Thomas: Yeah, that’s the pond that I was just describing earlier. Again about 4 feet deep on a normal basis. Mayor Furlong: Do you have the dimensions? Marcus Thomas: Diameter wise probably it looks like it’s about, just over 100 feet long by approximately 75 feet wide. Todd Gerhardt: Marcus, is that located in a wetland? Marcus Thomas: That is not located in a wetland, no. V.C. Wertz: Isn’t a swamp a wetland? Todd Gerhardt: Oh we could be here all night to classify wetlands. There’s a variety of different wetlands. V.C. Wertz: So the pond you’re putting in, you’re using more of the wetland that’s there to put in a pond. You know explain. I don’t understand it. Todd Gerhardt: We have a wetland inventory map and we have different classifications of those. This is not a primary wetland per se and it’s a low area that probably ultimately drains into a wetland. Marcus Thomas: Yeah this area where the pond is located is actually upstream of a wetland so it’s not directly adjacent to it or an expansion of the wetland. It’s it’s own separate entity. Tracy Cool: …it’s not the natural…but now he says off of Audubon they’re going to run into it too. So now you’re redirecting it down to that pond… Paul Oehme: I can try to answer that one. The Audubon Circle, we’re not changing the drainage area off of Audubon Circle. Where it drains now, a portion of Audubon Circle naturally drains into this area. All the City’s trying to do is treat the runoff before it ends up in the wetland so it has some rate control too so the streams and the wetlands you’re not getting impacted by… Mayor Furlong: So this area is already, Audubon and other areas, properties, streets and such are already draining into this area right now and it’s what? It’s just sheet draining over back yards? Paul Oehme: Exactly. Audubon does not have curb and gutter. Naturally drains to this area. It’s naturally low. It’s my understanding the water sits out here during large rain events as well. 23 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 We are not adding any more drainage area to this natural low lying area than already is going into there right now. Mayor Furlong: So is the expectation then to improve the standing water or the drainage on other areas so it’s going to channeled to this area? Is that an expectation? Paul Oehme: No. I mean what’s draining there right now is the only water that eventually will be. Mayor Furlong: So it’s going through right now. It’s still going to go through, it’s just going to be slowed down as the City Manager said so to take out particles. Paul Oehme: As it leaves the pond it’s going to be improved into the wetland so it won’t be as much flow going through this area if we construct it as it is right now. So we’re looking for rate control. We’re looking for water quality improvements. Trying to capture that silt and sediment before it ends up going into the wetlands. Trying to improve those areas. It’s advantageous for us to collect those sediments in ponding areas so it doesn’t end up in the wetlands so the city staff has had opportunities to clean out those ponds on a regular basis and try to improve the water quality for the city of Chanhassen. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Please. Good evening. Adele Pint: Adele Pint, 1641 Koehnen Circle East. I too would not care to see this holding pond in my back yard, and I guess the question that I wanted to ask was, what will this do for the water that stands say in the ditch in front of my house, as well as in my neighbor’s ditch. She lives to the west of me. Her lawn is wet most of the year, as well as there’s water in the ditch right in front of my house and what will this do for those issues? Marcus Thomas: Can you show me where you’re at? Adele Pint: I would be probably right here. So the pond is going here. I live just to the west of it. Marcus Thomas: Well the nature of the improvement is a road improvement project and not intended to go out and do any significant changes to the grading within individual lots so if there are places where water stands on your property today, that most likely is not going to change as a result of the road improvement out in front of the house. Mayor Furlong: You said the ditch. Is that the ditch by the road itself? Adele Pint: Right by the road. Mayor Furlong: So it’s road water, since we’re adding curb and gutter aren’t we? Paul Oehme: I know what you’re talking about in that area. It is a low lying area. Naturally sheet drains down to this, the pond area we’re talking about right now. With the improvements 24 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 that we’re talking about, with the curb and gutter, we are going to have to raise up that, the back of that curb there a little bit. This is the opportunity to build up the lot up to our right-of-way there to eliminate that drainage swale because there is no storm sewer per se that’s out there right now. The swale we’re replacing with curb and gutter and storm water, and storm water pipe to direct that water to the pond itself. Mayor Furlong: So to her question, with the addition of the curb and gutter, and with the grading that will take place within the right-of-way, we’re going to be eliminating that ditch and taking that water out? Paul Oehme: As long as that ditch is in the right-of-way, in the city right-of-way, we’re not going to go outside, onto private property to do any improvements but as long as it’s in the right- of-way in back of the curb there, we will be eliminating that. Direct that water onto the curb and eventually into the storm sewer pipe and into the pond. Mayor Furlong: Does that answer the question or? Adele Pint: I guess what I’m hearing then is that you would. Mayor Furlong: Speak into the microphone please ma’am, thank you. Adele Pint: I guess what I’m hearing then is that you will put some type of drainage sewer area so the water will run down and it will be below ground is what I’m hearing? Paul Oehme: You can show her on the map. On page 34. There is two catch basins I believe right on her property or right in front of her driveway. Marcus Thomas: This must be your driveway that comes out at an angle. Yeah, there’s storm basin drains in the street. That will accept runoff from the property. Adele Pint: And those are new ones? Marcus Thomas: Those will be new ones. There’s no existing storm sewer out in the street right now, so that will be new drains that will take that water and route it into the pond. Paul Oehme: There is a few little. Adele Pint: There is one that’s right below the cul-de-sac and that is out in front of my house too. I guess my other concern would be in heavy rains I have seen the rain, the water coming off of Audubon Circle, which is right behind me, and literally you can have 10 inches of rain down in that low lying area and I guess I’d be concerned if the depth of the pond is going to hold that. And I guess other than that I’d like to know what other alternatives were there to this pond? Because I literally hate to see that. I had no idea it was this big as what you just described also. Paul Oehme: Well maybe I can help out here too. The pond will have an emergency overflow system designed into it, correct Marcus? 25 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Adele Pint: And where does that go? Paul Oehme: And that basically is to the outlet that’s directed in the east. So you know in the event where we have over a 100 year rain event, the pond will naturally overflow it’s banks into the existing drainage area to the east so, you know the pond will be designed to handle the smaller rain events where we really want to treat the water, and also be able to handle the larger rain events where it will just sheet drain out of the pond and into the adjacent wetland and stream. Adele Pint: And what were some of the alternatives to the pond? Marcus Thomas: Well, sure. Sure. The pond is the most effective way to do two things for the city and that is to control the rate of runoff. That’s how quickly it leaves the site, and to treat the runoff. For rate control that is the solution. For water quality improvements there are alternatives. In fact we’re utilizing a water quality treatment structure at the north end of Yosemite. It’s just a larger sized manhole that can collect the runoff. Give it some pre-treatment before continuing it into the storm water conveyance system. It’s not going to do the same job as a traditional pond will do, and it will do nothing for rate control, so as a pure perfect alternative to these ponds, there really isn’t one. Todd Gerhardt: Marcus could you show on Figure 38 the overflow on the map. When the water, say you get an 8 inch rain within 2 hours, where is the overflow? Marcus Thomas: The overflow is in general going to coincide with the pipe outlet of the pond that exists. At the east end of the pond it routes the water to the east, so what we’ll be seeing in an emergency overflow situation is that it would embank first near that outlet structure, over the bank there and then the water will go where it always goes. It’s just going to go over the pond instead of through the pipe. Mayor Furlong: I think she also asked about water coming down from Audubon as well, with the curb and gutter improvements up there, storm water improvements. Would we expect to see improvements or no worst or, off Audubon Circle. Paul Oehme: Now the improvements we’re talking about, the proposed improvements are, include again the storm, the curb and gutter and the storm sewer pipe. There won’t be any sheet flow…so in terms of erosion and rate control down on, specifically on that, her property. That water’s not going to be directed there anymore. It’s going to be directed into the pipe, into the pond directly so. Mayor Furlong: Does it come off Audubon right now? Sheet drainage just to the north down towards her property? Paul Oehme: Correct. 26 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Mayor Furlong: And you’re saying with the curb and gutters on Audubon that will capture it and direct it through the system. Paul Oehme: Right, and into the pond without going onto private property. Mayor Furlong: Without sheet draining, or at least through, conveyed through pipes. Okay. Please come forward. Jean Bogema: Jean Bogema back on Yosemite. 