Loading...
CC 1995 06 26CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING JUNE 26, 1995 Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. The meeting xvas opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Berquist, Councilwoman Dockendorf, Councilman Mason, and C.ouncilman Senn STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Charles Folch, Kate Aanenson, Sharmin Al-Jarl, Scott Harr, Todd Hoffman, Todd Gerhardt, and John Rask APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to approve the agenda deleting item number 8, Amendment to City Code Section Regarding Horses, Final Reading. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Final Plat Approval, Stone Creek 6th Addition, Hans Hagen Homes. c. Final Plat Approval, Halla's Great Plains Golf Estates. e. Resolution #95-69: Resolution Approving the General Permit 17 Grant of $10,000.00 from the Board of Water and Soil Resources for Administration of the Wetland Conservation Act and Establishing a Monitoring Program, File No. SWMP-8D. f. Approval of Temporary On-Sale Non-Intoxicating Liquor License, 4th of July Celebration, Chanhassen Lions Club. City Council Minutes dated June 12, 1995 Planning Commission Minutes dated May 17, 1995 Planning Commission Minutes dated June 7, 1995 Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated April 25, 1995 Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated May 8, 1995 Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated May 22, 1995 Ali voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously, VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: CARVER COUNTY PROSECUTION CONTRACT~ MICHAEL FAHEY~ COUNTY ATYORNEY. Michael Fahey: For those of you xvho don't 'know me, my name is Michael Fahey. I'm an attorney here at Carver County. What I want to address the Council on this evening is the 1996 Prosecution contracts. Last year xve sat doxvn and looked at some statistics and the total plan revenue that was generated to the prosecution...xvas given a copy of this prior to tonight's meeting. If you look on the last page, it has the...for 1994 of approximately $187,000.00. The way our prosecution contracts work through the County is that every year I send out a contract...revenue that's generated for misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor offenses in the city City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 of Chanhassen and the other cities that we contract with, we get one-third of that for providing prosecution services. Carver County's somewhat unique in the State of Minnesota. To my 'knowledge, it's the only county in the state that does prosecution for all the oities within it's jurisdiction. And the funding mechanism for that is this 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 split. Our office gets a third. City of Chanhassen gets a third and the general revenue... County gets a third...administration that goes along with criminal prosecution. In looking at hoxv much our office generated in 1994, we took in approximately $64,000.00 and if you look on the second to the last page, we started the second line with what various cities were paying in the metro area for exactly the same services that our office was providing the 12 cities and as you can see, very rapidly $64,000.00 for 12 cities, including Chanhassen, Chaska, Waconia and Victoria, is a pretty good deal for the cities. Because of the growing needs at our office, I brought it up to the County Board last fall...to the cities, we said we're not going to do anything about that for '95. You were already past...budget cycles...so that's why I started this year, the first thing that you've got on this document is... What I've been doing the last month and a half is going around to all the cities in the County. Looked at the full surcharge...continue to provide the prosecution contract services to the...cities in Carver County. As you can see on the front page, Chanhassen, the full surcharge would be approximately $15,000.00. That would be in addition to the...for us to continue. You can see Chaska is $22,500.00 all the way doxvn to the five smallest cities in the county at $2,000.00. What I've provided then, and you can read this at your convenience is a letter- to the Board. There's some information in terms of what our office provides to all the cities. The vast majority of misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor work that we get in Carver County comes out of the cities. We're not mandated by a lot of prosecution misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor for the cities. We do that on a contract basis. We are mandated to prosecute for misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor... To give you a good example of what a typical misdemeanor offense that occurs fairly often is a DWI. Driving under the influence charge. Another charge would be fifth degree...assault. That's what a lot of our work is. In the packet that I've given you, there's reference made to worthless checks that we prosecute. Again, that's something that we do for businesses in the County. The businesses are primarily ~vithin the municipalities. You can see last year we did about 200. As of May 8th of this year we're already up to 95 ~vorthless check cases that we've prosecuted, and we prosecute...checks $25.00 or above. We've got a statistical breakdown of prosecution by townships and cities farther back and also percentage. As you can see, the largest percentage goes to Chaska, and Chanhassen's not that far behind...We've also got a breakdown as to the court trials that we do. Most of the cases that go to trial for Carver County, as with most jurisdictions, generally are tried through a judge...As you can see, in 1994 we tried 48 court trials for the City of Chanhassen. We did 60 for Chaska. I would ask that since you are starting your budget process, that you take the worst case scenario and budget in $15,000.00 for the City of Chanhassen. I had a meeting, I believe it was on June 7th that your City Manager, Don Ashworth set up. Mr. Knutson was there. Representatives there from Waconia, Victoria, Carver and Chaska. And one of the things that came out of that meeting, based on my discussions with Dave Pokorney, the Administrator for Chaska, is that the cities I believe like the concept. There's a lot of consistency in the system that we do have. We're right down...deal with one prosecutor's office and there is a real benefit to that I believe. They would like to see the present system, which has been in existence for about 16 years...be maintained. They xvould like to see the County Board pay for the additional staffing...cities provide the surcharge. So the Board is aware of that position. We've gotten a letter from the city of Waconia also in support of that position and what I think the next step that I'm going to be doing is probably in August, try to set up a meeting with the County Board and City Administrator from the 12 cities in Carver County and just try to come up with some consensus on... So are there any questions from your Council that I can answer at this time? Mayor Chmiel: Does anyone have any questions? Mark. City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councilman Senn: The fines that you've listed here now, the $2,445.00 and $55,312.00. Is that the total fines or is that the one-third? Michael Fahey: Okay. The $2,400.00, that's just parking and ordinance fines. The ones that you should be ' focusing on is the right side, criminal fines. Chanhassen in '94 generated about $55,000.00 in fines. Councilman Senn: Total fines? Michael Fahey' Total. Councilman Senn: Okay, so under your contract you're paid one-third of that then? Michael Fahey: Exactly. Exactly. Councilman Senn: Okay, so Chanhassen's total payment t° you right now is one-third of that $55,000.00, or roughly what is that? Is that $177 Councilman Berquist: 18.2. Councilman Senn: So $18,000.00. And you want to raise that by $15,000.007 Michael Fahey: Correct. What I tried to do with coming up with a surcharge is again look at the percentage of services that we've provided. Looked at population. Different factors like that...exact science as to how I came up with the surcharge. I tried to be fair to everybody and tried to make it as attractive as possible so that it's still cost effective for the city...based on information that we have from what other cities have... Judge Kanning xvent to the City Council meeting in Waconia. He said that he had checked with Shakopee, which is somewhat... If we didn't prosecute at all for the City of Chanhassen, we'd still do all the penalty offenses that occur in Chanhassen. We would do all juvenile offenses that occur in the city of Chanhassen. We would do a small number of misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor cases... Councilman Senn: And those are covered under the general County budget? Michael Fahey: Yes. Councilman Senn: Okay. So effectively this money here, the 18 and now plus the 15..., this is strictlY for prosecuting those special things outside of what you'd normally do in terms of the County contract? Michael Fahey: Correct. Councilman Senn: Okay. And how does that relate to man hours... I mean how much time is Chanhassen per se using right now for individuals? Michael Fahey: We've not broken it down per hour per case that comes through. Just to give you an idea how things generally xvork down there. Two days a week, generally on Mondays, they have what are called arraignments. For people who can't pay a speeding ticket or something like that are required to come to Court. Again, these are primarily... There's somebody down at Court on Monday morning and generally there'd be 50- 60 people down there. We always have a prosecutor down there...We'll be there for basically all the k City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 jurisdictions that have tickets issued out of. Cases that are not resolved at that point, either by...the next step is to have what is called a pre-trial and that's where the judge sits doxvn and the prosecutor, we xvork those. The defendant. The defendant attorney, if there is one, to see if there's a chance to resolve the case at that point. If we don't resolve it at that point, it either gets set on for a jury trial or... And again, the statistics that I have... Chanhassen had 48 court trials in 1994 and again those are .just tried before a judge. Generally they take maybe 2 or 3 hours at the most. Typical cases like a speeding violation. You have a State Trooper or somebody from the Sheriff's office comes in. Testified that...if he or she wants to, and then the judge will make a decision. Is your typical court trial. Councilman Senn: Just one other question if I could for Don. Don, do we have any other, I mean is this just one contract with the County Attorney? ...is this one contract with the County Attorney's office or do we have others too? Don Ashworth: You have others with other departments. The assessing contract. Councilman Senn: No, but I mean legal. Legal wise. Attorney's office. Is this the only one in the attorney's office? Don Ashworth: Only one in the attorney's office. Michael Fahey: Right, and every December we just send out a nexv... Mayor Chmiel: Any other questions? Michael Fahey: Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Mike. We'll move to item number 3. ADOPTION OF HIGHWAY 5 CORR1DOR STUDY. Public Present: Name Address Brad Johnson 7425 Frontier Peter Beck 7900 Xerxes Roger Schmidt 8301 Galpin Blvd. Paul Savaryn 9950 North Shore Road, Waconia Vernelle Clayton 422 Santa Fe Circle Charles & Susan Markert 7461 Hazeltine Blvd. Lisa Notermann 1450 Arboretum Steven Cwodzinski 6890 Utica Lane Kate Aanenson: Thank you. Barry Warner with Barton Aschman is here. They are the consultants that put together the corridor study. As you're aware, this document's been around since 1993 and the Council has implemented or made two recommendations as far as the document itself. One being the Highway 5 overlay district, which ~ve are using right now. And then most recently having selected the road alternative as the City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 southerly alignment of the north frontage road. At the time that these documents were reviewed by the Council, which were numerous, and the hearings before the Planning Commission and I have included in your packet a chronology of all the meetings, public hearings and public meetings that were held before the Council and the Planning Commission. The Council was reluctant to make a decision as far as land uses until they had selected the road alternative. I've included in here the recommendations for the land use that the Planning Commission had and a summary of those land use changes are also included, and I'll go through those more specifically. The big issue with this document is we need to get closure on it. When the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1991, there was a large area that ''vas left out that the Planning Commission and the Council felt needed further study and some careful consideration as far as land uses. One of the biggest issues that this looked at, and again going back to the driving force, ,,vas the widening of Highway 5 and looking at the sensitivity of development along that corridor. But also looking at what uses should be in that 1995 study area. So what this document will do is it's a mini comprehensive plan so once you've approved these, will be sent up to the Met Council for review and then it ''viii be updated as far as right now what's in the document currently is not the approved Highway 5 standards. Those will be incorporated. And also under the parcel developments, there was two alternatives. One based on the northern alignment and one based on the southern alignment so those xvill all be modified so again it gives the staff a guide when development occurs to show them what the intended layout of these parcels are. So for your consideration tonight, what staff is looking for is your approval of the proposed land use recommendation that the Planning Commission had also recommended and I'd just like to go through those with you and they're starting on page 5 of your report. The area that was left out of the 1995 study area, or we'll call the Mill's property, was given a couple of different designations. Low density, office institutional, medium density and then where we see not a full access for a right-in/right-out on the north side. Possibly some low or neighborhood commercial in that area. Then north of that frontage road, the rest of that would be single family residential and that ties into what's happening to the north there with the Lundgren Subdivision. The other property was the Eckankar who had requested institutional be also considered for their property so that was striped. What they have right now is medium density so they're also given the option of looking at the institutional use, which fits in with what's currently on a portion of their property. The other one is the Ward property, which the Planning Commission had recommended we stay with what the current zoning is on the property, and that's guided for industrial. The comprehensive plan shows several different uses on that but the Planning Commission felt leaving it industrial, which will allow up to 25% commercial under a PUD, was the most appropriate. We are currently meeting with a developer who is proposing a project on that area that even under the current zoning, the current comp plan or even this recommendation, is completely different. Would require a comprehensive plan amendment. The other change would be the Gorra property, north of the frontage road. Next to Lake Ann has high density. North of that we're doing a transition which would show medium density and then just west of that low or medium. Kind of transitioning that area. Right now there's medium and high density and that's where we're kind of looking at the transition zone on that. Then another small change would be medium density east of Timberwood, north of Creekside. When the school went into the 1991 comp plan, it did say if the school went in the property could become industrial or was guided for residential. So we're saying that the north of what is now Creekside Subdivision, just to the north of that, medium density development would be appropriate for that again a transition zone. Then the other change would be the DataServ property, which is in Hennepin County and we looked at guiding that, the most southeasterly comer as medium density or industrial office. And the reason for that, being it is in Hennepin County but there is a large subdivision to the south of that and we felt again that made a good transition. Lundgren has a large neighborhood there and we felt that would make a good transition. So either one of those uses we felt would be appropriate. The rest of them, the colored map is consistent with the current comp plan but we would recommend that you approve the comprehensive plan changes and I'd be happy to answer any questions that you have. City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Mayor Chmiel: Are there any questions of Kate? Go ahead. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Just a clarification. We're leaving ourselves options with the striped areas. However, if there is a piece here that is guided and we do approve it, not a striped area, you still have the option of rezoning that? Or changing our designation later. Mayor Chmiel: Go ahead Roger. Roger Knutson: Obviously what you do here tonight is not cast in stone forever. As you're going through this process you can...reamend your comprehensive plan. Councilman Senn: We could do that what, through a guide plan amendment then or what? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Kate, explain to me what you're using institutional for. The word institutional. Kate Aanenson: City Hall. A public building. A public/private. Church. That sort of thing. Public, quasi- public. Librau,. Church. Councilman Berquist: That land that's just to the east of the existing Total and the land that xvas just purchased by Mortenson all the way up to where the public, the ped bridge is going to be. You've got that drawn in in red. Kate Aanenson: Yeah that was, currently the comp plan guides that entire parcel commercial and xve reviexved all these changes, the consultant and myself and for some reason that was missed on my part when I reviewed the draft but it was staying consistent with the comp plan and that's how it's guided right now, commercial. And that's what we're recommending, neighborhood commercial. Councilman Berquist: The xvay this looks to me, if there was any other, except for that little corner, there is absolutely no place to put any retail sorts of development left in town. In the highway, on this corridor. Right? Kate Aanenson: Well, no. I know what you're getting to. Talking about the Ward property. Certainly that currently is zoned for some commercial, and as you're obviously aware, that someone is proceeding xvith that. The Planning Commission was concerned about it and if you go back into the history of the 1991 comprehensive plan, there was a concern about big box category killers and what that does and if you. Councilman Berquist: About what? Kate Aanenson: Category killers. Big box. Somebody that takes up a large space, similar to Wal-Mart, Target, that sort of thing. Circuit City, Best Buy. That type of thing. And if you recall this came up in the Vision 2002 and it also came up, as I mentioned, in the 1991 comprehensive plan amendment. And the Planning Commission also addressed it in your report and I put it in the cover memo too. There was a discussion about what is our trade area. We're not going to have the same draxv as an Eden Prairie Center and who should we be serving and how big should that commercial area be and that's a big struggle that the Planning Commission had and I raised that in the staff report too. How big should it be and xvho are xve serving? Are xve serving a larger region or are we serving Chanhassen residents? And originally it was decided in the 1991 study area that it was City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 not desired to have the category killers. The big box and that's why the Planning Commission felt like, with the PUD they had the control, which would still allow some commercial but we want to make sure that it's the type of commercial that services these residents. Councilman Berquist: So if I wanted to build a strip mall anywhere, at this point I'd have to get a comp plan amendment in order to do it? Kate Aanenson: No. Under a PUD, you could do up to 25% commercial, which if right now the zoning that's on there right now, if you took that 25%, I believe it's around 10-14 acres. That would be the same 25% under that piece right now so you could still that same amount. It would just allow for some controls to put in place to make sure it's appropriate type of commercial. So the acreage really wouldn't change under that 25% rule. Councilman Senn: Kate, what's the parcel xvest of the new elementary school? I mean it's the same color as medium density but it doesn't have the cross marks like medium density everywhere else. Is that some kind of delineation there? Kate Aanenson: Oh. That should be medium density. Councilman Senn: Okay, so that's just missing the hash marks. Kate Aanenson: Right. And you've given preliminary approval to the most southerly portion of that. Betty O'Shaughnessy's property. Mayor Chmiel: Any other questions? Is there anyone wishing to address this at this time? Chris Dietzen: Mayor, members of the Council, ladies and gentlemen, my name is Chris Dietzen and I represent Mills Fleet Farm .... appeared before you, I believe it was last January. Mills Fleet Farm had requested that this property be designated commercial and they have... This goes back...to conversations that occurred between Mills Fleet Farm and the city in 1986, prior to their acquisition of the property and for which there was discussions regarding developing a Mills Fleet Farm somewhere at that location at Trunk Highway 5 and Trunk Highway 41. We have...alignment discussion regarding the southern alignment and northern alignment and we wrote a letter dated March 28th of 1994 which I think addresses that issue and I would rely upon that. Our concern now is that with the alignment and with the designation, there's very little use that the property can be put to if you take into account the road alignment, potential wetland limitations, the city's desire to preserve all of the on-site vegetation. The property would be rendered largely undevelopable for the purpose originally intended and originally discussed. As we understand the comprehensive plan, the designation of single family residential is a dramatic change. We don't see any evidence in the record that would justify that. We believe that the designation of property as commercial is the appropriate designation by virtue of it's proximity to two regional arterials. The Mills property is best suited to a commercial land use designation. Those traffic counts we believe are significant. We think that going to a single family residential would be a poor transition and in fact there is no transition at all. In conclusion, we would request that everything that Mills Fleet Farm has presented to the City Council and the Planning Commission, from the date they acquired the property in 1986 through today, be considered part of this record. We urge that the property be designated commercial. We believe that there is no...to designate it other,vise. We believe that it results in...treatment of Mills Fleet Farm. We believe that there ,,vas an agreement...contract that was reached between the City and representatives of Mills Fleet Farm that we request be honored. For those interested, we encourage that the City Council Meeting - June 26, 19-95 property, the plan be guided as commercial and the single family designation be disregarded. Thank you. I'll answer any questions the Council may have. Mayor Chmiel: Any questions? Mark you had something you xvere going to ask. Councilman Senn: Yeah, I had a couple more to state if I coul& Kate, one of the things I noticed, if you follo~v the north frontage road along and stuff, I mean is it realistic to assume there's going to be like low density residential between there and TH 5? You -know when you get out there for example beyond, or to the west of Galpin. West of Galpin there you've got a lot of. Kate Aanenson: You're talking about the Swings property. Councilman Senn: Yeah. I mean basically you have the Swings property and all the property effectively going along TH 5 there. I mean I don't know if you can raise the same question, you -know back on medium density and high density because once those frontage roads go in, I would really question the liability of either low density or medium density. Kate Aanenson: The Planning Commission had looked at a recommendation for a park even in that area too. I think noxv that development is occurring within the Lundgren, a larger park xvas sited more north of the American Baptist. That is certainly an option. I think there was a concern too of certain amount of density within, along that corridor. Seeing all medium density along the corridor. But within that, as you recall xvith Lake Ann Highlands, there is an opportunity to do twin homes still xvithin that. Within the loxv density. I understand your concern. That is an option. Councilman Senn: But I mean shouldn't we be showing that as some options rather than just a clear delineation of the loxv or the medium. Barry Warner: Councilman Senn, certainly you have that option. During the task force life, they looked at a variety of different land uses in that area. And as Kate pointed out, I believe that the task force and subsequently the Planning Commission was concerned with having a corridor effect of either multi-family or commercial/industrial the entire length of Highway 5 within the community. So with that they felt that, given the fact that the access boulevard will set back for a portion of this distance, that that would make an adequate location for single family. And where it comes in closest proximity to the Highway 5 alignment, that that will alloxv some kind of a buffer. Setting back residential further on the north side of the road~vay. So those were those body's rationales at that time. Kate Aanenson: We also have to take that into context, that the Planning Commission recommendation was to put the road to the north so you did have more space. But since you, the Council's recommendation was to keep the road towards the south, it does pinch it more so their recommendation having it to the north, it allowed for maybe not such a confined area with the three roads. Three frontages. Councilman Senn: I understand the concern. I guess I just question the practicality or viability of doing it or accomplishing it, xvhich means we're going to, unless we provide for options there appears to me we're going to kind of create a vicious circle for us to go through a lot of requests for changes without leaving ourselves the option. The last question I had related to the service road out closer to TH 41. Kate Aanenson: We talked about that. It does need to sxving. City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councilman Senn: Yeah, I thought we were bringing it further south and then just swinging it north closer to TH 41. Kate Aanenson: And we'll make that change on this plan, you're right. Councilman Senn: But I mean that's going to have an impact on how we look at. Kate Aanenson: Well we would just carry that forward as those land uses, as far as where that road, because actually xvhat it does is xve want to minimize that jog but tie it in further north for stacking. That was the discussion, right? To get that road where it touched down on TH 41 to allow for better stacking. So our recommendation would be those same land uses would carry up to where that road would touch down on TH 41. Councilman Senn: Yeah, I mean the fact we're leaving the options there is fairly open but at the same time we're going to have to provide for some staging or buffering there and we're not going to just end up between the commercial and the single family residential. Barry Warner: I think that's something that you'll have to closely evaluate when you select the land use. As Kate pointed out, there's a number of different alternatives in there that you have the opportunity to look at. The amount of buffer that's appropriate that has to be reviewed once you decide the land use that is best for that area. Councilman Senn: Well the only thing I'm getting at, are we allowing ourselves sufficient depth to do that once we move the road to the south? I mean more or less, once we move the road to the south there on TH 41, there's really not going to be any room between the service road and the highway until you get to that very comer, or very close to TH 41, which means reverse the road if we allowed enough. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, if you look in your document here where we actually did the details of the different road alignments, there is layouts for those different, particularly on this. Barry Warner: What Kate is pointing out, later in the document there are sketch plans for each of the parcels along the corridor and where there were alternative alignments for the access boulevards considered, we looked at various land use configurations consistent with those various roadway alignments. Councilman Senn: I thought in the, that's the original report, right? The big, thick one? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Councilman Senn: I mean I thought in that one we didn't have one...frontage road right down... Kate Aanenson: No, we did. Yes, it's Figure 8.8, yeah. The colored is for the alignments. Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else? State your name and your address. Dr. Paul Savaryn: I'm Dr. Paul Savaryn from the...of Minnesota and we have an affected property on Highway 5 where... Your Honorable Mayor and City Council members and especially Kate Aanenson who I'Ve tried to get a hold of numerous times but she's always too busy to see me or is out of the office. The first thing I City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 would say is, being an affected landowner on the Highxvay 5 corridor study for 4+ years, I've been left out of the picture quite of it. I've also...plans and secondary plans. I've tried to make as many of these meetings as I can but it's always after the fact that I usually hear about them. I came specifically to the City Council to get a Corridor 5 study manual and was told there are none left and I would not be allowed to have one. t called the engineering department that did the study and they said they were not allowed to send out any more so I got the Catch 22 run around. So I have some disappointments with the overall study process but...history and I'd like to just include the fact that in the early 80's we have a sale on the intersection of Highway 5 and TH 41 where Fleet Farm has it now and Minnetonka Labs was willing to put in a nice campus operations...and that was not allowed by the City Council at the time. I know it had something to do with the MUSA line and going through xvhat the City...My second point is, I lived next to a Fleet Farm in Marshall, Wisconsin when I was in residency and I'm telling you that's a great store and that's a great community presence and they're not asking me to do this but Fleet Farm can be dressed up. But the Planning Commission and the people that work behind the scenes have a different viewpoint and I don't knoxv if xve share this or not...attitude or not. One day I was with one of the Planning Commission members and talking about what could be done commercial and so on and their attitude frankly xvas, who wants an ugly Fleet Farm anyway. I think that's a poor way to plan a community development is when people have personal attitudes against a site...what kind of products they might be selling or what kind of clientele they might be selling to. I think if xve had one here, we'd all be shopping there quite frequently as they are very... My second point is, we still retain property to the north of Fleet Farm and kind of L shaped around it and that frontage road willy nilly's across our southern park. When xve sold the property to Fleet Farm, we left 500 feet off Highxvay 5 for road stacking and frontage road so I addressed that point in a letter to Kate Aanenson. Why was that frontage road brought xvilly nilly just across the very bottom strip of our property? That property, xvhether it be commercial or residential, high or medium, low density, xvhatever it is, it's limited as it stands and then you take a row across the southern part of it, it limits all the further...the L shape that comes down there...north side of the property. So we have limited property now to begin with and then you take just maybe an acre and a half or 2 acres of the road xvhich easily is gone the way it's gone noxv. As a valuable property and it hurts us personally so I would address that issue xvith Kate Aanenson at kind of a... Whether I call the City Planning Commission about this or the city Planning office and they tell me, xvell that's really the engineer's decision where that road goes. So my question is, let there be a little more input on the landowner's side to where these exact road alignments go. I 'knoxv you're going to hear people say north or south, east and west but ov, erall, if you listen to each landoxvners xvishes, there probably will be some compromise on everybody's part. But for instance on our end of it, from an engineer's...that may have influenced where that...because nobody can tell me it was just an arbitrary line... Well, you've got to start someplace...and suddenly that line becomes a fixture. Welt, if they would have heard us argue the point, perhaps they would have said yeah, you've got a point there. You could bring it down closer to Highway 5 at that point. State xvhere it was originally intended by the landowners who are dealing amongst each other and trying to come up with development schemes on their oxvn. So those are my majority points that I want to make. And finally, whatever decisions you come up with the study, I hope you come up with something that includes that northeast quadrant. Don't exclude us once again from the MUSA line because it's been going on since 1981. You guys approached us and asked us to...what our use is for...City Hall and find out it's not in the MUSA line. And TH 101 will be, who knows, 10 to 20 years down the road and meanwhile we're stuck with what is agricultural land that could possibly be developed to our benefit of course but also to the city's benefit. I think it's unfair now that it's 16 years that no decision has been made yet. Those are my points. Do you have any questions of me2 Mayor Chmiel: I guess not. Thank you. Anyone else? 10 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Susan Markert: Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council, my name is Susan Markert and I live at 7461 Hazeltine Boulevard xvhich abuts the Fleet Farm property on the north side. We live on the east side of County Road 41. I was going to start off with something else but I'll address some issues that Paul Savaryn mentioned about the Fleet Farm. The Fleet Farm store, my opinion is that the Fleet Farm store is built on the corner of TH 5 and TH 41, that would become our downtown because they do have everything and that would be a terrible blow to all the retail after they've spent a lot of money to be located where they are. They would not be able to compete with a Fleet Farm because, like I said, they have everything. I was just there 2 days ago. And that would be one good reason why...shouldn't put that there. Like I said, that wouldn't... My next concern is for the recommended rezoning usage for our area, which at this time I-live in Agricultural 2, since 1983, which the staff has been talking about. We also do business as a small farm and we have small farm animals which include sheep, duck, geese, turkeys, guineas, swans, roosters, etc. We wish to continue our lifestyle and continue the farm as it is and also...income. When the area is rezoned, what is going to happen you -know, if it's recommended for residential now to the east of us. What, how are we going to be good with the people that are coming in next to us if... What would the city's position be with that? You know seeing that we've been there since 1983. We're operating under what it's zoned and it's been zoned. It's grandfathered in, I'm told and I can continue operating as a farm but you know, when people come around, what would happen? I would hope that we wouldn't be forced to give up the lifestyle that we've been accustomed to plus lost part of my income. So... know what the city's position ~vould be. Mayor Chmiel: Kate. Kate Aanenson: Certainly they have their grandfathered rights. Right now it's not even in the MUSA area so the first thing before it develops it xvould have to come in for a MUSA which is another separate process. Secondly, if development occurred, I'm sure there would be complaints but it has grandfathered rights. I'm not sure as far as noise ordinance and that sort of thing. We certainly don't intend to push it out. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that's really a hard thing to really try to address. If some of that. Susan Markert: If I could, you 'know like if I had a lot of money I'd buy that 40 acres to the east of us and preserve it as a farm for eventually and giving it possibly to the city of Chanhassen but we're talking, this is ideas that would be great but at this point, hoxv do xve protect ourselves? We don't bother anybody. We just do our thing and our farm doesn't have a smell to it. It's basically like a park but I know...and they do make their animal noises, so ~vhat would happen if there's residential and people would start seeing I don't like the rooster at 3:30 in the morning. Mayor Chmiel: Well ~ve have some of the same situations occur on our far eastern border where we have commercial and industrial businesses right along TH 5 and the city of Eden Prairie decided to put residential in there and the noise sometimes bothered those particular neighbors. And it caused those kinds of problems. That is not quite like what you're talking about right now. It's a little different but nonetheless, we get complains from the city of Eden Prairie but then the City of Eden Prairie didn't take into consideration as to how to really address that. At the time they shouldn't have put residential in there so. Susan Markert: Well I think now's the time to at least tell you what I think the problems might be and I don't know what...would be a good transition. Instead of residential there, would be loxv profile office? I don't know. Somebody that operates from like 8:00 to 5:00 or 8:00 to 6:00, I'm asking. You know I'm asking trying to let you know this is xvhat we do and we don't want to cause any trouble but we also want to be able to get along and have a good mix. 11 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Mayor Chmiel: Sure. How many total acres do you have now? Susan Markert: 6.01. Yeah, 6.01. Mayor Chmiel: By the same token, if someone came along and offered you a fair price that you thought ,,vas a fair price, would you sell? Susan Markert: I was going to say no but I had to xvait to hear xvhat my husband said. If he had said no... Councihnan Mason: Well I'm glad you're in agreement. Mayor Chmiel: That was almost in unison by the way. Susan Markert: But we really, we would like to preserve our time as long as we possible can and if something happens where we could possibly give it to the city, we've considered that but like I said, we're talking years from now. And my husband and I are both artists and I make my money also illustrating animals and we, artists have-a tendency to see the real big picture. I mean it does seem like years and years axvay and to us the worst thing that could happen would be for us to say, here. Take this. Cut down all these beautiful 80 foot trees, 100 foot trees. It's a beautiful park and we are dumb enough to, I don't mean dumb enough. We're conscientious enough to try to keep it that xvay and maybe, you never knoxv, you people might end up with it. And I would hope that if you did, you would be able to preserve it the way that was originally because it is part of the history of Chanhassen. But in the meantime, there's going to be development you knoxv, on all sides of us and I don't, I am concerned right noxv...and if that would be a...residential xvith that because actually we are kind of like, I xvant to say like an island because there's really, there's trees. There's two highways and there's trees on the other side and it's kind of like very private. So I guess I really would like somebody to tell me hoxv we can rectify this problem. Mayor Chmiel: I guess I don't have the answer for you. Susan Markert: Would the City Attorney be able to? Roger Knutson: ...prosecutor. You can't stop people from complaining. I would anticipate that if you have neighbors next to you, you might get some complaints... Councilman Mason: Yeah, I xvas just going to say. Having said that, you're grandfathered in there. I mean I'm assuming the neighbors are just going to have to live with the roosters. Councilxvoman Dockendorf: Buyer bexvare. Kate Aanenson: Well that's what I was going to say. What we would try to do best, when we go through the subdivision process, which is again down the road, that xve would try to disclose some of this so people who buy into the area know. Councilman Mason: I mean, and Roger correct me if I'm wrong but if somebody's grandfathered in with something, they don't have to change anything. I mean unless it's xvritten in somewhere that they have to. Roger Knutson: That's generally correct. You don't grandfather in nuisances though. 12 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councilman Mason: Well no. Susan Markert: Well it's not a nuisance but it could be a nuisance to somebody that doesn't like farms or animals but you know. Councilman Mason: Well then hopefully they'd have the good enough sense not to buy next to it. I mean, which I know if a leap of faith. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I guess the bottom line too is that development is down the road and all we can do is, I know you're trying to plan in advance but all we can do is make the developer, the would be developer and the would be homeowners aware of the situation. And I certainly think, with the length of time that you've been in Chanhassen, a lot of that's going to be given consideration. Susan Markert: Okay. And I have...the recommended usage for the comer of TH 5 and TH 41 is, let's see it's high density residential. I believe is that right Kate? Kate Aanenson: No, medium density, institutional and office. Susan Markert: Okay, medium density. I think that, my own personal feeling, my husband as well, we think that that corner is too pretty to make it you -know residential medium density. Okay. We personally would like to see like an institutional type of thing maybe like some sort of a small school and possibly a campus, corporate campus situation. That's what I think, it's one of the last pretty comers left so that's my only, all my comments. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Lisa Notermann: I'm Lisa Notermann. I live at 1450 Arboretum Boulevard. I'm wondering if you -know some time for all of this...involved, I mean my house is going right, no matter what. I live right by Lake Ann Park. Kate Aanenson: Right, I knoxv that. For the frontage road or which issue? Lisa Notermann: Well the frontage road from last I was told goes right through my house. Kate Aanenson: That's I guess what timing of the land use changes or the plan? Lisa Notermann: I'd like to 'know how much time I have left on my property. I mean is it 5 years? 10 years? 20? I mean can I have some ballpark figure. It's so hard to live in limbo. You know we've got 5 kids. We want to live there as long as we can. If you tell me 20 years, you know that's wonderful. Then we know what kind of upkeep to do on our home and everything else. It's really hard living like this for how many years now. 7-8 we've been living in limbo. You know, we'd just like some number. It's really, really difficult. Mayor Chmiel: I don't think we really do have any real numbers that we can talk about. In fact you and I have had many conversations back and forth, and it is. It's difficult for you and it's really difficult for us to say we don't know. I guess it all depends tOO upon MnDot. As you well know, Highway 5 has been pushed back. It was supposed to have been completed this year but now we're in the year 2000 something. And so if you look at it from that standpoint, you can almost say that there could be what, 7-8 years, providing funds are there from the federal government and through MnDot to be able to make that kind of acquisition as well. 13 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Lisa Notermann: Well can you tell me, I mean can you tell me yes. I mean in all probability I'll be there for sure another 5 years. Now... Mayor Chmiel: Well, all of a sudden if they come back up with some money and say that we have the dollars to do that particular project we promised you back to be completed in '95, maybe we can do this by '98. I don't expect to see it but that's always a potential. Trying to give you a timeframe is rather, very difficult. Councilman Berquist: Well when we sat here and talked about this alignment. The fellow from MnDot said, not until at least 2000. But he said, I think it xvill happen in 2000. Lisa Notermann: So. Councilman Berquist: So that's 4 years. Lisa Notermann: Okay. Councilman Berquist: The State of Minnesota, I don't think the Minnesota Department of Transportation is going to find however many dollars it's going to take to redo Highway 5. So I would be xvilling to put myself on the line and say you can plan on being there for 4 years. How's that? Lisa Notermann: Okay. But it could be 5. Councilman Berquist: It could very easily be 20. Mayor Chmiel: Let's put it this way, God only knows and that's about the only way you can really put it. And it's true. Lisa Notermann: It's just difficult...home and you know if it xvas a ne~v home, it's the upkeep that's the hard, that's really the hard part. You know our furnace went and this goes and this goes and so do we just make do or hoxv much more do we put in the house? That we'll never get back, you know. I mean to be realistic. We're not going to, we've put thousands of dollars in that home already and we need to put thousands and thousands more because I don't know that we'll ever get it back. That's the hardest part. Because it's an old home and everything just kind of goes, you know. So I don't have any more ansxvers than when I came. Mayor Chmiel: Unfortunately. Lisa Notermann: Okay, well. Councilman Senn: I'm just curious. The Met Council funds that we used down in terms of acquisition on the 212 corridor, I mean can we use those same types of funds in situations like this relating to the Highway 5 corridor? Mayor Chmiel: You can't transfer from one highway fund to another highway fund. Is that what you're? Councilman Senn: No, but I thought the Met Council funds were for any future highway construction where you needed to look at acquisition now versus waiting. 14 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Mayor Chmiel: Some of that is specifically allocated to that particular kind of highway. They don't grab it from there. In other words, some of the dollars that we had appropriated for that for the environmental assessments that had to be done, was specifically designated for 212. Councilman Senn: Okay, so like the stuff that Eden Prairie acquired along 212, that's designated for 212 and the stuff they acquired for TH 5 was designated as TH 5. We have none designated for TH 5, is that what I'm hearing? Mayor Chmiel: I think that's probably right. Kate Aanenson: Well this is also the frontage road issue. It's separate from TH 5. This is the frontage road. Councilman Senn: No, I understand. But it's also part of the highway expansion issue. I mean it's both really. Lisa Notermann: Because I'm going to go to...I'm out of here. Councilman Senn: Either way it goes. Lisa Notermann: I hope it's 20. I mean I'd like to live there but then I need to -know how much upkeep I need to do. Mayor Chmiel: I remember discussing this with MnDot and asking them to stop back to see you and have some discussions. Have they ever done that? Lisa Notermann: No, and I've called there and all I do is get the run around. I just get transferred from person to person and person and all of a sudden I'm right back where I started from so I gave up on that. So noxv I'm going to Tom Workman to see if... Mayor Chmiel: A little more xvithin the State, you may be able to. Lisa Notermann: Okay. Thank you. Steven Cwodzinski: My name is Steven Cwodzinski, 6890 Utica Lane. I also want to say real quick, with respect to Fleet Farm. You folks have done an incredible job maintaining a sense of pedestrian flow downtown here. Keeping the...keeping all the civic facilities, all the shopping in this area and when I'm stopped at a stop light and I see somebody pushing a stroller across the street, you don't see that in a lot of suburbs. You just don't see people getting their mail and then going off to Target. I think whatever you folks do to continue that sense of commercialism in this community, history will judge you quite kindly. I think you're creating a unique environment here. And the other thing with respect to Fleet Farm. Just al~vays in the back of mind, keep in mind the setting that's already out there. We're real fortunate to have the Arboretum. There's only two things people think of when they think of Chanhassen and it's the Arboretum and the Dinner Theater and so whatever you do in the back of your mind to maintain those institutions here and the uniqueness that...so thanks. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Steve. Anyone else? If not, we'll bring it back to Council. Brad Johnson: My name is Brad Johnson, I live at 7425 Frontier Trail and this evening I represent the Ward property. In your recommendation or the recommendation of the Planning Commission, it's requested that the 15 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Ward property should be zoned office institutional. I'm requesting that that, at the minimum be zoned office commercial with partial, with a portion of it being residential because it's needed for a buffer and I'd like to speak to those issues. We have not had an opportunity to address formally xvith the Planning Commission concerning this because we were not employed by the...during that process of the Highway 5 corridor. We have spoken to them at the last couple of meetings about some of the concepts. But the major concept I think that we're dealing with is that the community is running out of sort of commercial space. Back in 1990 xve had a comp plan where we had 129 acres of, or t51 acres of retail, primarily in the downtown area. That comp plan was revisited in 1992 and they added 129 acres of retail to that bringing it up to a total of 280 retail acres. That represents approximately 2% of our total land area...go through this process. Currently we're absorbing retail commercial, and this is not all, this is off...we're absorbing in the downtown area at the rate of about 15 acres per year. And in 1990 I can honestly say I was hoping that we'd absorb 15 acres in 5 years. When the comp plan was put together, it was anticipated that the 280 acres that was available at that time would be good through the year 2000. Now at least from the comp plan, one of the objectives of the overall land use plan as stated, the city has maintained a long standard policy of directing commercial development into the central business district. Chanhassen is rather unique among the suburban communities in that it has historically had and maintained an active downtown business community. In recent years there has been substantial public and private investments including development in this area and there's no desire on the part of the city to see that effort diminished by the construction of commercial centers bordering on the highways...downtown business district. Consequently it was anticipated that the overall, the majority of nexv commercial development xvill occur in and around the central business district. Primarily north along Highway 5 but also in a newly developed area south of Highway 5, located along the relocated TH 101. Additional commercial development is anticipated in the mixed use area, illustrated around the Highway 101/212, this is the famous interchange for 212 interchange. Commercial development in this area can capitalize in it's location while creating newly developed areas in the community and at that time we added 129, excuse me while I step away, acres. It's taken me a little while...to figure out what really happened at that time. Currently this area, ~vhere we have the slashes, is occupied commercial space. At the time we represented both the city and Bloomberg and we xvere trying to get the downtown developed and we did not anticipate anywhere near the development that xve have had, which includes the Target and although they were floating around, that they would actually happen. So at that time the community was trying, at the 1992 period, to keep the commercial in this area of the downtown hoping it would develop first, which it has. And we currently have 2 pieces left, maybe 3, for development in the downtown area. We have an acre on the Charlie James site. Mr. Burdick has an acre and the city has about 3 acres but I believe that's already in the process of going through the city. Is that correct? In addition to that, we have the property where the Legion is, which is zoned neighborhood business, because it abuts primarily a residential area. That is up for development here and then we have 1 acre, a lot or half an acre lot I guess over by the...that will be going through the process at the next Planning Commission meeting. Which means that most of the land that is truly designated ready to go sort of thing, represents one year's absorption. There's 10 acres here, 3 and 2 and that's it. We can say well the town's not going to grow yet we're issuing permits at a rate of...to the east of us in Edina, or Eden Prairie, are issuing a lot of permits. I was amazed. There must be at least 600-700 homes since I was last over there. At the time they did that rezoning then, they said xvell we'll add 129 acres. Part of it was they thought there maybe should be an acre on the Bandimere parcel. Our other retail spot on the west end of town is up here at TH 5 and TH 7. TH 41 and TH 7. This is the interchange of 212 and 101 when it realigns. Someday that will be a commercial location. No one that drives through there now knows it is not, and certainly when the roadway comes through, which is 2000 to 2005 and even 7, when this will come through, there's an opportunity. Part of the 129 acres was mixed use in this area and they designated mixed use as being either commercial or housing sort of just came first. And what happens in this particular case is Rottlund came first. So this blue area was then removed and we have this parcel here and I believe...part of that. I don't know how many acres but I knoxv there's a small, maybe 10 acre parcel there that's 16 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 commercial. We've got a parcel south of the interchange which is now a field, and then we have this parcel doxvn here. All of those xvere parcels that were brought in. So to the best of my calculations, not having any active records...280 acres of retail, it appears to me that in the downtown area, we're out of land and I can speak to that because that's our business. We've been protective of the downtown as possible ourselves, but we've reached the point now that we can see that we're about ready to bust out. And as I said, when we say retail, it does not have to be the big box. As a matter of fact, the Ward site has a 40 foot or 50 foot drop from the front to the back. It's not a good site for a big box but it is a good site for a number of other types of retail offices, smaller. Perhaps say an acre or 2 or 3. I have taken the liberty of calling a number of cities. When we were meeting with the Planning Commission, they were looking for some direction and they were wondering what cities were not like Eden Prairie or Edina or Brooklyn Park, Brooklyn Center. Some of those that have retail... regional center. What percentage was a good number for acreage to be set aside for retail. Just a question. The people that work for us, BRW indicated somewhere between 3% and 10%. 