6371. Got a couple of things first off. I think the project is quite expensive and one of the concerns I have is that with this project that it’s going to raise the value of our property from what I understand and are we going to get doubled taxed on it? I have the property that’s going to have a major retaining wall put on with a fence, rd and I’m a little concerned about it. The road coming, West 63 down, basically would go into our driveway. We’ve had vehicles go into our driveway that couldn’t get out. We’ve had vehicles in our ditch where this retaining wall is going to be put. If you have a fence there, we’ve had a bus, the Breck school bus ended up in our ditch. So it’s a very dangerous intersection right there and we have to be concerned about that. Not real happy about the rd retaining wall. I’m not sure why the pond is going to be on West 63. rd Marcus Thomas: Here’s West 63 and here’s the one pond just east of Cardinal. And then yes, you have the pond off of Yosemite is further south. Jean Bogema: The other thing, the traffic does go fast, even in that short distance. It goes really fast. We’ve had some people go by there so fast that you just, you can’t let your kids out there. Even if it is a short distance, you have to take that into consideration. So we too are very concerned about the traffic flow through there. Been very bad with some of the construction, the trucks that have gone through. That…got to get out there because those big trucks were so fast. So we have to let construction people going through there know that you know they have to slow down. And then the fence. I’m a little concerned about the fence that’s being put on the retaining wall. What is it going to look like? Is it going to look something, chicken wire? Marcus Thomas: There’s certainly options and there’s no firm requirements as to what it looks like. We can do something as simple as a chainlink fence. It can be something as simple as a wood picket fence. The options are wide open for that. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you Jean. Anybody else who would like to speak at the public hearing, please come forward. Got a couple more. rd Barbara Solum: Barbara Solum at West 63 Street. First, I need for you to reiterate how wide that street will be? rd Marcus Thomas: West 63, our objective is to establish it at a 30 foot wide roadway. I can say that as we’ve advanced on some of the design, it looks like a 28 foot roadway is what’s going to be going in place which is similar to what’s in place now. Mayor Furlong: So it’s about the same as what’s, okay. 27 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Barbara Solum: Okay. And our issue we have is how fast people drive down that street so I’m wondering are they going to post that street at all and second are they going to light that street. We have two street lights on it which but it just is not enough. It’s very dark on the one end on rd West 63 and on Yosemite. It’s very dark in that area. I don’t know if that’s done at the same time but to me it would be an appropriate to fix that. Also what did they do on maintenance for the end of our driveways when they were doing the widening and correcting that street. What was done with that? And mail boxes. What happens to them? Mayor Furlong: What happens to them? They go away. They keep delivering the bills. Great, let’s see if we can address some of those questions. Marcus Thomas: As far as the street lighting is concerned, there is no additional street lighting proposed at this point. I’d defer to the city engineer, if you want to discuss any further but at this point we weren’t going to change anything as far as existing street lighting. As far as impact during construction, the driveways and mailboxes and things of that nature, yeah typically what we’ll find in a reconstruction project like this is that because the work is happening right there on the boulevards, those mailboxes are temporarily removed and they’re replaced after the project is completed. And most of the time the contractor will basically gather what they call gang boxes in strategic locations throughout the project area so that mail can continue to be delivered at these temporary mailboxes. As far as driveways are concerned, in order to match the new street that’s constructed, driveways are improved up to the right-of-way. Along the project corridor as well. So at each one of the driveways, we’ll replace that driveway in kind as to what’s there so. Paul Oehme: The street lighting issue I can maybe just touch on that. Typically in newer areas street lights, or in all of the new developments street lights, we require street lights for our new project areas. This is an existing neighborhood which obviously doesn’t have that much street lighting to it. And what has been our city practice, if property owners wish to have street lights on their street, those costs are assessed back to the existing property owners at 100%. The city has not contributed to those improvements, so just based upon past practice if the property owners wish to have street lights put in, we can easily send out a petition and see if the property owners are, want street lights and get together or come up with an estimated cost for those improvements as well. Mayor Furlong: Okay. That interest may depend on what those costs are so, but that is. Paul Oehme: It’s not cheap, I know that. Mayor Furlong: That is a dark area at times so that’s a good question. Maybe something to look into. Okay, thank you. Sir. I think there was somebody over here too. Lance Ford: I’m Lance Ford. I live at 1711 East Koehnen. Is there a copy of this? Can we get a copy of the feasibility report? Pick it up here at city hall then? Todd Gerhardt: Sure. 28 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Lance Ford: Okay. This project, if it goes through, what do they intend to do on ingress and egress as far as phasing of the project? Are they going to come in and mill everything off at one time to where we’re going to be driving on Class V or whatever, or is it going to be phased? Are rd they going to do Yosemite first then 63 then the Koehnen Circles? Because that’s, and at what time the project goes through, what time of year do you anticipate to do it? And then how often do they intend, I know it’s a hard one to answer to clean that pond at the end of, and what will it be trucks going in and out and backhoes and things of that nature? That’s all I have. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Maybe we can address some of those. Paul Oehme: In terms of the project schedule, you know we would anticipate this project would move forward, start construction in the summer time. And we do limit the contractor to specific roads that he can start on and certain areas that he can only open up in one time. Typically the contractor would work on the sanitary sewer and then jump to the watermain to the next street, so we would require that the, and then move on to the roadway section so in the past we have in bigger project areas limited the contractor to a certain linear footage of streets. The Koehnen Circle East and West. Those streets first. Get those buttoned up and then move on to Cardinal rd and 63 Street and work his way out. Those type of things. We haven’t gotten to that level of detail but we do limit the contractor to opening up amount of roads in the project area at one time. In terms of the construction of the pond depths, I mean I would anticipate backhoes being out here to, and dozers. Bulldozers to grade out and dig out the ponds. So there is going to be equipment out here during the construction project. Lance Ford: I’m talking about cleaning once the quality. Mayor Furlong: How often do we clean the ponds, with regular maintenance? Paul Oehme: Well yeah, we clean ponds as an on need basis. We have our water personnel that inspect these ponds on a regular basis and if they need to be cleaned out, we have, we clean them on a yearly basis so. It’s not a 5 year or 10 year schedule. It’s an as needed basis. Kate Aanenson: I was just going to add, that’s part of what we’re doing with the storm water management plan update is putting together that. As the City Engineer indicated, it’s an as needed basis so annually the ponds are inspected. Made a determination. It could be 3 years. It just depends on how much erosion is occurring there. Silt is being traveled down so, they’re checked annually. Todd Gerhardt: On an average I’d say somewhere between 5 to 8 years. Sometimes we can get in there with a bobcat or a small backhoe to clean it out. Try to do as minimal disruption of the turf in that area. Typically I’d say 5 to 8 years is usually the average schedule on our ponds. Usually it’s a functionality of the pond that creates us to come in and clean that pond out. If they have a capacity problem or a release of the water at the pipe’s outlet, we need to get in and pull out the delta that’s created in that area. Mayor Furlong: With regard to during the construction process itself, and this goes back to similar projects such as Santa Fe neighborhood and along Lake Lucy Road earlier this year. Or 29 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 last year, excuse me. Access to homes, is that something that’s maintained throughout the construction process? Paul Oehme: Absolutely. The property owners would have access to their homes on a daily basis. There will be sometimes during the construction project when the contractor’s working in front of their house with sewer improvements or watermain improvements where they might not be able to access their driveway at a certain time, but all the excavated areas will be filled back in on that day and other’s Class V so they will have access to their driveway. The only other time that they would be…getting onto their driveway would be the time when they pour, actually pour the curb and gutter in front of their driveway. We typically require about 3 day waiting period before we allow vehicles to drive over that, just because of the cure time. We don’t want it to crack up. Mayor Furlong: And that’s similar to the type of project that we did in the Santa Fe area 2 years ago was it? Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. To the residents comments, there will be a period of time where you will be driving on Class V. I’d say a month to 2 months you’ll be driving on the Class V material. You know like Paul said, the first step is to put the sewer and water in. When you do that you’re going to lose your current blacktop. After that then they come in and bring in the Class V. Establish the grades for the curb and gutter. Once curb and gutter’s in, then they’d come in with the blacktop. Lance Ford: How much disruption is there going to be for the sewer and water? Paul Oehme: That’s a good question too. For, typically we have isolated sewer areas that we’re going to be repairing. The contractor will bypass pump, actually pump from one manhole to the, one manhole if we’re working in a certain section of that area. There might be a time, a couple hours where we would not like water run at a certain time when they’re working right in front of a service or something like that, but we try to limit those to an hour or two during the day. In terms of water, yes we are replacing all the watermains in this project area, or at least we’re proposing to. What we do in those situations, we do have to shut the water down completely for a length of time to install the watermain but we do have temporary water we actually run temporary water service from hydrants to houses through pipes on top of the lawns to have the water service provided at all times to the property so, you know there will be interruptions for an hour or two to make those transitions from normal service to temporary service, but it won’t be for hours, days or a couple hours for those transition periods so. It is an inconvenience, we understand that but construction is… Mayor Furlong: Okay. Marcus Thomas: I’ll just add a comment. Bolton Menk, you know we work with these types of projects on an annual basis in a lot of different communities and the concerns are very similar as far as impact during construction, access and availability of water, things like that. And over the years as we’ve gained experience in assisting with these types of projects we’ve kind of, we’ve customized our specifications and requirements that we impose on contractors to address the 30 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 regularly occurring issues like this. For example in the event that there are times where water needs to be shut off to a neighborhood, we’ll require the contractor, it’s just our standard to require the contractor to give advance notice of that. 24 hour advance notice of that minimum so that the residents are prepared for that so, it’s that continual information, getting that to the residents so that they’re prepared for the disruptions. It’s not an easy process, we all know that but if we can at least prepare you for what to expect, it, at least you can plan your life around it. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Other comments. I think there was a gentleman over in this area. Bruce Koehnen: Good evening. Thank you. I’m Bruce Koehnen. I’m from 1830 Koehnen Circle. I’ve got a couple of comments and a couple of questions here. Question. I didn’t quite understand for sure, it sounded like if I interpret it correctly, the MSA funds for Yosemite does not require that the full length of the street from Lake Lucy to Mill Street needs to be redone at the 32 foot, is that how I’m interpreting it? That the state funds will apply to just sections of that road. Paul Oehme: Right, as the project moves forward, you know the State allows cities, municipalities to improve certain sections of roadway without improving the whole length at one time. rd Bruce Koehnen: And dealing with the retaining walls on West 63, I also have a little concern about the safety issue as was stated earlier. I’ve also witnessed, I’ve lived in the area many years. My whole life as a matter of fact, and there’s over the years been a number of vehicles rd that have left the roadway, both on Yosemite as well as West 63 Street. Both those areas do have sharp declines off of the pavement. Nobody’s been seriously injured or killed. I don’t even think we’ve had a rollover. It’s not steep enough to cause those problems, and so my concern is if we put a retaining wall, I don’t believe fencing on top of a retaining wall will prevent the cars from going over that have in the past. So I think it will be a more dangerous issue. As well as I’m concerned about the continuing maintenance cost where we find those fences do get ran into rd and damaged. And also with the retaining wall I’m not sure, I don’t know if West 63 on the south side, particularly probably in front of where the drainage pond will be. Now the grade on the edge of that road, I haven’t been out and measured it but my guess is it’s steeper than it is over on Yosemite and I haven’t heard any mention of a retaining wall on that road. Is there one planned? rd Mayor Furlong: It’s on West 63 right where Cardinal comes in, just to the east of Cardinal. Bruce Koehnen: Between, just to the west of where Blue Jay comes in. Mayor Furlong: Yep, between Cardinal and Blue Jay. Bruce Koehnen: South side of Cardinal. Marcus Thomas: There’s no retaining wall planned for that, no. 31 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Bruce Koehnen: Why would there be one not planned for that road on Yosemite is the question I have? Marcus Thomas: The street width on Yosemite, the wider street width pushes that curb line out rd basically extending over the existing slope so we would build that. Along West 63, we’ve got the opportunity to essentially match that existing street width again so we don’t have, we’re not infringing on that slope like we are on Yosemite so. Bruce Koehnen: So again if we don’t make Yosemite 32 foot wide, we most likely could eliminate retaining walls on Yosemite. Marcus Thomas: With the narrower street width, yes. Bruce Koehnen: Okay. Then my next comment is, earlier the chart described how they took the cost of the project and divided it by the amount of lots, property owners that would benefit from the project and it was asked about potential lot splits. I know there’s one. Probably more. There’s minimal lots that could be split in this project so I don’t think it’s a lot to ask the city to look at. It’s not a large area. There’s not that many lots to begin with to look at. I think it’s only fair if somebody has a lot that they can split with simple metes and bounds, that they be assessed for two lots. You mentioned about history. I personally myself, I’ll say since 1972 have been hit up for assessments on two of my properties. One of them was a large lot that was not split yet. It was never requirements to be split which later I did split, and I assume some of these people later will split and reap the benefit, even if they don’t pay an extra share. And another lot, I did have a driveway on but I also am, I just had a driveway on because that’s one of the comments that was used whether they have a driveway or not. So I don’t think that’s a good criteria to go by. Because I’ve been assessed too for property that I have. That did not have a driveway out to the street. So I don’t think those are fair ways to look at it. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Brian Evers: Brian Evers, 1799 Koehnen Circle West. Just kind of want to repeat a little bit on the Yosemite, from what you said earlier that the MSA is covering basically the added couple feet of road width and then also, that would also be covering the retaining walls and guard rails or guard, so if…is not doing it and we’re not doing it to the south, right now you are proposing a 32 foot wide in the middle with nothing connecting it, wouldn’t it make more sense to leave it as is? With the 27 foot. If you’re not planning to do it to the south anyway. Mayor Furlong: Mr. Oehme or. Paul Oehme: Yeah I could maybe just try to touch on that. Again we’re not planning to do to the south at this time because of the sewer, the utility services aren’t to the south at this time. In the future those services potentially will be provided, if those lots were to develop. At that time we would require that that road be upgraded to our 32 foot wide roadway standards at that time to make it a consistent roadway section throughout, on Yosemite all the way up to the city of Shorewood. The City of Shorewood, they, I don’t know if they would have a proposed project. When I talked to the City of Shorewood they had not indicated to me that they are looking at 32 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 improving that roadway at any time in the near future so, and I know they don’t have any MSA funds available at this time either for those improvements so. So that’s kind of the methodology we used for MSA. Mayor Furlong: Are the MSA dollars, maybe Mr. Gerhardt, if I understood your earlier comment, the MSA is a source of funding to the city for street improvements that are being used here, and they are, as I understand it, correct me if I’m wrong, they are covering the wider street and the relationship, but they’re also covering the cost of the 60% of the existing street improvements as well. Paul Oehme: Right. Mayor Furlong: So that’s part of it, is it’s not just what’s right. Brian Evers: You’re getting a better benefit out of it. Mayor Furlong: Right. The resident, the assessment portion is 40% of the existing width of the street. The 60% is part of the MSA dollars but to do that we also have to spend more MSA dollars and MSA dollars are money from the State that comes through gas taxes that we all pay so. Brian Evers: Second question I had was regarding, there’s a couple of gravel roads entering Cardinal and every time we get more than 2 inches of rain there is a ton of gravel coming down Cardinal. Have you addressed what kind of improvements upon those to prevent all that gravel going down into the road? Paul Oehme: I believe you’re referring to the gravel driveway on the west side? Brian Evers: East side of Cardinal and then there’s a west one I believe at Cardinal Court that’s right on the border of. Paul Oehme: I’m aware of that one. That one, there is a gravel driveway out there that I’m aware of. We are putting curb and gutter along that section of roadway. We will be looking at improvements in that area to try to minimize the amount of runoff at that point. We can adjust the grades to try to slow that water down in that area to minimize the amount of gravel that leaves that property. I believe that driveway, we do have several other gravel driveways in the city of Chanhassen that we are, you know it’s a private issue and I don’t know what our recourse is from a planning perspective. Kate Aanenson: I’m going to speak from a storm water management issue. We did change our city policy. All driveways now have to be gravel. We also have a policy of, excuse me asphalt. If they’re, no gravel. If you do have a gravel driveway, which is permitted in agricultural zoning, you have to have so many feet of it to be pavement to reduce exactly what we’re talking about, and I’ll just throw this out for maybe engineering to look at this, that we might want to do, look at doing some asphalt aprons on some of those driveways and looking at, as the City Engineer was indicating, ways that we can do it through our storm water management techniques 33 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 to, again I just want to emphasize this is an important issue in this area too is to reduce the rate of some of the water problems that we’re having up there. Whether it’s the driveways or the ditches, so that’s an important element that we want to look at, so if we can maybe do asphalt aprons on some of those to help reduce the gravel. Those are the issues that plug up the pond that we have to go back and do lots of maintenance so those are the things we try to be proactive on to reduce. Brian Evers: I know the one is a, I believe as driveway but the other one is actually a road. There’s 4 houses, 5 houses. Kate Aanenson: It would be a private street, but we can still look at that too. Even the private street can do some sort of approach. We can look at their techniques to see what we can do. Brian Evers: And then the last, you mentioned the watermain replacement. Are you also doing the complete service lines to the houses then? Paul Oehme: We do not replace the services on private property. We try to replace the curb stop boxes, which are typically right on the property line. Those valves that are on your lot. We try to replace those and then connect into the existing system. Your copper line that goes into your house at that point so we do not replace it all the way up to the house. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor I just wanted to make a point of clarification on Yosemite. The reason Paul said that we’re not doing the southerly part is that there are some property owners that would be serviced sewer and water down the line and we could go ahead and pave Yosemite now but then we’d have to tear up that brand new pavement for those future utilities. I just wanted to be clear on that. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Anybody else for the public hearing or comments on this project? Chuck Cool: Hi, I’m Chuck Cool. 1601 Koehnen Circle. Why curb and gutter? Why now? I mean it’s a naïve question but it sounds like it’s going to cost a lot of money. The MSA stuff, that’s kind of funny too. You guys are building a road. Widening it out but it doesn’t go, you don’t widen it out to the end, to both ends. Just to get state money. And kind of state money is our money, isn’t it? Just because the money’s available doesn’t mean you have to use it. I’m also concerned about the pond too. You said that you’ve got all these ponds around and no one’s every drowned in them. There’s been no accidents as far as you know, right? Todd Gerhardt: That’s correct. Chuck Cool: Who is liable if someone does die in one of these ponds? The City? Todd Gerhardt: I’ll let the City Attorney answer that one. 34 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Chuck Cool: I mean I have little kids. What you’re talking about is, I mean they’re talking about depth of an 8. I don’t know if you guys really have been there when you’ve seen it really rain. It’s draining off of 3 or 4 cul-de-sacs. It comes right up to my back door. With that pond there, that’s fine. I mean I understand why you have to have a pond and stuff, but if you’re going to rely on the existing trench that I dug and the pipe that Shoreview put in that leads into the actual creek bed because that whole part you’re talking about is a natural creek bed. That’s where the deer run. It was filled in to build homes. But it was naturally the creek. But who has a liability in case something happens there? Roger Knutson: If a tragedy happens, it really depends on who’s negligent. Just because, this may sound harsh but just because someone has an accident doesn’t mean anyone is liable. Chuck Cool: Well I understand that too but there’s also laws, if I put a pool in my back yard and I don’t fence it in and the neighborhood kid goes swimming and drowns, as far as I know, I am responsible for it. Roger Knutson: For storm water ponds, if someone wanders into our pond and we engineer it properly as the engineers have been discussing, and tragedy happens, probably frankly no one is liable because there’s no negligence. Chuck Cool: Well you guys are saying but you aren’t putting a fence around it. You’re saying that some cattails are going to stop kids from going in there? Roger Knutson: Fences have been discussed in this community and every other community in the state for as long as I’ve been doing this business and most people think those fences don’t help. They actually cause a greater safety issue then not having. Chuck Cool: Have there been any reports to that, that you have access to that say that? Roger Knutson: I’ve read the literature in the past on that subject, yes. It’s just like lakes. I mean the lakes are a natural attraction to children. I think most of us at the table have children. Lakes attract people. You can’t fence the lakes. No one would even suggest it. That’d be silly. Chuck Cool: Right. Roger Knutson: And it’s also the same conclusion in part. It doesn’t make sense to fence. Chuck Cool: But the volume of a lake is not going to change as much as one of these pools are going to change. You’re talking anywhere from 4 to 8 feet and actually I think you’re underestimating. I think it’s going to be a lot more with a heavy rain. Roger Knutson: Well I don’t know about your lake but I have my cabin, it changes 4 feet anyway. But anyway, the people, the safety experts that have looked at it have said, they don’t recommend fences. 35 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Chuck Cool: Okay. And then you talk about maintenance. Someone’s got to come out. Do you have records of when people come out? Do you have records of when they’ve been out to take a look at these ponds? Kate Aanenson: Yes we do. We do do that now. As a matter of fact we’re updating our storm water management plan and one of the outcomes of that will be a maintenance schedule of when we review all the ponds in the city. Chuck Cool: And will we have access to that information? Kate Aanenson: Yes you will. Chuck Cool: Okay. And then once again, why curb and gutter? Todd Gerhardt: Well the curb and gutter in the street is going to help with some of the drainage issues that people are having in their back yards. Right now your road is sheet draining so gravity is taking the water on the road and letting it spill wherever gravity will allow it to go, so having curb and gutter will catch the water. Have it drain into a catch basin. In that catch basin there’ll be a pipe. That pipe will go down into a storm water pond. Pre-treat it but the sand, silt, oils from the automobiles settle out into that pond and then there’ll be an outlet that will ultimately go into the wetland. Into the wetland, into a stream and then into the lake. Chuck Cool: Now are you guys talking about a pond that’s going to be by my place? I mean it sounds like you weren’t going to do anything about the little 6 inch pipe that’s in the back. It was all going to just overflow onto the ledge back into the creek, is that correct? Marcus Thomas: The pond will be graded to have an overflow that needs to kick in once, on those larger storms when the pond has crest. You’re referring to a 6 inch pipe? Chuck Cool: That goes into the creek bed. At the back end into Shorewood. Marcus Thomas: Well I guess that won’t be expected to serve this pond. Chuck Cool: Well then, are you going to knock down part of the woods and dig a trench? I mean how’s it going to, because that’s a natural run of the creek bed… Mayor Furlong: Can you show us on the map perhaps which pond or where your property is so that we speak of the same thing. Chuck Cool: So there’s the pond right there. There’s my property right here. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Chuck Cool: So right here, back in here is a natural creek bed. And I suppose it’s a ravine maybe 20 feet deep or so. I mean it’s a true, original creek bed. What they did is they filled in all this area here. Well right now it just runs through here off of this slip trench and then right 36 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 here is a 6 inch pipe where it drains into that creek bed. If I don’t keep that pipe clean, I get water building up to the back of our house. I’ve talked to the City about it before and they said it would be too expensive to remove the trees or do anything to it. And now you guys are talking about putting in a full pond, that’s great but then you’re going to have to grade this area out into the creek bed. I mean what are you going to do? Where’s it going to go? When it overflows. Marcus Thomas: We haven’t nailed down the final design details yet for the pond but the pond will be, will facilitate an overflow so that it’s not endangering adjacent property. Our goal is to get that water out of there before it raises to a level to cause damage to other properties so that’s the whole objective of the design. The feasibility report doesn’t go into that detail as far as final design is concerned. Chuck Cool: You were able to tell me though how big the pond was going to be. How deep it was going to be. Marcus Thomas: That’s correct. That’s the level of detail that the feasibility report does go into. Chuck Cool: Okay. And the whole idea for the curb and gutter then, and all this money is just for better drainage? Todd Gerhardt: Yes. It’s going to catch the rain water off of the roads, off of people’s driveways that drain into the road. Go into the catch basins. Go into this pond. Now if I understood what you were saying right now, the water is draining between your house and, your house and your neighbor’s house? And then it goes, sheet drains down to this pipe. In your back yard. Chuck Cool: Basically follows the natural creek bed. Todd Gerhardt: And then it goes into that pipe, into that creek. Chuck Cool: That’s correct. Todd Gerhardt: Now what it’s going to do is the water’s going to collect on the road, go into the catch basins, come down the pipe, go into the pond and then in those cases of 100 year rains, it will overflow out into where your old pipe was into that creek, into the back of the pond that’s heading east. Chuck Cool: Okay. Todd Gerhardt: And then naturally flow like it did before. In those occurrences if the pond should happen to clog or if you get a rain event where the pond can’t handle the amount of rain that’s going in there, so the pond is designed to pre-treat the runoff from the roads. Chuck Cool: Right, okay. Todd Gerhardt: So the catch basins are to divert the water into the catch basins into the pond. 37 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Chuck Cool: Okay. Todd Gerhardt: So that’s what the curb and gutter’s for. Chuck Cool: Okay. But then for the overflow of it, when it does overflow, what happens if it doesn’t? What happens if it starts building up? Who do I call when it’s coming into my back door? Todd Gerhardt: Well. Chuck Cool: I mean do you guys come out and throw a pump in there and drain it out or what do you do? Todd Gerhardt: We did this summer. Chuck Cool: I know, I saw you. And that’s why I’m asking. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. That’s the key thing about this is to make sure it’d designed properly. Marcus, designed properly right up front and to make sure it works as the engineers have designed it. And the emergency flow, where we were before this summer, our emergency overflows weren’t graded properly and there was modifications made to those. We also had new construction that played a factor in some of that too, so the key thing is to get this designed properly and get it to overflow where it’s flowing right now. Chuck Cool: And then if it doesn’t, you guys will be out and correct it, correct? Todd Gerhardt: Yes. Chuck Cool: Okay. Todd Gerhardt: Call the non-emergency number or the emergency numbers down at Carver County. They’ll dispatch out our utility department and we’ll clean out the catch basins like we did in Longacres and some other neighborhoods. Chuck Cool: Okay thank you. That’s about it. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Anyone else who’s interested to speak at the public hearing this evening on this project? If you want to speak, this would be the time to come forward before we close the public hearing. Mike Schmidt: How far down Yosemite does that go? You said there was a small section in there. This here driveway here, that’s a cartway that goes to the guy behind us who’s got 3 lots back there where he wants to divide it into 3 lots. We’re sitting here, is this going to end right at, at the top of the hill? 38 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Marcus Thomas: This is essentially where it’s going to end… Mike Schmidt: That’s the Hennepin County line. Marcus Thomas: Excuse me? Mike Schmidt: That’s the Hennepin County line, right? Shorewood? Marcus Thomas: No, no, no, farther south… Let me just go back… Mike Schmidt: So all of this new blacktop that they just put in, they’re going to dig that up? They just put that in a few years ago. Marcus Thomas: Well we’re going to matching at the existing line. At the new line…storm sewer pipe that may disturb the edge of the existing road where…but the intent of our road improvements… Mayor Furlong: Anyone else? Sir. Bruce Koehnen: I have one question just out of curiosity sake. We’re talking of this section of Yosemite at the south end that does not have, it sounds like utilities in it right now. Why aren’t we at this time put utilities in there and assessing the property on that section of road like we did back in ’73? Mayor Furlong: I wasn’t here in ’73 so I’m going to defer to, Roger were you? Roger Knutson: No, no. Mayor Furlong: I know you’ve been here longest. Is there a particular project or area that you’re referring to? Bruce Koehnen: Yeah the whole city. That’s when we had city sewer and water installed in the city of Chanhassen, the outer areas and they put it in and all the properties that benefited were assessed. And so this seems like a simple thing to do here at this time while we’re doing this project, so it’s maybe a dumb question but just out of curiosity sake I’m wondering why not. Todd Gerhardt: I’ll tackle that one. This is similar to the 2005 MUSA area. We go in and establish an assessment against benefiting property owners. Some of these individuals probably were originally assessed that had homes for sewer and water for one unit, and at the time typically somebody comes in and subdivides you get them for the rest. At this point this area wasn’t able to be served. I believe it’s from Lake Lucy. It would have to be served from the north. Bruce Koehnen: Is that still the case? 39 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Todd Gerhardt: That is still the case. Because when we upgraded Lake Lucy, I know we’ve looked at this over the last 5 years of trying to service them off of Lake Lucy and just couldn’t do it. So it would have to come from the north and I believe that probably Ann Nine’s property got to develop first when you bring sewer and water in there, and then that would property would have sewer and water available to it. It’s kind of a stepping stone. Bruce Koehnen: But there’s one house there on, kind of in the middle of that strip of Yosemite, do they have private well then and private septic systems? Resident: Yes. They pump their sewer but they have a well. They live right next to me, yeah. All those houses down there. If it’s going to go, if it’s going to go north, it’d have to be pumped. Because I’m almost flat… Todd Gerhardt: We may have to put in a lift station. I’m not sure. Bruce Koehnen: Well that kind of goes back to one of my concerns, which I think you all have an e-mail that I sent about the depth of the sewer in the city. If we are having a problem in areas with the sewer not deep enough to service all of the residential homes, this really seems to me the time that we should lower all our sewer mains, sanitary sewer mains also as long as we’re digging up the streets and spending some money on the project, I think we should do it right if we’re going to do it at all. Mayor Furlong: Thank you and I think to that point, if I recall, there are some areas, I think Mr. Koehnen because of your e-mail in fact, there are some areas that we are looking at dropping that, the sewer line to try to improve the flow or the angle between some of the existing homes. Marcus Thomas: Yeah, that was on one specific cul-de-sac that we talked about at Blue Jay. Blue Jay Circle. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Public hearing is still open here. Is there anybody else that would like to speak this evening? On this. Okay. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor I’d just like to add that if anybody has any questions between now and th February 13, contact either Paul or myself and we’ll try to answer any questions that we didn’t answer tonight. Come in and meet with us. Anybody that wants access to the feasibility study, we can make copies of that. I believe it’s also accessible at our web site if you have access to a world wide web, just go to our web page. Mayor Furlong: I guess just one question that I had, there’s, a few people brought up the issue of the retaining walls, and that’s because we’re widening the street and as I understood, because the curb is going to be extending out now at the current grade off the side of the road. We need to build retaining walls. What’s the alternative or alternatives to not doing that? Marcus Thomas: Yeah I think the alternative would be to construct a more suitable and safer slope that would obviously extend out further away from our road, and I think what we’re dealing with on the east side of Yosemite, if I recall, I think we’ve got some low area, wetland 40 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 areas that in lieu of a retaining wall, if we were to do that sloping, it would encroach into wetlands or private properties and kind of subject them to these grade changes that may not be desirable so, the intent of the retaining wall is to eliminate those far reaching impacts of grading. Mayor Furlong: With the change of grading, having driven the road, there are a number of trees along the road nearby that would likely take out some of the trees as well. Marcus Thomas: Huge part of it as well, and that’s one thing that we’re looking at too is those retaining walls really keep us within those tree lines so we aren’t having to go in there and clear cut a lot of trees to facilitate slope instead of the wall. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. At this point if there’s nobody else that wishes to speak at the public hearing tonight, oh yes sir. Mr. Johnson. You got in at the last minute there. rd Willard Johnson: I’m Willard Johnson. Live on 63 Street. You were just talking about Blue Jay. Are you going to lower the sewer line there? Marcus Thomas: That’s what we’re looking at doing for a particular property owner at the end of the cul-de-sac, they indicated that they have a flat sewer line. Sewer service line. That’s not your’s is it? Willard Johnson: Mine runs to the back lot line, no that isn’t mine. Marcus Thomas: Okay, okay. Willard Johnson: Is it going to affect me is what I was wondering. Marcus Thomas: The only affect it will have is along steeper slopes along your service line to the sanitary sewer itself so it would not cause any adverse impacts. Willard Johnson: You’re just going to lower Blue Jay? Marcus Thomas: Yes. Yeah, it looks like we’ve got the opportunity to lower that sewer on the order of about 12 inches or so which is a lot in terms of a private sewer grade. Willard Johnson: It runs across the back of two lots here and goes off to me and I was just curious. Marcus Thomas: This was the particular property I think that had an issue with flat service line… Yeah, and the extent of our sanitary sewer improvements in this area are strictly along Blue Jay. Nothing outside of there. Willard Johnson: Okay, thank you. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Is there anybody else this evening that would like to speak at the public hearing? If not what I’ll do then is entertain a motion from the council to continue the public 41 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 th hearing to February 13 at which time we’ll consider comments with regard to other parts of the project, the Chanhassen Hills neighborhood and Lake Ann. Councilman Labatt: So moved. Councilman Lundquist: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion to continue? Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to table the public hearing on the 2006 street improvements, Project 06-01 to the February 13, 2006 meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Mayor Furlong: Thank you everybody for coming this evening. Mr. Thomas and staff, thank you. If we can take into account the comments and recommendations we heard this evening from the public over the next couple weeks and see how much the recommendations can be accommodated, we appreciate that. Okay, very good. Thank you everyone. Looking at the time we’re going to take a short recess, about 5 minutes subject to the call of the chair. (The City Council took a short recess at this point in the meeting.) PUBLIC HEARING ON METES AND BOUNDS SUBDIVISION REQUEST WITH A VARIANCE FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY, PAUL & ANDREA EIDSNESS, 630 CARVER BEACH ROAD. Kate Aanenson: Thank you. As you stated Mayor this was an application for metes and bounds subdivision that does go before the City Council. And also approve a variance. The subject site is located off of Carver Beach Road, just north of the existing Creekwood subdivision. The proposed plat, so you have to back in and out here for a minute. Comes off the recently built Big Woods subdivision and they’re proposing to build, create 2 lots. Lot A which has the existing house, and Lot B. I just want to back out here a little bit and show a little bit of the area so you understand why the conditions, how they relate to the subdivision. Again this is Carver Beach Road. The subject home we’re talking about is right here. There are some out buildings. When this property came in for subdivision there was some interest shown from some of the adjoining properties of further subdividing. …part of our job is also making sure that we provide adequate access to other property owners that may want to subdivide. So with that, when we looked at this larger area, again this is Carver Beach Road. This is the Big Woods Boulevard, and our subject site here tonight the existing home. Can you zoom in on that just a pinch more Nann? And then this would be the future lot. So what we did is looked at how could this property be subdivided? Obviously it’s not being proposed more than just the 2 lots but if future development was to occur, how could it be served by a public street? Carver Beach Road right now is 40 feet. We did take additional right-of-way with the Big Woods subdivision because that’s 50, so we are recommending 50 foot for the new road that will be built through here, so that’s one of the requests that’s being made for the subdivision, and I’ll go through those in a minute. Keep everything going in the same direction here. Show that again so again this would be Big Woods Drive. This is the 2 lots that are being created and we are requesting for right-of- 42 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 