10% probably being on the high side. For your information, there are communities like Edina that have 10% set aside for retail. We, and I'll give you all this stuff, but xve did call a number of communities and think about population and we're going to have a population of about 35,000 .... population of 57,000, a lot of acres. About 706 or 3% of those have no regional centers...the very large community but they have 706 set aside. Woodbury on the other hand, which is a little bit more like...maybe more like Eden Prairie, has 1,269 acres set aside for retail or approximately 5%. Brooklyn Park has 1,209 or approximately 12% set aside for retail. Maple Grove, which is a little bit more like what we are, has 6% set aside for commercial. Not just retail. Mendota Heights, which I didn't 'know would have any retail at all because I can't tell you what center is there, has 320 acres or 5% of that community. Oakdale 3%. So it's fairly common that a community has more than 2% and if you take a look at our particular situation, probably 70% of our retail designated area today probably isn't developable until more after 2000 simply because there will be no sexver and water doxvn here for a long time and this is just going to be in the air. My final point relative to all that is that we have been trying to maintain a downto~vn and the natural place for us to groxv is just across the street xvhere we have about 70 acres. That's another 5 years. The absorption for our community as we're growing currently. Then I think we're faced with a problem of where do we go from then. Maybe 212 xvill be here. Maybe at that time Fleet Farm has worked out their deal, I don't know. We were concerned about the large boxes...so what we have proposed, and this is not the place to do it but this is the idea, is that if we have the proper zoning, which is what I said it would be, we could design a community that is all pedestrian friendly, like this one fellow said. You can walk through it. It ties into two lakes. Within a pond. All kinds of, it's the kind of place that you could make a really nice community. What we're running into is that we have met with the Planning Commission, I would say they're not opposed to it. I've never_.the neighbors. They're not opposed to it. The problem is that our previous comp plan and now the Highway 5 corridor plan is saying that this is not something that xve want to have, which is what you're going to vote on today. We could go with 25% of the property as commercial but I don't think that's the way to do it at the present time, because we just spend all our time arguing about that. That's where I'm at. So I think what I'd like to say, I don't kno~v what the procedure is but either you take this portion out of the plan. Amend the recommendations or decide that the downtown shouldn't be here and then we all find ourselves another downtown. It xvill be developed in one way or another but it does make some sense to me to do it. This is not the plan as I said but it's a great site to build a village and that's what we're trying to accomplished and we've had some major studies in there. We 'know what the neighbor's concerns are and they've been fairly well received... So we're not here to present this. But that's the idea. We cannot proceed sort of with what you would call a village in there because of the zoning situation that is there at the present time. And the Highway 5 corridor zoning, actually changes the comprehensive somewhat. In addition to that, the overlay district was fairly difficult to deal with but we dealt xvith it. We are concerned about some of the issues that people have. The ponds, which is Highway 5 friendly. You know we see a pond and then you see a building. Those are the kinds of things we could see happening there but we need the proper land zoning. So that's my presentation 17 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 here this evening. Any questions? Like I said, we're out of space. I mean we literally are. Pressure's going to be into the industrial park or someplace for what is perceived to be a need here. One way or the other. We've been successful... Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Anyone else? Seeing none, then I'm going to bring it back to Council. Any discussions Steve? Councilman Berquist: Well, I don't knoxv how much discussion I've got. I'm not all that up to speed on this entire comp plan but I do know that I would like, that I want to try to keep, we do have a unique downtown. From a suburban point of view, I think any suburb you go into, and I spend most of my time in this one. I do get to a lot of the others and this downtown is unique and I would just as soon keep it unique and I would just as soon keep it the downtown. I'm really not against, but I am not for the retail development spreading west on Highway 5. I just do not like the way that that looks. I understand xvhat Brad is saying as far as being out of retail space. Being in the construction business I'm very cognizant of xvhat is going on with the land in Chanhassen. And I know there's no place to put any more services for the population that is here and xvill continue to come here, so that's a concern of mine. I'm for making some amendments to this, to the guide plan. There's no doubt about it. With that I'll pass to you Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Sure. I just wanted to address a couple issues. What Dr. Savaryn said really did concern me and I wanted to, this has been in the works a long time and my take on it, and I've been involved in bits and parts of it but there have been several people, more than several people xvho have been intimately involved with it and it has been one of the most public processes I've ever seen and to hear someone say that they're not informed or that they were left out of the loop, I find hard to swallow. I think we've done a very good job as a community addressing this issue and getting all people's input, including landowners and potential developers and ordinary citizens. Anyxvay with that said, Fleet Farm, it's not an issue of that it is a Fleet Farm. It's an issue of keeping our retail downtown. That property xvas bought on spec and there xvere absolutely no guarantees that a Fleet Farm would ever be put there. As far as development of that parcel in other areas, we don't have any control right now with the MUSA line. That's a Met Council issue and to be honest, we haven't pushed because we haven't found a need yet. In terms of Brad's presentation. Kate, hoxv far are xve in looking at that piece? I know we had a tour last week of it. Kate Aanenson: Sure. Brad's met with the Planning staff and we had some concerns because of the significant road alignment changes which pick up 7 additional acres and that's really what the issue is. The additional commercial zoning and what that does to potential future uses. I guess our concern is that we can put overlay standards. We can develop PUD standards that says it has to look like this, but it goes back to the issues that the Planning Commission has and it's something philosophical that we wrestle with is how large should the commercial be. Brad threw out a lot of numbers which gets kind of dazzling and you have to kind of dissect that and it goes back to what I was saying before. You know Edina has a regional center ~vhere we don't see ourselves as a regional center. You go back to what we talked about in the Vision 2000. We like the downtown where you bump into your neighbor at the grocery store, the post office. And how do you accomplish that with this property and what we're saying is, I think as Brad said, the Planning Commission wasn't opposed to it but again we felt under the PUD, you could get the 25%. It's an additional 7 acres. We just ~vant to make sure that xve haven't given the zoning and then find out that the market isn't there. We want to take our time and go through that process to make sure that it's done right. We don't xvant to have it commercial zoning and then find out there's no market there or it doesn't xvork or it takes axvay from the energy happening downtown. Yes, there will be additional commercial zoning and we want to try to keep the doxvntown but we want to make sure also if someone comes in for a comp plan, that xve're consistent in saying 18 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 these are the reasons xvhy we added commercial here and this is why we don't feel it's appropriate there so we just wanted to make sure it's done appropriately and in the right scale. Councilxvoman Dockendorf: I guess just overall, looking at it, I think we've accomplished a lot of our goals that we set out with and I don't think xve're going to end up driving down Highway 5 and having townhomes on either side. I think there's a very good, varied use and I'm comfortable with the plan as it is. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Colleen. Mike. Councilman Mason: I basically agree with what Colleen has said. I've been pretty involved with this process from the beginning too. Although hearing Brad, you know Kate you made the comment about, it's a philosophical discussion and I think maybe as a Council we need to grapple with how much retail does this city want and we haven't done that. I do also know, as Councilman Berquist just said, we can certainly amend-the comp plan down the road if we need to do that. I agree with what, I clearly agree with what Mr. Cwodzinski said and xvhat I'm hearing the people that have spoken so far on Council. We do have a unique downtown and I want retail to stay in that area. Now, can it go across the street on Highway 52 There's certainly some potential there but in terms of going out Highway 5, I certainly wouldn't. We spent a lot of time on that Vision 2002 about Chanhassen, the doxvntown Chanhassen ending at Powers Boulevard. I think that was one of the few unanimous things that came out of those rather lengthy sessions. And yeah, we need to keep downtown viable. I'm comfortable with the plan but I think we do need to discuss what the retail needs are for the City of Chanhassen. Do we want more retail space or not? Do we need more retail space or not? And I don't think tonight's the night for it. Clearly. But that is something I think we need to look at. But I think this is a very well thought out and for the most part a very well done plan. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks Mike. Mark. Councilman Senn: I agree that we're not going to resolve the question of retail tonight I don't think, one way or the other. I think it's one that needs some discussion. Generally overall I'm in agreement with the plan. The one area that still bothers me, like I say, is the area between Galpin effectively and where the other, I'm not going to say options start towards TH 41 because I just think it's totally unrealistic to think that there's going to be low density in that area. So it's just something we have to deal with later...doesn't want to deal with it now. I just can't imagine it ever developing as low density. But you know, other than that, like I say, general agreement. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. I know the uniqueness of Chanhassen from what people are coming to town and community and have, I've had the opportunity to talk to these people. Saying what they see they really like. I think this is really what attracts a lot of people into a community in itself. I'm not going to reiterate much of what everyone else has said. I think we've worked hard at trying to establish a downtown Chanhassen. I'm going to try to keep seeing that particular mode stay here. So with that, if I can have a motion. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I would move that we adopt the Highway 5 corridor land use study. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adopt the Highway 5 Corridor Land Use Study and the recommendations found in the document and amended attachment Figure 4.1. All voted in favor and the motion canied, 19 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 REQUEST TO REZONE 16.34 ACRES FROM 44~ RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO RSF~ RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY~ PRELIMINARY PLAT OF 16.34 ACRES INTO 19 SINGLE FAMIIJY LOTS; AND A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A 50 FT. WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY~ LAKE LUCY ESTATES~ 1471 LAKE LUCY ROAD~ MICHAEL BYRNE. Public Present: Name Address Michael J. B%rne Joanne & Bill Lambrecht Gloria Carlson Randi Folsom Bill Coffman Steven Cwodzinski Brian & Nancy Tichy Alan Weingart Joe & Gayle Morin Dale Carlson Eric Rivkin 5428 Kimberly Road, Minnetonka 6990 Utica Lane 6900 Utica Lane 7050 Utica Lane Chanhassen 6890 Utica Lane 1471 Lake Lucy Road 5330 St. Albans Road, Shorewood 1441 Lake Lucy Road 6900 Utica Lane 1695 Steller Court Sharmin Al-Jarl: Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. The applicant is requesting to subdivide 14 1/2 acres into 18 single family lots and two outlots. The property is currently zoned residential. Rural residential and the applicant is requesting a rezoning to residential single family. The average lot size is 30,122 square feet. The resulting gross density is 1.2 units per acre. A number of those lots meet the minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance. There are some parcels that require some adjustment in order to meet the ordinance requirements. Staff has been working with the applicant for the past 3 or 4 months. This plat has gone through numerous changes. Numerous revisions. The first plan that we looked at, we moved a large number of trees. It mass graded the site. After 4 months of looking at this plan we feel we have reached a stage where a number of trees have been preserved and we've reduced the grading on the site. Today at 2:00 we met with the applicant to review tree preservation issues on this application and this is what we came up with xvhich is not included in your plans. What you see in red is what is being graded on the site. What you see in green is the tree preservation easement that staff is recommending. Some of those tree preservation easements, such as right around the wetland, are really non-buildable areas. They are...setback area. Therefore they are unbuildable... We're just making sure that the applicant preserves the trees that are located within this setback .... are currently buildable but we are recommending that the applicant give a preservation easement over the area right here. There are some significant trees on this parcel to the area up in this comer and this whole comer here. There are other areas along the westerly property line that you see are shaded. What we agreed upon is that...trees would be picked up and collected for preservation so the applicant can go in there, grade for specific sites. For specific house pads. However, there will be specific trees that he xvould not be able to remove. So anyway, this is what the applicant has agreed upon and then anything that is preserved above and beyond what staff and the applicant agrees upon is actually an additional benefit to this subdivision. There are a number of variances, as mentioned earlier, attached to this application. There are three front yard variances that staff is recommending that would move house pads closer to the right-of-way and this way we reduce the number of trees that will be removed as a result. The street grades are at 10%. The zoning ordinance alloxvs up to 7%. This is again another variance that would preserve the site topography and reduce the number of trees removed 20 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 off of the site. In general this application meets the minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance and we are recommending approval with conditions outlined in the staff report. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Sharmin. Any questions of Sharmin at this time? Councilwoman Dockendorf: What would this most recent iteration of the preservation, tree preservation, what does it do to our canopy coverage and all of those ratios? Sharmin A1-Jaff: It really keeps it the same. Mayor Chmiel: Anyone else? The applicant. Is there anything that you'd like to say at this particular time? Michael Byrne: Mayor, members of the Council. My name is Michael Byrne. I live at... Mayor Chmiel: Would you just tilt that up a little higher. Michael Byrne: I'd like to thank the staff for...one of the very first things I looked into doing...is that they made it very clear that...working very, very closely with the staff. I've done that. Much of what the staff has recommended...As far as the staff developing or designing the site, I have a bill of $20,618.00... the site is very delicate and there's a lot of senses because water, the pond...shoreline that's heavily reeded. I'm sure you'll hear...The concept that the plan was supposed to...I'm not a builder. I'm just...What I sell and hope to sell is basically the amenities of that site... It is one of the most beautiful sites in Chanhassen. That's why we were trying to... The philosophy is to leave each site as untouched as possible...individual homeowner or builder. Hopefully we can...The designing of the site, using it for the terrain... The average lot size is 30,000 square feet. The average front will be approximately 135 feet. We are hoping to keep these lots, we hope to keep the lots as xvide as possible to maintain not only trees to the rear but also on the side and the front. I think we've done that. I feel very strongly... I think we solved the last... Sharmin and her staff have been working way beyond the call of duty and I think they've done a pretty good job. A lot of comments from...The staff report has... I'd like the opportunity to respond to whatever I can...We have followed the staff's directions. The ordinance in trying to achieve what our goals are. Another item. Part of the process we've been going through involves some land ownership issues. We set, I set...possibly very unrealistic goals as far as... Because of the concerns that the neighbors have dragged on beyond what I ever expected. Now Mr. and Mrs. Tichy have received $35,000.00...I had asked them if they would extend it until I can final plat... They were well within their rights, said no to that. I turned to legal advice and their recommendation was to file reorganization under Chapter 13. It...I'd much rather have given the money, any money that would have been involved in...to the Tichy's. That would have been much...acceptable. I -know that it's been brought up, the Mayor's even indicated, he's got a... The only final comment that I'd make is we started out on what... We would welcome to have those incorporated in our...development contract... The only way the site works for us and all the rest of... Mayor Chmiel: Is there any questions from Council at this time? I think not, thank you. Hopefully the information that's going to come forth this evening is hopefully not repetition of what we already have within the Minutes that we have from the other meetings. We'd like to have you address your concerns, but if they've already been addressed, and if you'd like to just take maybe 5 minutes just to reiterate something, that'd be fine. But I'd like you to try to stick more or less to that time frame. We have several other items yet going tonight and time is fleeting. So if there's anyone who would like to address this at this time, please just state your name and your address and we can go from there. 