way and again to maintain the prevailing development pattern in that area, recommending the 50 foot right-of-way, so that’s the variance before you tonight. The lot itself is a little over 2 acres, so both lots would meet the requirement. We are requesting that while those lots meet the requirements with the variance, that they do provide the easement for a future road. There are conditions in there that have been drafted by the City Attorney to provide for at such time that a building permit is requested on this lot, or if the city chose to…subdivide, that we could build that street. This street does provide access to the rest of those properties so we want to have that available to, availability to provide that. In addition to that, there are some other issues that need to be resolved with the subdivision besides the right-of-way easements. Construction easements and then also typical drainage and utility easements and those are conditions of approval. One of the other things we did mention in the staff report, the city does have sewer and water lines. We’re working with the applicant to get those in. We had originally recommended that just a generalized utility easement be shown over that but they would request that they actually be over the lines themselves so that’s fine. We’ll agree to that. Then the other request at this time is, when we do a subdivision at the time that we would take additional right-of-way because the property is being subdivided. We would request, similar to what we did on Big Woods, that they show a 10 feet for street right-of-way. They would also submit to showing utility easements… at this time. And those are all conditions in the staff report which are found for your recommendations on page 7. Again the variance findings are also in the staff report, as well as the mentioned summary of that is the prevailing development pattern in this area is really set at 50 feet. So with that we are recommending approval of the metes and bounds subdivision with the variance with the conditions and the findings in the staff report and I’d be happy to answer any questions that you have. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff. Councilman Lundquist: Kate, the variance is 50 foot instead of 60 foot? Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Kate I have a question if you go back to the picture of those lots. Is it possible to subdivide those lots again? Kate Aanenson: Yes it is. I tried to show it on… But this is the existing home right here. There’s a common driveway right now that serves this home and this home. Sorry, push it up here. You can see that, I’m sorry Nann I’m doing this to you. This is…so what happens if a building permit were to be pulled on this lot, they would have to get access via this road and then this home’s driveway is then also served up the street. Does that make sense? So now they’re all being accessed via public street. So right now as long as there’s no homes, there’s no violation of existing conditions. But this would be that large lot. It could be subdivided. One or two times. You could get 2 lots depending on how, with the layout. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other questions for staff at this point? Okay. If not then I’ll go ahead and open up the public hearing and invite interested parties to come and address the council on this matter. 43 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Paul Otto: Good evening Mayor and members of the council. I’m Paul Otto with Otto Associates, 9 West Division Street is my address, and staff report looks real fine. We’re happy to see about the 20 foot easement. We will work with staff to work that out. The one thing that we would like to request is the additional right-of-way along Carver Beach Road. We’d like to request that at this time we maintain it at the 20 foot. That would fall outside of the tree line, and basically keep what’s there and at the time of future subdivision look at going to a 30 foot right- of-way if indeed. Our thought is that if this property does not split, there are some significant trees in that area and we’d like to try and make sure that they’re preserved so that’s kind of the reason for that. And I’m available for questions. Kate Aanenson: Can I address that? It’s not our intent to build the street at this time but it’s our intent to take it as a road easement so if we do widened that street, that it would be built at that time…take down the trees and remove any at this time. We want to dedicate that as a road easement so if we did, build the road, which we intend to and… So this is Carver Beach Road. This is the area that we’re talking about that would be an additional, right now it’s at 20 feet. To get to 50 feet, which we took on the Big Woods subdivision, we’re just saying we want to look at a condition of approval it states that there be an additional 10 feet as a roadway easement. So we wouldn’t have to remove any trees or anything at this time but at such time in the future that we decided to upgrade that road. Mayor Furlong: What are the consequences of, or a situation that would present itself if that’s not taken at this time? Kate Aanenson: Then they’d probably have to come and say that we wanted to upgrade the road if the rest of this came in and we had that missing link. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions? Okay. Anyone else that would like to speak at the public hearing on this matter? No? If not then, I’ll close the public hearing and bring it back to council. Councilman Peterson. Councilman Peterson: Seems like a fair presentations…any substantial issues. I think the one that the applicant brought up, and to Kate’s point, if we don’t do it now it’s going to cost us money later and we’re not going to take out the trees until we need to so. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any other comments. Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: I watched, laid in bed and watched the Planning Commission meeting regarding this issue. I think they did a good job smoothing out all the wrinkles and getting it ready for us tonight. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilman Lundquist, any comments? Councilman Lundquist: Just good to see that we’re, staff is looking ahead putting that road in there for access for the future and looking at that will simplify down the road if it does divide, great. If it doesn’t, then nothing will be done so it’s good to look at that now and take out some 44 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 of these long driveways, narrow roads, shared driveway issues that we come up with, especially in this area so. I think it’s reasonable and with the conditions in here. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Councilman Labatt. No additional comments? Councilman Labatt: No. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. I won’t repeat. I would concur with Councilman Peterson and Lundquist as well. We’re planning ahead. We’re doing this at this time to try to make the situation easier down the road. That’s what planning’s all about so I’ll commend staff. If there’s no additional comments or follow up questions, is there a motion on this matter? Councilman Peterson: Motion to approve as submitted by staff. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second? Councilman Lundquist: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on that? Hearing none, we’ll proceed with the vote. Resolution #2006-08: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded that the City Council approves the metes and bounds subdivision (#06-02) of 2.18 acres into two lots as shown on plans stamped “Received January 5, 2006”, subject to the following conditions: 1. Detailed grading, drainage, erosion control and tree removal plans are to be submitted to the City for review and approval with the building permit application for Parcel B, or with the subdivision application if Parcel B is incorporated into a future development proposal, whichever comes first. 2. Park dedication dollars will be required in lieu of land dedication for one new lot (1 lot x $4,000 per lot = $4,000). 3. The sewer and water hookup charges for Parcel B will be payable with the building permit application or assessed with the property taxes. 4. The survey must be revised to dedicate a 30 foot wide roadway, drainage and utility easement over the east half of Carver Beach Road, measured from the centerline of Carver Beach Road. 5. Parcel B will be specially assessed $10,000 for the street. The assessment will be deferred without interest until the street is constructed. When the deferment ends, the assessment shall be paid over a five year period at 8% interest. 45 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 6. The applicant shall enter into the attached Development Contract and Special Assessment Agreement. 7. Standard drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated to the city as described in the UTILITIES section of the staff report. 8. The plans must be revised to show the exact location of the existing utilities (watermain and sanitary sewer) and easements. Additional easements may be required as described in the UTILITIES section of the staff report. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. JACOB’S TAVERN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 5 AND CENTURY BOULEVARD, APPLICANT, TRUMAN HOWELL ARCHITECTS: REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A 6,808 SQ. FT. RESTAURANT BUILDING ON 2.02 ACRES. Kate Aanenson: Thank you. This request is for site plan approval, variance free. It’s a request for approximately 6,800 square feet of restaurant located at the corner of Highway 5 and Century Boulevard. This site has been identified as a restaurant and was put into place when we actually put the, oops move in a little bit on that. So this would be Highway 5 and Century Boulevard. This is where the Holiday Inn sits. When Holiday Inn went in we actually anticipated and they rough graded for that site and always anticipated a restaurant so we’re pleased to bring one forward for you tonight. Just wanted to give you a couple other background issues that were some points of discussion and looking at the picture of this property, again I mentioned the rough grading that when this project came in, the staff actually, the engineering department actually undertook the curb cut issue on Century Boulevard. There is a little bit of a concern about that but I know we did adequate, this piece has always topographically separated from the rest of this. This is our natural area that we preserved. It’s beautiful views looking out the hotel side and the restaurant seating. We believe it’s a really nice asset that really gets the best use of circulation we provided for a curb cut in there. If you go down to Corporate Place, that is actually would be how you would get to Lifetime Fitness, so they’re not on the same road access wise but eventually they may get on Century Boulevard. So if you look at in the staff report