21 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 A1 Weingart: Mayor and the Council, my name is A1 Weingart. I currently live at 5330 St. Albans Road in Shorexvood but I have recently purchased the peninsula on Lake Lucy and xvill be buying 1685 Steller Court from the Sanda's come this fall. And I'm not real smart but I did recognize this sort of movement before so I wilt try to keep to your time frame. First of all, just a first one. We have, you probably know we've been very active in trying to work with Mr. Byrne and also somewhat being some~vhat critical of what's being done. Let me just, this is xvhat's on the board... Some of this stuff you may have seen. All this point here is that we have followed this thing fairly consistently from the very beginning. Have been very active in trying to xvork with Sharmin and Mike and to Sharmin's credit, she has done a tremendous job given the circumstances surrounding this particular application and applicant. And we have been forced somexvhat into very technical arguments on xvhether or not this particular project complies or doesn't comply xvith the ordinance. It stretches the boundaries of what the intent of the ordinances are and we feel that basically it pushes beyond the intent and unfortunately staff is handcuffed with respect to what the ordinances are because that's their job. To try and develop something xvith the developer that fits the ordinances. And so xve're here to sort of counter balance that a little bit and say look. Technically this might be viable. We do have a number of variances associated with this particular project but there are a lot of policy issues here and a lot of intent xvithin the ordinances that we think this is very...and I'm trying to keep it brief but I think there are some things that I'd like to point out from an ordinance standpoint otherwise that goes to that intent. My other concerns on this particular, you can shut that off. My general concerns, from a personal standpoint, I'm concerned about the economic value of my property and as to what this kind of development xvill do to the neighborhood in xvhich my property exists. And also to furthermore, the quality and the level of Lake Lucy in which development like this, given the kind of area that this is being set in, you can have on that particular water level or else quality and the runoff into Lake Lucy. Overall, I have basically four concerns about it. Number one being rezoning. For this specific plat I think it's somewhat inconsistent with other development along the north short of Lake Lucy and certainly along the west and south side, which obviously doesn't have much development at this point. The purpose of our zoning ordinances states that the intent in carrying out the city's comprehensive plan is to prevent over croxvding of land, which I think is what we're doing here with this particular development. And also it's supposed to preserve the natural beauty and amenities of the city and achieve excellence and originality of design. Again, something that I don't think this particular project does that merits the rezoning of the property. Apart from the Mason development, which is Point Lake Lucy, all of the home sites along the northxvest and south shores of this are 5 plus acres. And this development has proposed lot sizes as small as 15,000 square foot, or a third of an acre. Here is a comparison between the Point Lake Lucy development, which we basically have no problem with. We're not opposed to development along the north shore. We just don't like the extent of the density that's being created here. This particular chart kind of shows both aspects of this. You've seen this in one form or another in your materials. However, this has been updated pursuant to the staff report. The latest staff report that Sharmin and her staff have put together. And essentially what it shoxvs is that we are putting here...2.21 units per acre whereas the Mason development has 1.7 units per acre. And we don't think that basically we have comparable developments here and xve would like to see a little more sensitivity to the site, like Point Lake Lucy. Although, subsequently in looking at what's been done up there and taking the topography off the land, we're a little bit concerned that this doesn't happen here, even though this is not a point. This is more of a ravine. Secondly, we have concern about the 5 home sites along the lakeshore. The runoff does not go into the Walker Pond that's situated to the north of that, those 5 sites. The Mason development has a much more significant buffer zone between the lake and between the home sites. And the 4 foot to 9 foot of fill, and I'm not sure where that number is. It kind of goes all over the place every time we talk about it. But nonetheless is a large amount of fill that's being put down around those houses and there's no plans for erosion control or anything else to accommodate the runoff, etc from that. Number 3, the clearing and the grading of a significant portion of the site.' That's the last chart that I've provided you presenting our concerns. That one, basically xvhat I did was take a look at. This was a revision to what you already had in your materials and this is 22 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 something nexv. The same concept but basically we have the total acreage less the wetlands showing developable acreage. And your 46% that's applied to this particular project...required to maintain 5 1/4 acres of which the staff report indicates that he's 1.36 acres over that as far as removing trees. But I think the most important thing about what this says right here is the comments that the staff has made in the staff report, particularly in the very bottom one. It says if you will, assume that the shaded area of the trees...denote the extent of tree loss in the development is unrealistic. Additional trees that are near the grading limits will have questionable survivable possibilities. At least 10 trees on the survey appear to be near enough to the grading limits that preserving them will be difficult, although they are shown as being saved. So I think to think that this is what is going to happen on that site, I think is a bit optimistic and we have some concerns. If approved, I think the concern that we have is that...whatever is being approved here has to be extra careful because I don't, being through this process already, I have some suspicion about how ultimately things might be done. There are a number of ordinances I think that give the Council the ability to look at the preservation of trees. Section 18-60, which is already in your materials, deals xvith the trees. Also 18-61, the revised tree ordinance indicates that there are, the policy of Chanhassen is to protect and preserve the trees but the benefits include stabilizing the soils, which again we have a concern about down by the water. Secondly, prevention of erosion. Again, same issue. Reduction of storm xvater runoff. Protection that increases property values, which is something I mentioned right up front. Providing habitat for birds and other wildlife and also conserving and enhancing the city's physical... There are some policies within the ordinances that I think the City Council can look to, to respect what is being proposed here. If something like this is approved, we would like to see some strict conservation easements in place, and I understand that some of that has been done this afternoOn. I'm not privy to xvhat exactly was done other than xvhat I've seen here tonight. I really...to study that. Custom grading on all the lots as opposed to selectively. And that's where the complete tree survey and reforestation plan, which we've had problems with in the past in this particular project. So, and the last thing I guess to speak to would be the financial concerns that xve have about the going forward with this project. Mr. Bryne indicated some intent as to why he has put himself in a financial situation like this, which isn't a concern of mine but I certainly have some empathy for that. I don't xvish that on anyone. However, our fear here is that us, as neighbors, we're sitting there. The site's 80% cleared. The homes are in and all of a sudden someone runs out of money and we're sitting there with an eyesore in our neighborhood and that's something we want to make sure we prevent. So I'll sit down. Thank you very much. Unless there's any questions. Thank you very much. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Okay, is there anyone else? Dale Carlson: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council. My name is Dale Carlson. I live at 6900 Utica Lane in Greenwood Shores. And I'm here both as a co-chair for the Lake Lucy Homeowners Association, representing some of those homeowners on that lake. Many of us have lived there for well over 20 years and I'm also here as a concerned citizen as I've been somewhat involved in what's going on on the property that's being discussed. I won't take up much of your time other than, a lot of discussion has been held about this and no one that I've talked to has opposed the development. Development is going to happen, and the major concern certainly has been, regardless of what Mr. Bryne said, to the insensitivity of the change in the environment over there. I knoxv that when we first were approached by Mr. Bryne as to what was going to happen, we were talking 8 to 10 feet of land fill being placed on that. I believe the high water mark would be... high water mark on Lake Lucy would be about 956 and they were going to have about 8 to 10 feet of fill. I believe that's back down to about 4 now but...so it just appears to us, the discussion I've had with many of the homeowners around Lake Lucy, again is what's going to happen over there. Mr. Byrne once told us that that is an extremely difficult piece of property to develop. We interpret that as saying, it's extremely difficult to put 18 homes on about 8 acres of land. He's going to have to make a lot of changes to that landscape to fit 18 homes on there and preserve, as he has indicated, this natural environment that everybody's...pieces of property. Again, 23 CiD' Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 we're not opposed to the development at all. Not anybody I've talked to anyway, and I just hope it can be developed sensibly and maintain the environment at least many of us have become accustomed to living on Lake Lucy. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Dale. Anyone else? Joe Morin: Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council. My name is Joe Morin. I live at 1441 Lake Lucy Road. I have the property that is immediately to the west of the Mason Homes development and then immediately to the east of the proposed, or the applicant's proposed development, so I'm right in the middle. First of all I also xvanted to thank the staff for the efforts that they've made in getting us to this point. I think if it wasn't for their efforts, we'd still be looking at the original proposal, which was to mass grade 90% of the site. ...sharply critical of the proposed development, by no means am I critical of the staff or the Planning Commission. I think their efforts have been outstanding. Basically I don't believe that the intent of the city ordinances and the intent of the comprehensive plan are being met with this plan. Excessive density is certainly one of my concerns as well, and I share with A1 the concern about reduction in value in the surrounding properties as a result of that. I spoke with a builder of high end homes and we talked about this site. And he thought, and I respect his judgment. He thought that 12 sites would be about right. Beyond that you get into a condition of diminishing returns for each additional lot that you add that destroys the amenities that actually add value to the rest of the property and the surrounding properties, and I think we're well past the point of diminishing returns with this plan. The entire layout and design of this plan is not about preserving and protecting the natural amenities. It's about trying to maximize the number of lots that we can get into this topography. That's my opinion. I don't believe that it's compatible with the Mason Homes development to the east of my property, and it's not compatible with the plans that we have for our property. Gayle and I. Our intentions, I should probably outline that. At the request of staff we hired Schoell and Madsen to do a concept sketch of what's feasible for our property and that would show on our 5 acres of property, 3 buildable sites, one of which is our current site that Sharmin is indicating there. We bought the property about 9 years ago and during the first 3 years, I basically worked with a designer to design a home that would conform with the site. We cleared the land by hand. I never used a chainsaxv out there and the only grading done was what necessary to put in the driveway so we wanted to build a home that was very much in conformance with the natural beauty of the surrounding area and I didn't chop down a single tree...a chainsaxv and we preserved even the smallest trees. The other buildable site is to the south and east of our existing home and above that little slexv area in the middle. And in that area there is one significant tree. I'm not sure exactly where, the exact location of that tree is since we didn't have a survey or anything. This is just a concept sketch. The other property would be to the south and east of that slew, just above the pond area that you see on the drawing there and there, there's another natural clearing and in that area there are only...and buckthorn. So what xve would hope to do would be to, on our 5 acres of property, develop only the 3 sites and put those into areas where there are already natural clearings and then preserve and protect the woodland surrounding those properties. Our main concern is the number of lots...land has been treated. I think this could be developed a lot more creatively with a lot more sensitivity. And I think the market value would be there. We could have a slight...attracting high end homeowners. Certainly the Mason Homes development area...people who want very expensive homes but not in a traditional development setting. More in a xvoodland, more in a secluded setting so I think we could have two developments in that area that are highly...and work more creative and more sensitive to the natural environment. It can be done. That's what I'd like to see. Talked about Mason a little bit. Obviously they're high up on a ridge. It's a totally different kind of setting. Ted Coey told me once it took 14 to 16 hours for him to just cut the grass on his riding lawnmower. So there's a lot of open terrain there. Now we're talking my home that you see up here is also high on a basin. The Tichy home is high on the basin. The Willis home and so on but now we're going down deep into this basin where it's more heavily wooded. Where there are ponds 24 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 and xvetlands and springs and I think xve've got to be a lot more sensitive to it. A lot higher standard-of care is required in this heavily forested area. I walked that area with the city, xvell the forester with 40 years of experience with the DNR and he said this is a site that, while it's certainly unique for Chanhassen, it's rare for the State of Minnesota to have a site with so many large, mature oak trees. It's a site that I think the whole community wants to see developed in a sensitive, caring manner. A way that we can all be proud of. Everyone that lives here can be proud of xvhat could happen. But right now I'm also concerned about the excessive grading. A1 talked about 15,000 square foot lots. There's 15, 16, 17,000 square foot lots on steeply, heavily xvooded terrain. 8 to 10 to 12 foot high retaining walls. These walls are 350, 300 feet, 200 feet in length. When I scaled it out I got a total of 1,185 feet of retaining walls and I have serious concerns about tearing up the land and what that will do this important watershed area which is the headwaters of the Lake Lucy chain of lakes. The Lake Riley chain of lakes. This whole chain of lakes, Lake Lucy being the headwaters, gets it's input mainly from ground water seepage from springs and so on that are on this north shore and I think we need to be really, really careful what we do here. I spoke about these springs before. Eric has spoken about them. He's seen them coming out of the ground cross country skiing. They still haven't been located to my knowledge. I'm not going to make a big issue about that but what if they were in the location where the holding pond's going to be. Wouldn't the holding pond continue to overflow? Wouldn't it not allow the contaminants to settle out? I don't know. We've talked about the negative impact on the wildlife, rm going to just mention that and not dwell on it. The condition of 4 or 5 feet, or 8 feet, xvhatever it was that was originally proposed down by the lake. I think a sensitive plan for this site would have 1 or 2 homes down by the lake with no basements. When I first talked with, well when Gayle and I talked with Michael several months ago, he told us that he xvas planning to put styrofoam insulation above the sewer pipe. Okay. And that way he could prevent it from freezing without having to add excessive amounts of fill in that area. But obviously that kind of construction technique isn't being used on this application. They're over about 40 significant trees...that are shown as being... Many of these are...There are entire groves of 9, 10 and 11 inch aspen. Second growth oaks, 9, 10 and 11 inch oaks. Those are very difficult...so I'm concerned about that as well. There's 11 variances on 8 of the lots. Although staff is requiring some of these... Staff spoke in the staff report about the 4 homes down by the lake and having to move the home on the eastem most portion of this park, to the west of that property line if possible. Yet by saving the trees in this area and...but they did not address the concern that...4 sites down there would not be buildable. At all, w, ithout variances so...From my point of view the applicant...simply crammed in as many lots as he can get, not to preserve... I'm concerned about the fact that this applicant has filed bankruptcy. I understand he's bonded but I'm worried about common sense kinds of issues. If this was a traditional kind of development, I wouldn't be as concerned but this is a very delicate ecology. Many of these trees are...they haven't been affected by changes over 50 years and they can be killed by changes in water runoff, changes in humidity, and soil temperatures... And if this project stalls out, how bad do things have to get? How bad does it really have to get before the city steps in? How much damage is going to have to occur and what happens when the costs exceed what the proposed bonding2 Who's going to pay for that? All the taxpayers or just the taxpayers around the lakeshore~ What about damage to_.to my property. These are just some common sense things that I'm kind of concerned about. The quality of the contractors employed by a developer in bankruptcy. Who's going to watch them? Who's going to correct their mistakes? We've all heard horror stories about grading that has been done on sites that has no relationship of the plan that they were using and this is an especially delicate site...do it right. Otherwise we'd be asking for a natural disaster here. rm concerned about the applicant's statement at the Planning Commission meeting when he said, I accept all of your conditions. That included very restrictive conditions for the conservation easement...2:00 this afternoon he's reached some sort of relaxed negotiated settlement... My final point is basically that I certainly can accept development next door to my property. I would profit from that. I have two developable sites of my own. But I don't want it rushed in a development of this form. I think this site deserves much, much better...and I want to reflect a little bit on one of the Ladd Conrad's comments during the Planning 25 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Commission meeting. He said, I think when they gave what I think xvas reluctant 3 to 1 approval to send this to you, one of his comments was, unfortunately when you have a sensitive area like this, there's not an ordinance for that and it's really tough to develop one. And I believe sincerely that the Planning Commission and staff are well within their power. I have nothing but praise for their work but their power is limited and I think that the City Council has broad responsibilities for stewardship of the land. Certainly broader powers to interpret the intent of the comprehensive plan and the intent of the ordinances governing environment preservation and protection. And ©ayle and I believe that the intent of the comprehensive plan, the intent of the ordinances, especially the one that A1 mentioned, I believe it was 18-60, about preserving and protecting natural amenities such as vegetation, wetlands, steep slopes, water courses, and so on. I think those...and for this and the other reasons I talked about, I request that the application be denied. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Joe. Gayle Morin: My name is Gayle Morin. I live at 1441 Lake Lucy Road. Everyone has agreed that this is a unique and beautiful site and I think it's apparent to everyone that the north shore of Lake Lucy...into the lake. Now we had one...but I think we need to step back and...Are xve developing this property in a xvay to enhance the value...One thing I would like to see, currently the property just to the west of this proposed project is for sale. It would seem to me to make sense, given the topography, that at least someone should look at hoxv this could be developed in a broader scale. Perhaps it'd make more sense...if the Willis property. I know it's for sale. Perhaps less damage would be done to the homes in the lakeshore area if you put... Eric Rivkin: My name's Eric Rivkin and I live at 1695 Steller Court. I live...I concur with what...and Gayle and Joe...I commend Sharmin and the city for...but I have to concur with what has been said... While Mr. Byrne has said...I think actions speak louder than words. This is not a workable plan. It's not...and retaining walls and...wildlife that are trying to survive around the areas of dense wildlife corridor around the lake. There's too much... There's much more work to be done...I need to see some assurances that...I developed land in Minnetonka that was totally wooded and I...city wanted to destroy trees to put in...taking down trees unnecessarily...I did the best I could. I saved 90% of the trees...and I got top dollar for every single one of those lots...but the natural amenities were saved to the point where...I had it written in the contract...where I had in the contract with the builder, it said you're not allowed to cut any trees doxvn without my approval. I have... house was designed to fit the lot. Not the other way around. You just don't...put up the traditional house pad... 2 story monstrosity for all to see. This kind of a site demands to see architectural design homes that are designed to fit the site...no question about that. I think Mr. Byrne would be far more lucrative to pursue that road rather than put...I believe that what the DNR recommends...those homes right by the lake...not to mention the fact that the ordinary flood level of the lake, the highest recorded level is 960 feet. That's 4 1/2 feet above the...There's nesting areas, rookeries for...waterfowl such as Great Blue Herons...wood ducks, mallards all over the place.., surrounding that pond and that lake area...extremely sensitive environmentally. Our ordinance doesn't protect animals...I don't have a lot of confidence in a developer who has filed for protection under bankruptcy laws... I do have confidence that there's a plan doxvn the road that does comply with the... Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Anyone else? Okay. Steve. Councilman Berquist: I have a fairly definite opinion... Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Colleen. 26 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well I'll be long and circuitous. Sharmin, xvhere's the fill at noxv? What's it like? Where is the fill at? How many feet are ;ve at? Sharmin A1-Jaff: We're adding approximately 4 feet along the lake. We've changed it from walkouts to lookouts as far as the homes go. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. Well, I've said this before. I have a love/hate relationship with properties like this. I love the land and I hate the fact that they're going to be developed. I was thinking of the last piece of property that in my mind is similar as far as, not similar but had the same constraints as far as t6pography and trees and that was off of Lake Lucy Road... Anyway, we did a fairly nice job of putting houses in there. And I have found myself, other applications like this, really hiding behind the ordinances. I think what Mr. Morin said about we are the final say so and staff is constrained by ordinances, as is the Planning Commission and I think we're the line when it comes to intent. And I'm finally going to take a stance that property like this needs more sensitivity than xvhat our ordinances allow for. And I just look at all this red, the grading and it grates. It just doesn't seem right. It doesn't seem appropriate for this piece of land and I know I don't have very firm legal footing but in terms of interpreting the intent of our ordinances, I feel very strongly that we're not there yet. I know a lot of work has been put in on this, but I don't think we're there yet. And whether it's the idea of clustering or just simply reducing the number of homes we have on the property, either xvay something has to be done. Mayor Chmiel: Michael. Councilman Mason: Well, I'm not very often a mug wump. You know you have mugs on one side and your wumps on the other. That's a history lesson. If Cwodzinski's still here, he knows that one. And some of the other people I think could. I try, I'm hearing things appear here to meet code so on the one hand I say well, I heard Colleen and I thought she was going to, good for you Colleen. What I started to hear was, well it's code. What can you do? And I think as a government unit, we have to follow that code if we expect the residents to follow it. However, when you come to an area that is this sensitive, is the code enough? Well if it's not, then we have to change it. Do we, but I don't know that we can make it retroactive. I 'know I'm rambling and I'm going to ramble a little more, which is also probably nothing new for some of you. One of the concerns I have, and this is quite honestly one of the reasons I got involved in Council, is I didn't like a development that was going in next door to me. And you know, by god I didn't get it changed. But I tried. And so now I'm in the difficult position of listening to the neighbors that are saying this stinks. I don't like it. And part of me says, it's me, me, me, me. I don't want this here. Oh, you can develop but boy, it's got to be done the way I want it done. And so the other side of me goes, well now wait a minute. I mean if we truly believe that this is a community effort, it's not just a one way street. And my sense, after wading through all the Minutes and all the verbiage, is I'll admit, I'm having a real tough one on this one because I agree. There are some things about this development I don't like. I don't think those homes should be on the point. I agree with you. Now, does the developer have the right to do that? So it's a balancing act here that we have not perfected and I quite honestly don't think we ever will perfect it. I don't think it can be perfected. So I guess I, quite honestly I don't have a real strong opinion one way or the other on this based on this whole thing. I'm concerned by some of the lack of concern I see by the developer. Apparent lack of concern. The other side of that coin is, I don't know that you folks out there, and I'm knocking this because if I lived there, I'd be there with you but I don't know if you people would ever find a development that would make you happy. And you know, and I know Joe you're disagreeing and yes, we will but the other side of that coin is, is that you don't own that piece of land. Just like I didn't own. You know xvhen Woodhill Drive developed boy, I did what I could to get the lot next to me, and I was fortunate enough to do that but you knoxv, by god I had no control over anything else. So I don't know 27 Cit.,,' Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 what we're going to do about this. I don't know. This is a tough one. This is an extremely sensitive area. So I don't know yet. I really don't. I want to hear what everyone has to say. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Mike. Councilman Mason: Yep. Mayor Chmiel: Mark. Councilman Senn: From my perspective I'd have to say I don't have a real high level of comfort on the project given, I'm going to say the attitudes and the original proposals that were brought in. Staff's done a real good job of simply forcing a better plan...better plan at this point. In my mind this is still too much density for this parcel and it really over burdens and I think we need to address some of the...amenities down there, including Lake Lucy itself. Too many of our lakes are already on the endangered list. The applicant tells us that the Tichy's have cancelled the contract. That makes me believe they've got some other ideas. I guess my general opinion at this point is I'd like to see...better ideas for this property... Mayor Chmiel: Is that it? Councilman Senn: Yes. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Your turn. Councilman Berquist: It's my turn. While I can appreciate the applicant's desire to maximize the number of lots, and therefore the potential return, that really can't be my concern. If I xvas a developer, it xvould certainly be my concern. I've walked this site twice and I feel that Ladd Conrad's statements regarding the specialness of the site and the fact that we don't have ordinances to cover all sorts of developments, is a very profound statement. That really stuck out when I read the Planning Commission Minutes. I think 18 home sites xvill seriously affect the land regardless of the claims made otherwise. And I do think the site can be developed. I don't know how many houses can go on it but 18 is too many. It's a shame the thing has to be developed but I understand the economics. I think there's a workable solution. I just don't knoxv ~vhat it is but this isn't it. Mayor Chmiel: Well I think you've basically taken some of the words from what I felt about this originally. I've had some discussion with Mr. Byrne, as well as with Sharmin in regards to some of this and I too have a lot of mixed emotions as far as the site is concerned. It is pristine. You're not going to find too many more like this within the community, other than the fact when you maybe get down south in some areas. But there too we have so many variances and that's the thing that I think we have on this specific one to either deny or not alloxv that to really take place. But with that, I think the Council seems pretty much consistent in their thoughts and I would then entertain a motion. Michael Byrne: Mr. Mayor, may I speak? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. I'll give you 5 minutes. Michael Byrne: I would ask the Council... Mayor Chmiel: Sharmin? 28 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Sharmin A1-Jaff: We do have a limit on the 120 days under ~vhich the City Council, or the city xvould have to render a decision so as long as the applicant waives his right to the 120 days, or extends it. Roger, can you elaborate on that? Roger Knutson: Yes. Michael Byrne: As much as I can... Mayor Chmiel: Council? Councilman Senn: Well I guess I don't 'know ~vhat Roger...if that effectively means that they can go back to ground zero and plan all over again and basically take whatever time necessary to do so, we're not obligated? Roger Knutson: It means the clock is stopped. Councilman Senn: Indefinitely? Roger Knutson: Yes...the clock is stopped. I xvould just say this...if, for example the plan came out radically different than...you probably want to send it back to Planning Commission and... Mayor Chmiel: That's correct. Roger Knutson: And I'm not going to guess what may or may not come if you table it. Councilman Berquist: Do we want it to go back to the Planning? Councilwoman Dockendorf: I do. Councilman Berquist: I do too. Councilman Senn: I think so too. I just, you -know the only thing that's bothering me is I don't want to give any impression of some minor changes because I think there's a major redesign that needs to occur here. Not minor changes. If that means voting it down and waiving a fee or something to do it, I mean I just want to make sure that xve're not conveying an impression that there's some minor modifications... Roger Knutson: What I heard, if I can summarize it...substantially changed or the answer is no. Mayor Chmiel: I think that's exactly what's given. Roger Knutson: And if you want that pursued, then... Councilman Senn: Based on the applicant's request then, I'd move to table this with the understanding, or I think clear direction from this Council that this project is in need of a substantial redesign if it's going to even be considered as far as going forward. I'd say incorporating a lot less density and numerous other comments that I think have been clear tonight. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I have a motion on the floor. 29 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councilman Berquist: Does that put it back to Planning? Councilman Senn: I think it automatically it does. Roger Knutson: It depends on xvhat changes you propose. If he radically changes it, then it has to go back to the Planning Commission. Councilman Berquist: And staff decides what is radical... (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) Councilman Mason: ...question a little bit what we hope to accomplish by tabling it. I'm hearing that everyone on Council thinks that this is essentially no good and I, as long as Planning Commission and everybody's been struggling with this, I guess I wonder if we're kicking a dead horse by tabling it and if we should vote it down or start all over again. I'm throwing that out. I mean I'm, you knoxv. Councilman Senn: I don't disagree with that approach. I mean that's why I said. I mean if there's a way that we can simply waive a fee to make it easier, I'd like that approach better because to me it sends a much clearer message to what we mean. I don't know. Again I look over to Roger and say, what's the best approach for us. Councilman Berquist: Let me ask a practical question. What happens if, I mean financially are you stung with a declined versus a tabling? Michael Byrne: There's no question that a tabling...With your cooperation, it is a timing factor. We've heard what you're saying, obviously so tabling is a reasonable...to not add an6ther 30 to 45 days. Roger Knutson: I think I may have a solution that might, let me throw this out. If you withdraxv your application, it hasn't been denied here. It hasn't been tabled. Then you can start it fresh immediately without any time delays. I think that'd be a good solution for you. Councilman Berquist: No down time? Roger Knutson: It's a good solution for you. Michael Byrne: ...so if I was... Roger Knutson: You're withdrawing the application. There's nothing to act on. The application is withdrawn. Michael Byrne: If that will move it quickly...I would now officially withdra~v the application. Mayor Chmiel: Would that allow it to go. Roger Knutson: Then he can start over again but he has to start from scratch. Councilman Mason: Well what's the, Roger what's the difference between withdrawing the application and tabling it? 30 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councilman Senn: Well it's simple, I'll withdraw my table motion then and we don't need a motion. Councilman Mason: Well that's fine but. Michael Byrne: What you're asking for withdrawal. The intent with the table, we'd be able to go back to staff. Verify the changes that... There's a routing through Planning Commission...If we withdraw, will that go through... Roger Knutson: If you withdraw it's nice and clear because if you were to for example be denied, you wouldn't actually be denied tonight of course. Consistent with your practices, I'd have to prepare Findings and that takes you a couple of weeks and that delays things and then you have to come back here and people in the audience might come back and notices would have to be sent. But if you just withdraw, that's a clean, easy... I think there's a loud message that that's...If you withdraw, you have to start over again. Clean piece of paper. Work with staff. Re-notify the neighborhood and come back with something. Maybe even work with the neighborhood. Michael Byrne: Thank you. Councilman Senn: On that basis, I withdraxv my motion. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Will the second also withdraw? Councilman Berquist: Yes, the second will. Roger Knutson: So for the record, you're withdrawing your application for the rezoning and withdrawing your application for preliminary plat approval? Michael Byrne' Yes sir. Roger Knutson: The application is withdrawn. There's no action necessary. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, that's it. Michael Byrne: Thank'you for your time. Mayor Chmiel: Everybody understand that? Councilman Senn: Can we take a short recess? Mayor Chmiel: 5 minute break. (Councilwoman Dockendorf left the meeting at this point.) 31 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) APPROVAL TO REZONE 22.4 ACRES FROM R- 12~ HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO PUD~ PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT~ PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDWIDE 46.57 ACRES INTO 78 LOTS~ 10UTLOT AND ASSOCIATED RIGHT-OF-WAY~ SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR 75 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED ZERO LOT LINE HOMES ON 19.95 ACRES; AND A WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LAKE R1LEY~ NORTH BAY ADDITION~ ROTTLUND COMPANY. Kate Aanenson: This property is located off of Lake Riley Boulevard. That's hoxv it gains access. It has 212, future 212 alignment running through the middle of it and it is adjacent to what ,,vas a plat by Mr. John Klingelhutz and to the east, Lakeview Hills Apartments. The property is guided for high density, zoned R-12. Rottlund Homes is proposing 75 unit, single family &yelling project. It's a different type of project than we've seen in the city because it's zoned for medium or high density. You can do a zero lot line. Single family detached, which will be the first one of this type in the city and we're, the planning staff, are in support this type of project. Again we think it provides a different market nitch of housing product xvhere there could be something different based on the zoning. We think it is appropriate for the land. But there are some issues with the property. One being, the xvetlands and road access. When this plat was originally submitted, the wetland had not been staked and xvas originally going to be in this area. After the wetland had been delineated, it actually goes on the most easterly portion of the property. Staff believes that to reduce the impact of the wetland and combine access with the future development of Lakeview Hills, that's probably appropriate to move the access to the most easterly portion of the project. Approximately xvhere the red line is right now. And therefore combining accesses. And again reducing the impact to the wetland. The project itself, as indicated, would be accessed off of Lake Riley Boulevard and would provide a public street ~vith access onto the proposed Klingelhutz plat. It xvould stop at the 212 right-of-way and provide appropriate buffer and screening. As indicated, there is a wetland and...appropriate buffer setback from the proposed wetland. One of the other issues with the plat is the use of this area here. The Park and Recreation Commission, which I'll let Todd Hoffman speak to, had looked at acquiring some of the property and using it as a public park. The applicant himself would like to use it as a part of a recreational beachlot. This is before you just for concept approval right now. We wanted you to look at some of the broader issues but if it does come through for a beachlot, they would come through with a conditional use permit. We are in support of the PUD zoning, as I indicated. We believe it provides a different market nitch. It could meet some other type of product but xve think this is a different one that we haven't seen in the city and is appropriate. We believe it's consistent xvith the comprehensive plan and the goals. Again, it's conceptual. There are some issues to be xvorked out. One, I'll let the applicant speak to that Charles Folch had put a memo to you on the cover sheet is the applicant xvould like to realign the old Lake Riley Hills. But with that staff is recommending approval of the conceptual PUD xvith the conditions in the staff report and I would like to let Todd Hoffman speak for a minute or two on the park issues that he has. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Todd. Todd Hoffman: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council and the audience. The conditions that the Park and Recreation Commission has recommended is in your packet... Essentially what the Park Commission is investigating the possibility of acquiring a portion of the lakeshore for public use. Specifically...area for picnicking and then a... They studied two alternatives, which I'd like to shoxv you on the overhead at this time. They include alignment number 1, which is the...city alignment if you will. It allows for the parking area, and this is again conceptual, to lie outside of the tree cover canopy area of the large oak trees. The little kind of savannah areas...and then would not interfere with the wetlands on the site. The other alignment, the Rottlund alignment or as presented by the applicant, this would cause the parking area to be pushed forward towards the lake. Obviously either alignment xvould work... So that's an update I have for you and xvith that... 32 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Mayor Chmiel: Any questions of Kate or Todd? Councilman Berquist: That Lakeview, that Lakeview Apartments, is that the name of them? Kate Aanenson: Yes. Councilman Berquist: Noxv that's on the lot directly next to them? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Councilman Berquist: Right next to them. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Would you like to do your presentation? Don Jensen: Certainly. I had this set up but, I just visited during the break. Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. My name is Don Jensen, the Land Development Manager with Rottlund Homes. Rottlund Company Inc. We are proposing to be both the developer and the builder for this development, and are proposing to undertake all of this...approval. Staff outlined the concept for this development. What I have in front of you is the plat as presented to the staff. We are in concurrence with most of the conditions with the exception of the... conditions in your packet and I'll have a chance to discuss them briefly. You have a long record of Minutes that we went through with the Planning Commission so I won't bore you with a tremendous amount of the details that are covered there but I wanted to briefly overview development. What we have is a package of two different housing types. One which is targeted for empty nesters. One which is targeted for, probably just above first time home buyers or perhaps first time detached home buyers and they're represented primarily along the public street we have the empty nester product. As you can see there's quite a bigger footprint and plan view. And then to the north, looking around on a private street, up off the future 212 corridor, we have a two story product that would be targeted more for a move up, first time home buyer. The square footages for the two products, I'll take this down for a moment, for what we're calling our cottages and what it's designed as empty nesters, it's a rambler. At grade. Dwelling units, there is no basement and at the moment there are no second floor spaces. They're approximately 1,400 square feet up to 1,600 square feet, depending on the floor plan. But they're intended to have quite a different facade as well as the building color ranges. As you can see on the sample board that we have down below, it's pretty much in the earth tones or muted tones that much of the siding manufacturers have gone to these days. The plan that I just kept up on the easel now, the floor plan of that same product. The empty nester orientation. What we're doing there, similar to how...Planning Commission, is we're pushing the buildings approximately 30 degrees to the street. What that does is it shortens up the distance between the structures to approximately 40 feet of the 72 foot length of the structure. It opens up a front yard entrance area to the doonvays. In cases where we have additional square footage or bonus space that this floor plan would indicate, the foyer slides around and we'd still have essentially a front yard space. And likewise you'd have a large back yard space with a patio or three season porch opens up off the coruer. You accomplish that by twisting the building and having it at an angle. You can see from the site plan that that really is hoxv we've oriented a majority of the dwellings throughout this roadway condition. The final plat would twist and massage that so that we could make that angle occur and... The second building product that we're looking at is a two story. You've seen our villa development at Mission Hills. What we're doing is increasing the square footage a little bit and adding a two story space. Having some of that space as bonus above the garage. Again it's somewhat similar to our villa but each unit is it's own structure. These are coming in your packets as we have in our design development area, anywhere from about 1,630 square feet on up to about 1,850 square feet. Two bedrooms and three bedroom plans. Flexibility on the elevations... Flexibility on 33 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 building materials that are also coming with that package and again some flexibility on a floorplan. So you have a variety of front elevations. The site plan twists these buildings a little less aggressively as submitted in the sketch plan form and the cottages, it's not so true to the concept of the dwelling and building plan that they need to be skewed. However, it's probably an idea that's going to be pursued more...sketch plan here. Skewing would do the same thing with twisting the garages and the street that would be head on. They'd be angled so depending on your line of travel...It xvould push the front door a bit closer to the street. The building materials would be consistent or...have in front for both product lines but they will have varying colors. Both in brick and in'door accents and window accent colors as well as the siding colors. Unlike...product ~vhere ~ve start to have a lot more uniformity, these have a little bit more variability...completed about a year and a half ago. That's the product that we have. What I'd like to do is come back to the site plan. We have an aerial here, if the Council is interested in just having a general orientation of how this development fits. And we'll come back to the site plan. Staff has suggested in their conditions that the, and as Kate just xvent over, that this road entrance onto Lake Riley Boulevard, move over to be straddling the property line. After some review at our offices we xvill agree that that's a reasonable effort. We wanted to make sure that ~vhat we were doing, slipping the roadway to the other side of these buildings so there is less wetland fill than on this plan but still some based on that latest delineation that we had. There would be buildings to put that on this site. I'm not exactly sure hoxv many different plans you may have received in your packet. We did submit some different road alignments and building plans that were for the engineering staff to prepare their memo, which I 'knoxv is attached to the packet there so presumably they have to have received those. Regarding our big issue is what we have in front of the Planning Commission was a desire to program this space a little bit more than we have on our sketch plan proposal. We would like to alloxv this central commons area, between the two developments to be able to be developed and programmed by the residents that move into this area. We would prefer, and that's not something that's in any condition, that we xvill forward, possibly even set up an escroxv xvhere at 50% of the build out, this escrow money and a design would be done between the neighborhood and Rottlund Company and the city could designate or appoint a planner, park planner to be involved in that process. But we have had greater success when we alloxv the residents to program what is their background than we have by having some...trying to predict what that site can be in the future. The way that the grades xvork out, we believe that ultimately that...for two different levels. This street is rising and then it starts to fall back down as it joins what we're calling and labeling North Lake Drive and this street gradually falls all the way down to Lake Riley. There's about 35 to 40 feet of change, as some of you 'know by looking at the property, from Lake Riley Boulevard on out. That translates into about a 5% street grade. So this center space and the spacing between buildings xvill need to step approximately 8 foot...betxveen buildings so it becomes more difficult to get.., space in that area. I'll give you a for instance and then I'll get off of this topic. We just went through an empty nester development in Lakeville, where as part of the approval process the Council there thought it xvas good that we develop a playground for their grandkids. And we did so because we were conditioned upon approval to do so. Now that the neighborhood is 60% built up, they don't want to have to pay the insurance costs in their homeowners association for liability purposes. It's park rated equipment. They've asked the city to remove it. The Council as well as the manager have agreed and now we're going to go back in and install a perennial garden and use the same monies. It's those kinds of decisions we'd like to leave up to the residents and we're more comfortable saying that we'll spend x amount of dollars to improve the site but we'd rather not have it to be playground if nobody wants a playground. We'd rather not have it be a garden if nobody wants a garden. We'd like them to be involved in that process. We did have success xvith that in the city of Inver Grove Heights where we have an escroxv set aside for, there was a playground... That's one of our issues. This common open space. This is approximately an acre. As was described in our Minutes, it's about 180 feet long. As an average, it's about 120 feet wide in it's current configuration and as staff has pointed out, there's going to be some massaging xvith this road alignment to make sure we have our wetland buffers for this zone in through here. We have a large quantity of open space, depending on the calculations that you do or don't get credited in 34 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 this area, and again what we were describing, instead of this whole zone of approximately 2 acres as common area for all of these residents and as part of their common open space. We can and will program and plat as an outlot a portion of that for city park purposes. We have heard a couple of different things. Both presentations I've heard this evening talked about acquisition ~vhich is something that we did not hear coming into tonight's meeting. We're not in a position that we can take full park fees for all these residents and then dedicate lakeshore. We xvould be more than willing to set aside for purchase or to have an abatement of some of the park dedication fees for land along, for lake use for public purposes. We've been working with staff regarding moving the trail off of Lyman Boulevard and both of the sketches that were held up...to get the public closer to the lake experience as they go on the bike trail and move through some mature trees rather than being along side a road all the time and that's been a consistent theme of our development. Regarding some of the other conditions that are in the staff summary and maybe what I can do is just go straight to those because I know it's late and I'd like to be available to...all your questions regarding both our product and the site plan, sketch plan. We are concurrence all the way, conditions 1 thru 19 are fairly standard. Part of the concern of different road alignments, and I'll explain it briefly on this plan here which is condition number 20 about storm water ponds. We have been pursuing different alignments of the road for two purposes. One of xvhich is to, what we believe is improve the storm water purpose of the xvhole region as a part of this storm water quality plan. This road is slid further to the lake. As you look on the aerial you'll see there's an opening there that we've been just sliding the road within. If you've been by the property you know that there's kind of a dirt area on the lakeshore side of the road. It opens up the area between the water and the wetlands to the north and the road. On this plan and on our plans there's a large space in here for xvetland mitigation and we've been able to do a water quality pond also off of this road and just imagine the road and these houses flipped over and you have pretty much what our preliminary plat might look like with your approval. The water quality pond gets a chance to grow a little bit bigger. When we do that, we believe and our engineers have the calculations and staff has had a chance to review those at a preliminary level, to take all the runoff from the road, which currently doesn't have any ~vater quality from the adjacent development to the east when it develops the undeveloped land. Quite conceivably enough to accommodate the project as it is currently designed. There's no water quality for it today. This development and a small portion of the road through the Klingelhutz property. The other alignment, which for park purposes gets a little bit more parking, eliminates virtually all of this area in through here to function as a water quality pond, and from our engineer's estimates, what it does is it limits the ability of this property to accomplish all of those downstream goals and it really allows only enough area outside of wetlands for ponding for this development only. It's squeezed to get anything from Lake Riley Boulevard. There is no ponding capacity for the property to the east and probably accommodate a couple hundred feet of road going to the east. It's slightly higher here and that...a better drainage area. That's been our focus and it's... unanswered as to what is the overall goal. The second overall plan that we had in trying to move that road was to make use of the land and space that was in that park area as targeted so that when we get the trail a little closer to the lake and so that we could maximize developable area just north of that road that carries with it a large setback area and that primarily impacts our ability to have a dwelling unit down in this location. The city code eliminates any building, for all practical purposes, other than a boat shelter. Storage space as a beachlot improvement. The collector road with it's setbacks pushes any development almost 200 feet away from that lakeshore. So by having the road slightly forward, that does improve the developable opportunity for both the structures and for water quality. We're not taking any trees of an3' large size that are not taken by the current plans that we have received from the city's consultant, OSM. There are a couple of small, low quality wetlands that shoxv up on the current state requirements for wetlands that are impacted in all cases slightly by road improvements for their highway. Some are a little bit more aggressive than others. The up side is that those are low quality wetlands and by taking them on the lake side, you can more than compensate for them north. And you can clean up the water quality, which we think is an important element of trying to preserve the water quality for Lake Riley. It provides a lot more opportunity. The legislature didn't help us out this spring. 