there is some discussion regarding the conditions of approval that we’re monitoring that and that’s one of the items we’re actually going to do some traffic counts and bring back to the Planning Commission to see what the actual traffic modeling for that is fulfilling that after the restaurant would be built and kind of see how that’s functioning. Again that was a big issue. So with that back drop, talk a little bit specifically about the site itself. It’s a unique… It’s unique in the fact that there’s that larger berm in front so what the developer or the architect actually made a more vertical roof line on the site to actually provide for the berm that’s in front. Has some interesting orientation. This would be the, if you can see that, maybe you can just zoom in… This would be the drop off area or the drive through for the Holiday Inn. So there’s easy sidewalk access to get to that. There’s also additional sidewalks to get to the back of the building. There is a trail…that trail was put in place…which is again a really nice asset for people staying in that area. The restaurant itself has a nice fire pit on the outside, and then also has nice seating around the perimeter. So there is some shared parking that was set up in place between the two pieces at the Holiday Inn and the 46 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 restaurant itself. We believe again that will be successful. So I’ll just take a few minutes to talk a little bit about architecture itself of this particular building. The Planning Commission did…the big issue then, I talked about is the very vertical building…with outdoor seating. The silo. Kind of similar to some other things that we have on the other end of town…the culture of that area. So I think all and all, looking at the, based on the sight lines…is pretty limited but what you can see is the top of this first. It’s low key as far as the signage in itself. The one issue that did come up was the canvas awning on the top of the silo itself. We’re looking at making a recommendation of changing that, the roof and the canvas. I think there was concern about, I know another material would be more expensive but just the long term maintenance…and the height of that, that we wanted something more durable. So again…which is consistent under the PUD itself. I did mention the street, talking about how we get access to this via the Century Boulevard cut through and shared parking with the Holiday Inn. That shows on the other drawing it was massed graded so there’s minimal grading that needs to be done with this. So all in all it’s a pretty clean site plan…most of the work will be in the building itself. So with that we are, I also wanted to talk to you a little bit more about that, but I think I won’t steal Truman’s thunder. Let him go into a little bit more detail about the material itself. But the Planning Commission did recommend approval with the conditions in the staff report and there were a couple modifications… With that I’d be happy to answer any questions that you have. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff. Councilman Peterson: Kate if you would, just to highlight the two views that we have there. They are from what direction? Kate Aanenson: This is…south and then this is…this side, and this side is which you see right here. And this is the outdoor fire pit. Mayor Furlong: Is the silo on the northwest corner of the building? Does that answer your question? Councilman Peterson: Not, so the silo is in the northwest. Mayor Furlong: Toward the intersection. Kate Aanenson: Correct. And again that’s the part to get the visibility, right. So there was some discussion, quite a bit of discussion actually at the Planning Commission regarding, changing that roof line but they’re actually at the end of the discussion… Councilman Peterson: What’s the discussion of signage so far? Kate Aanenson: Essentially pretty well…they are allowed a monument sign that does say, the plans itself show a monument sign along, I believe it’s, they’re looking at somewhere over in here for the, which would be the entrance. Applicant: At the corner of 5 and Century. 47 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Kate Aanenson: I was told that that was going to be the spot where you wanted to put it so, apologize for that. It shows a monument sign but at the Planning Commission that was, so. But the building itself is actually pretty, it’s shown on this…it would be allowed. Two wall signage and then the monument sign would be additional. Mayor Furlong: And a follow up to Councilman Peterson’s question, is there any signage allowed on the roof line itself or it looks like right here it’s on the wall. Kate Aanenson: Right, because architecturally if they were to do something different, it would have to be integrated into the building and I think at this point we’d want to say that that would be no. To have it come back and try to put something artificial into it. Right now I believe it’s a more softer signage and that would be actually the silo. Mayor Furlong: It’s on the building as well as the monument sign? Kate Aanenson: Correct. And there’s…where they put the monument sign…put in the staff report. We’ve actually showed 2 locations. We didn’t put it in on the south side, but again I think the silo’s going to be what catches your eye. Because right now it’s hard to see the Holiday Inn on certain perspectives, which is… Mayor Furlong: Other questions? Councilman Lundquist: Kate question on how this is or isn’t impacted by the retail market study we just… Because we’ve always looked at a restaurant on that spot, a restaurant next to a hotel, and I mean that makes sense as well, any reservations or hesitations at all? Kate Aanenson: That’s a good question. Actually this area, when we put together this PUD we actually allowed for some ancillary support use. We always anticipated a hotel and a restaurant at this site, so it is consistent and doesn’t require rezoning. Anyone that’s looking at rezoning… Mayor Furlong: Other questions? Ms. Aanenson, real quick. You had mentioned in your report, your verbal report and it was also mentioned in the report about the materials for the top of this, canvas versus some other recommendation. Is that a condition in here? Kate Aanenson: Yes. Mayor Furlong: I’ve been. Kate Aanenson: I hope it is. There should be a strike out in there. Mayor Furlong: There was a strike out on number 4 which, that was the roof line and looks and gables and stuff. Kate Aanenson: If it’s not we need to, I think we’re willing to look if there’s something more durable. You know we talked about metal standing seam, so I think we’re willing to work with them on that but I think what we want to have is something beyond canvas. 48 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Mayor Furlong: Okay, but is there something right now in there or does that need to be discussed? Kate Aanenson: I think it needs to be added. Mayor Furlong: Maybe you could propose some wording and… Kate Aanenson: Number 32. We’ll put something together. Mayor Furlong: Any other questions? At this point. The applicant’s here. Good evening. Would you like to come forward? If there’s anything you’d like to add for the council? Truman Howell: Well I’m Truman Howell, Truman Howell Architects. Good evening Mr. Mayor and council people. Any questions we could answer, we’d be happy to. The client came to me and asked for something of a vernacular in what would typify a Midwestern feel. Obviously if you go to the farming identity but what we’ve done is kind of stretched some of the basic forms and tried to do something more interesting than is common. The silo’s and the cupola’s on the building are actually wire frame as opposed to being solid. The silo actually identifies 3 large fireplaces that you find in the, on the ground. One for the outdoor area, and one for the waiting area on the inside and one for the bar area. So they’re all three there and the silo basically caps those off. They’re large timber trusses on the inside which will identify the space and the, will be a very, it’s going to be a very comfortable and exciting interior. If there’s any questions I’d be more than happy to answer those. Mayor Furlong: Questions. Councilwoman Tjornhom: When is this expected to be completed? Truman Howell: I think as soon as they can. They’re making, putting together the project as we speak and they’ve been quite successful so. Mayor Furlong: Mr. Howell, the question that came up with staff’s recommendation with regard to material for the top of the silo. Is that something that working together with them. Truman Howell: We will work with them, yes. We had…of course we’ll work with them. Our initial idea was that it would be a fabric. Cloth of course, but then it came back with yeah, but you’re going to have to change that stuff and so we had some discussions and I think standing seam’s a good and expensive a bit much. We may try talking about something that, we’ll work together to make that happen. Mayor Furlong: That’d be great, thank you. Any other questions at this point? Okay, very good. Thank you sir. Truman Howell: Thank you. 49 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Mayor Furlong: Are there any follow up questions for staff? If not, I don’t know that this changed much coming from Planning Commission. I know they spent quite a bit of time and had the public hearing there so I don’t know if there’s anybody wishing to make public comment but they’d be welcome at this point if they do. No? Okay. With that, I’ll open up council discussion then. On this project. Thoughts, comments. Councilman Peterson: I’m one probably that raising the flag on architectural interest and expressing the need for that and I guess I say that with a grin because this clearly has that. I commend the applicant for pushing the window and that’s what I’ve been espousing over the years and it was enough of a push where I had to look at it twice and go do I like that? But then I said to myself, it’s not necessarily my opinion. It brings a distinctiveness…and I think we’ve accomplished that and I think that, everybody involved should be commended for that so I think it will be a nice asset to the community. Mayor Furlong: Thank you for those comments. Other thoughts? Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: I’m just happy they’re coming. I think it’s a long time coming for a new restaurant in Chanhassen so welcome and look forward to eating in your establishment. Mayor Furlong: Councilman Lundquist. Councilman Lundquist: I would echo. We need more restaurants. Glad to have something new and different and I look forward to eating there as well. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Mr. Labatt. Councilman Labatt: I would echo it. I would change the word from different to unique. I like it very much. Mayor Furlong: It’s not a brown, beige box. Councilman Labatt: No. Mayor Furlong: Which is good. It’s going to work well along that. It looks great and I think it’s definitely going to be an asset. It’s a great location and looking forward to seeing it come together so, I would, Kate do you have some recommended language there for 32? Kate Aanenson: Yes. The silo shall be durable material similar to a metal, working with staff. Mayor Furlong: How about the applicant works with staff to identify a durable material? Kate Aanenson: That’s fine. Okay, is that, okay. Mayor Furlong: Is that okay? Kate Aanenson: That’s fine. And they’re… 50 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 Mayor Furlong: This is going to have to come back for. Kate Aanenson: No. Mayor Furlong: This is it? Okay. So we’ve got to make sure that, do you want to make it acceptable to staff then? Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Well at it’s clear that your intentions is that it’s not canvas. More durable material. Roger Knutson: You might as well say durable material which does not include canvas. Kate Aanenson: That’s what I would say, right. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Sounds like we’ve got some, we can work on something. It sounded like, I just want to make sure we’re good. Okay, so the idea is staff proposed condition 32. Councilman Peterson: It’s actually 31 because we’re deleting number 4. Mayor Furlong: Okay, so we’d add that as 32 and we delete 4 as shown on the staff report. Conditions 1 through 32. Okay, is there a motion to that effect? Councilman Peterson: Mr. Mayor I’d move that City Council approves Site Plan Case 05-40 as presented by staff this evening with conditions 1 through 32, with the addition of 32 as noted earlier. Councilman Labatt: Second. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any discussion on that? Hearing none we’ll proceed with the vote. Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council approves Site Plan Planning Case #05-40, plans prepared by Schoell & Madsen, Inc., dated November 10, 2005, for a 6,808 square-foot restaurant on Lot 1, Block 1, Arboretum th Business Park 6 Addition, subject to the following conditions: 1.The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. th 2.A recorded parking easement for the benefit of Lot 1, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 6 Addition for the use of nine stalls on the Holiday Inn Express site (Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum th Business Park 6 Addition) is required as part of the site plan. 3.The developer shall install site furnishings including benches, bicycle racks, and tables. 4.All signs shall require a separate sign permit. 51 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 5.Mechanical equipment, either roof-mounted or at grade, must be screened. 6.The building must be protected with an automatic fire sprinkler system. 7.The building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. 8.The building owner and or their representatives shall meet with the Inspections Division to discuss plan review and permit procedures. 9.Pedestrian ramps shall be provided in all locations where the sidewalk ends at a curb. 10.The full access driveway onto Century Boulevard is allowed. However, should the driveway cease to operate in a safe manner in the opinion of the property owners of Lots 1 or 2, Block th 1, Arboretum Business Park 6 Addition, or Lots 1, 2 or 3, Block 1, Arboretum Business th Park 4 Addition, or if any of the following conditions are met, the property owners of Lots 1 th and 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 6 Addition and Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, th Arboretum Business Park 4 Addition shall be assessed 100% of the costs incurred to correct the conditions in a fashion acceptable to the City of Chanhassen: a.Level of service “F” at the intersection during peak AM and PM times. b.Level of service “D” or below at the intersection during non-peak times. c.Significant accidents that are attributed to the configuration of the intersection occur that indicate a mutually recognized safety concern at the intersection. 11.The slope located along the southern property line shall be seeded with a native grass mix and left natural. The applicant will be allowed to mow along the parking lot and trail if necessary. 12.Storm water calculations shall be submitted to ensure the existing downstream storm water infrastructure is sized adequately for the proposed development. 13.Two details for silt fence are included on the detail sheet. The old detail for silt fence (Detail 5300 last revised January of 2003) should be removed from the detail sheet. The plans should be revised to show inlet protection around all storm sewer inlets. 14.Wimco-type inlet controls should be specified for inlet protection. Inlet protection shall be provided for existing catch basins immediately adjacent to the project. 15.During installation of the proposed storm sewer infrastructure to the existing storm sewer, temporary caps or plugs should be provided until the installation of the pipes and inlets are complete. 16.A temporary cover of mulch and seed is needed within 14 days of final grade for any exposed soils or if any exposed soils are not actively worked within a 14-day time period. 52 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 17.Any sediment tracked upon paved surfaces must be scraped and swept within 24 hours. 18.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 (NPDES Phase II Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval. 19.A professional civil engineer registered in the State of Minnesota must sign all plans. 20.The applicant will be required to submit storm sewer sizing design data for a 10-year, 24- hour storm event with storm sewer drainage map prior to building permit issuance. 21.The applicant should be aware that any off-site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. 22.Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City’s Building Department. 23.Add the latest City Detail Plate Nos. 1004, 5214, 5300 and 5302. 24.The site will be subject to City sanitary sewer and water hookup charges at the time of building permit issuance. The 2006 trunk utility hookup charges are $1,575.00 per unit for sanitary sewer and $4,078.00 per unit for water. 25.Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, MnDOT, etc. 26.On the utility plan show all the existing utility sewer type, size, slope and class. 27.Cross-access easements for the shared driveway access must be obtained and recorded against the lots. 28.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. 29.Yellow curbing and “No Parking Fire Lane” signs will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and location of signs to be installed. 30.Builder must comply with the following Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policies. a.#1-1990 regarding fire alarm systems, 53 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 b.#4-1991 regarding notes to be included on all site plans, c.#7-1991 regarding pre-fire drawings, d.#29-1992 regarding premise identification, e.#34-1993 regarding water service installation, f.#36-1994 regarding proper water line sizing, g.#40-1995 regarding fire protection systems.” 31. The applicant will work with staff to identify a durable material for the top of the silo which does not include canvas. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: Mayor Furlong: Any council presentations? Okay. There was, Mr. Gerhardt and I did attend, a week ago Saturday Carver County, the Emergency Preparedness Meeting was put on by Carver County. It was very well attended. It was nice to see from across the county, including cities, townships, school districts, and I think the flavor that I took away from that is we’re well prepared as a county and we have a good emergency operations plan in place. We put part of it to use when the President visited just over a year ago, in terms of the emergency operation center and there seems to be good coordination between the different levels of government in this area. That meeting itself I think demonstrated that we had for example, which was very nice to see. Our city is served by two school districts, both 112 and 276, Minnetonka and Chaska school districts and there were representatives from both school districts there at that meeting, which was I think from most school districts across the county as well so, it was a good meeting and, there continues to be different levels of government working together from an emergency preparedness standpoint so. Other discussions or council presentations? Seeing none, administrative reports Mr. Gerhardt. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: Todd Gerhardt: Just want to update the council, the storm water study is done. We’ll be having th a joint meeting with the Planning Commission at our work session on February 13 so we’ll update you on the progress and final draft of the study. Update on the water treatment plant. This coming Wednesday all the foundation walls will be up. They will then in the next couple weeks be capped off. Little bit of utility work to be done so we’re out of the ground and that’s a good thing. Paul’s promised me he won’t find any other surprises out there. Councilman Labatt: How many did you find? Todd Gerhardt: Oh, quite a few. But that project’s moving along. The mild winter we have, they continue to work every day. If you noticed the boom truck pouring cement, so it’s been nice. We already talked about the depth at Lake Ann. We’re looking at 9 to 11 inches of ice out there. We will not be allowing people to drive out onto the lake, but 9 to 11 inches is more than enough to handle the crowds that we usually attend the February Festival. And then you have a park commission meeting tomorrow night and so Todd Hoffman will be there. Staff as usual and 54 City Council Meeting – January 23, 2006 he wanted to share that with you. And also you have the Chamber luncheon tomorrow where we’ve been nominated as Business of the Year for the City of Chanhassen, so we’ve got a couple council members that will be present for that ceremony so. Other than that, that’s all I have. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any questions for Mr. Gerhardt? Councilwoman Tjornhom: What time is the luncheon? Todd Gerhardt: Noon. Mayor Furlong: Gathering starts at 11:30. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah, the luncheon starts at noon. If you want to get there early, 11:30, quarter to 12:00. Mayor Furlong: Is it in the different location as well? Justin Miller: Country Inn and Suites. Mayor Furlong: Country Inn and Suites, not the Legion tomorrow? Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Gerhardt. Any discussion on the correspondence packet? CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. Mayor Furlong: Those letters to the fire department that were included in the council packet, I encourage everybody to take a look at those. They’re very heartfelt. With that, are there any more musical motions to adjourn? Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m.. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 55