35 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 There's certainly an opportunity this project would not go until probably spring next year, based on the plans for Lake Riley Boulevard and utilities. There is a possibility that this land in through here that's currently a wetland could function as a good water quality if the legislature changes the rules but xve don't knoxv that now and that's not something we can propose to you at this time. We believe that xvhile some of the conditions in this memo state that the proposals that we've had on road alignments would not meet state aid standards. That there's still a possibility that a flat road could be staked, depending on how far back in the Klingelhutz property the road could be changed to meet that alignment. We have only dealt with the road alignment on this development starting here, working back through here. And then working with staff on that. So that's, condition number 20 is just a point of clarification. Condition number 21 deals with what is developable acreage. I would say as we move forxvard with the preliminary plat, those acreage numbers switch. If it's 17.1 acres, we have no problem with this cash number. If for some reason it drops to 16 acres, 15.5 acres, that number tends to be calculated off the developable acreage. We'd just like it to be known that that number is a floating target or moving target. Number 25 we dealt with in some detail and staff has in their memo. Our comments there are just that we believe we can still massage something. It's not an all or nothing in terms of the two alignments there at the northerly alignment and the southerly alignment that were shown both in park and for engineering purposes. There may be some middle ground difference between and what we're trying to do is decipher whether water quality is the most important aspect. Whether it's plenty of parts in a parking lot is the most important aspect. Whether or not you can have a roadway that's designed for 40 mph next to Lake Riley that ends 300 feet away on a gravel road in Eden Prairie, for the time being. Whether or not it's a small, what's called a super elevation. In other words, instead of...ground, the outside edge is just going to be tipped up at the same grade that it tips doxvn on the outside. This...in order to maximize the water quality. We really have two separate components to this development. We have the housing in the neighborhood and then xve have really kind of urban infrastructure here and how we can accomplish that. We're saying we can accomplish all of these things. It's just how well does it work for you and how do you want to create your hierarchy. Regarding the condition number 29. That's what I want to clarify here. I've heard acquisition and it's acquisition, not dedication. That can be amended. We don't have a whole lot to dispute or discuss...park fees if there's acquisition on 29 as well. I'll give you some brief acreage we asked our consultant to look at. The two park plans, if you take the tighter right-of-way and the sides of the parks, came up xvith approximately an acre that the roadway is pushed somewhere in this vicinity they would have as the boundary line between xvhat would be retained by the development and what is proposed to be acquired. If the roadway slides to the north, it's approximately 1.3 acres. I'm not here to tell you what I think that lakeshore is worth. I think ~ve'll be able to work with the city on that. We are concerned about the, I'm going to say opportunity to have some overnight slips, and part of your regulations are that our lakeshore distance that we're entitled to so many slips per how much frontage we own and if our frontage is taken away, then that diminishes some of our ability to have overnight slips, xvhich we've... At a minimum we've got a docking program that's out there as with the apartment complex to the east. We've been looking at all the other conditions that are on the plan. We ,,vent over item number 31 which was define the options of the development for the open space area. We xvould just as soon be comfortable with an escrow. With a dollar amount...landscaping, benches and... Item number 33. Our plan we believe...briefly touched on. The fact that we would have a dock. We would have the opportunity to have possibly some storage for paddles and that kind of thing for people who could use... All of the other items are quite easily accomplished...35 conditions. With that I'd like to thank the Council for allowing this presentation here. Hopefully our product presentation is clear as a need in the city. The zero lot concept for the Rottlund Company is one that we think is...can have some success. It's been about 10 years since these type of...had any buildout in the Twin Cities. We have a couple underway now. We have several more started and in the approval process and throughout... The key for us here in this concept is again having minimal maintenance to the buyer. The/,, can be in a detached product and they don't have to worry about moxving the grass. They don't have to won3r about shoveling their drivexvay on a daily basis. They don't have to xvorry about ~vatering the 36 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 lawn, taking care of the shrubs. They can live. They can take care of the inside but they don't have to deal with the exterior maintenance and that's we think a key opportunity for those folks. In particular, many of our single buyers that we have out there that are hard pressed to work, play, and find time to take care of a house... Two family xvage earners in our home so that's why xve think this really has an opportunity in Chanhassen. Our target point that we discussed with staff, that we had in your Minutes for Planning Commission, is we are real hopeful that we can start down in the loxv 100's. Around $110-120,000.00 and then depending on options, try to cap that at about $140. We are not trying to capitalize on the opportunity that the lakeshore has at this time by doing a lot of things to drive the price higher. We think our nitch is trying to provide for that first time, move up home buyers and somebody who's trying to downsize. An empty nester. They might have an $120,000.00 house with a very small bathroom on two floors and they're trying to just move that capital into another location and still live in or near the Chanhassen or Chaska market. And that's been our focus for a lot of our housing products...still for this neighborhood here. With that I'll be happy to answer questions and... Mayor Chmiel: Are there any questions? It doesn't look like it right noxv. Do you have something? Councilman Berquist: Well no. I just, this is a very, it seems very complicated. It seems we're going to have, in my simple mind I want to, I'd like to take it issue by issue. Park and Rec is concerned about some things. The common driveway. The switch and stuff has not been, we're not looking at what has, we're looking at stuff that's old right now. Don Jensen: We're looking at the...plan. Staff has proposed a condition of approval for the sketch plan that xvould take and put the roadway on the common joint property line and move this similar amount of houses to this side. They believe that the sketch plan is conceptual enough that that's... Kate Aanenson: Maybe I can address that Steve. This is concept and the intent here is just to see that you're comfortable with trying to develop the framexvork for the product. We didn't want to over burden them with a lot of drawings. You'll have an opportunity under preliminary plat to see the whole revisions. All these issues addressed under the preliminary. So we felt that we would just try to express to you the concerns, issues that xve would have and then he'd have to go back and articulate those in another plan and come back before you. Councilman Berquist: Okay. Good. I hoped it was conceptually. Concept I have not a problem with. Alternate A, Alternate B and Alternate C and the pros and cons, they don't relate to alignments 1 and 2? Alignments 1 and 2, the alignments 1 and 2 do not show the road as it is. Do they? How is the existing alignment? Todd Hoffman: Alignment 1 would be the existing alignment. Councilman Berquist: This is the existing? Charles Folch: Yeah. And that would correspond to Alternative C. Councilman Berquist: And that corresponds to Alternate C? You've solved it and broke the code. Don Jensen: Alignment 2 would correspond to either Alternative A or Bo Councilman Berquist: Alright. It's become clearer. Thank you. 37 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Mayor Chmiel: 78 units is xvhat you're looking at? Don Jensen: There's 75 on this plan now. Mayor Chmiel: Or 75 single, yeah. Don Jensen: In all likelihood that's probably going to drop 1 or 2 more, depending on xvhat you decide, especially if the road alignments would take one for sure. If you went with Alignment 1. Mayor Chmiel: Currently what are your clearances between those structures? What setbacks do you have? Don Jensen: Well right now what we have is, we have a 20 foot setback to the right-of-way line xvith the standard city 60 foot right-of-way for public street through here. So you have a full space to p.ark a car away from the road. A public sidewalk in the right-of-way all along the southern side of the north face through here. And we have approximately 15 feet inbetween structures. The...larger footprint through here. And we have approximately 10 feet inbetxveen the structures when they are aligned in a parallel fashion such as this. In this location. Mayor Chmiel: I guess I have a little bit of problem with the total numbers of 75 units. I'm not sure xvhere I'm going to go from there as to how many but it seems like it's very congested. Don Jensen: Well what you really have is a similar concept to, if you were to attach them into configurations of 4 to 6 dwellings. You'd have a party wall and you might have 20-25 feet between a building. If you allowed everybody to have their own dwelling...party wall, you've got really an area of 10 to 15 feet. It's not all that unusual for some single family neighborhoods, 15 feet is not all that uncommon with 10 foot setback... design this zero lot line concept. 10 feet is, it's a question inbetween here that you don't have any comparables but again the zero lot line concept is looking at people buying into the idea of having a little tighter proximity to each other and a way that you would design that living area space inbetween the buildings so that you have really the people looking at it in an area that's landscaped inbetween that is not windoxv to xvindow. It's window to blank walls so they have that privatized feeling in there. And the front entry again is more of a private entry space. This is a new product line for us. We've had distances. These are...couple feet bigger. It would be easier for us to respond if they said xvell, I'll give you 10 feet or 12 feet or 13 feet is better than... Councilman Berquist: ...10 feet... Mayor Chmiel: You got it. That's what I was thinking the distance inbetween. That I think we can look at as we progress xvith it. Anyone else? Councilman Mason: I like the concept. We certainly have had this discussion before about lot lines and square footage and what not and I think there is a place. I certainly wouldn't want the whole city to look like this but I definitely think there is a nitch in this town for that sort of set-up. I've got to believe that with that price and that close to the lake, they'll go quickly. Would be my guess. And again, I don't city wide, I certainly wouldn't agree with the zero lot line but this does afford, and I caught the Minutes about no, it's not loxv income and you could argue it's not even affordable but it certainly is closer to affordable than whatever else is going into this city right now and I like the concept. Mayor Chmiel: Mark. 38 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councilman Senn: Just echoing Michael. I like the concept and I like your price points. Other than that, I think we need to... Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there a motion? Now there's also one other thing, before I go. Some of the things that he was referencing Charles. Number 20, 21, 22. Charles Folch: Well basically, it's kind of a horse and cart situation so to speak. To a certain extent what happens with the potential use of the park property, if you ~vill, adjacent to the lake will sort of affect to a certain extent where we want to put the road. Then again on the other side of the coin, we have to meet certain design standards for that type of road that we have there and I think as long as we work out those issues through the preliminary platting process, I don't have a problem. I think at this point in time staff would be looking at more thoroughly into either Options B or C. B I should preface as being, looking at it if it's a viable option where we don't have to super elevate the road. I think you xvould find Carver County Engineer and I know a couple of the other neighboring City Engineers from communities adjacent to us here that I've spoken to over the number of years regarding road issues and one thing you don't want to do is super elevate an urban road because we've got problems now trying to get people to obey the speed limits on local roads. 30-35 to 40 mph. If you super elevate a curve, it makes the motorist much more comfortable to drive at a faster speed so we tend to discourage using super elevation for our low speed urban road~vays. But again, if there's an opportunity to try to massage it a little bit at the end touchdown points for the development, to try to eliminate that, then maybe it's a viable option so. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Mike. Councilman Mason: I guess I'd like to move approval. It is a concept. Conceptual plan at this point. And assuming that these issues can be worked out with staff and Rottlund and if not, it's going to come back to us and we're going to decide it one way or the other anyway. So at this point I'll move conceptual approval for, Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval to rezone 24.85 acres from R12, High Density Residential as stated in the staff report. Mayor Chmiel: PUD #95-17 Councilman Mason: Right. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Councilman Mason: You're welcome. Thank you. Councilman Senn: Second. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, a motion on the floor and there's also a second. Did you want to say something? Kevin: Yes...Mr. Mayor, Council. My name is Kevin...with RLK Associates .... Lakeview Hills Investment Group to look after their interests of their property. Not only apartment buildings but to develop a portion of the property... One of the issues that was brought up was the common access. You may be interested to know that the Lakeview Hills Investment Group does go along with that comment... There are several issues that would come into play on how this development affects the property. One is the existing drive that services the apartment buildings that need to be maintained as... The common access... Secondly, there's some storm water 39 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 drainage issues that would be impacted by the development of this property. One is the ditch line comes through here. I'd like to see that preserved and run this line here. That we recognize as this develops, as this portion of the property develops, we'll need to address...storm xvater ponding area. Other issues have to do with access. If this road did come up, one of our concerns was access betxveen properties... There xvas a park down in this area where it's previously proposed but to be sure that residents of the apartment building in the future would have access to that regional park. If this road does indeed come up here, there would be a sidexvalk... We don't have any problem with this realignment...modifications at this end of the problem .... proximity to the road to the lake. There's not too much we can do with it but it helps the overall...That's about it. All and all it should be, I'm not opposed to this plan as presented and we have met with Rottlund...Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks. Councilman Ma,son moved, Councilman Senn seconded to grant conceptual approval of PUD #95-1 with the following conditions, issues and concerns and reconm~endations: 1. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, NW Bell, cable television, transformer boxes. This is to insure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 2. Fire hydrant changes: a) Add one fire hydrant at the intersection of Lyman Blvd. and the new proposed street (near Lot 1). b.) Add one fire hydrant at the intersection by Lot 43. c) Relocate the current hydrant between Lots 46 and 47 to between Lot 47 and the trail. d) Relocate the current hydrant from between Lots 36 and 37 to betxveen Lots 33 and 34. 3. Submit street names for review and approval. 4. Submit turning radius of cul-de-sac to Fire Marshal for review and approval. 5. Revise Grading and Drainage Plan to indicate lowest floor level, top of foundation elevation and garage floor elevation. This should be done prior to final plat approval. 6. Revise Grading and Drainage Plan to show standard designations for dwellings. This should be done prior to final plat approval. 7. Submit soils report to the Inspections Division. This should be done prior to issuance of any building permits. 8. Submit proposed street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division for review prior to final plat approval. 9. Obtain demolition permits. This should be done prior to any grading on the property. 40 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water Management Plan requirements for nexv developments. The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and formal approval. Type III erosion control fence shall be used adjacent to the wetlands. All utilities and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and utilities plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council approval. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before accepting the utilities and will charge the applicant $20.00 per sign. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10 year and 100 year storm events and provide ponding calculations for storm water quality/quantity ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post developed stormwater calculations for 100 year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins, created basins, and/or creeks. Individual storm sewer calculations between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. In addition, water quality ponding design calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance xvith the terms of the development contract. The applicant will meet wetland rules and regulations as stated in Corps of Engineers Section 404 permit, the State Wetland Conservation Act, and the City's Wetland Ordinance. Mitigation work shall be implemented prior to or concurrent with wetland fill activity in all phases of the project. Impacts resulting from sanitary sexver installation shall be provided to staff as an amendment to the replacement plan application. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Carver County, Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Department, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Army Corps of Engineers, and Minnesota Department of Transportation and comply with their conditions of approval. The appropriate drainage and utility easements should be dedicated on the final plat for all utilities and ponding areas lying outside the right-of-way. The easement width shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. Consideration shall also be given for access for maintenance of the ponding areas. 18. No berming or landscaping will be alloxved xvithin the right-of-way. 19. 20. The loxvest exposed floor or opening elevation of all buildings adjacent to the wetland shall be a minimum of 3 feet above the 100 year high water level. The proposed storm water pond must have side slopes of 10'1 for the first ten feet at the normal water level and no more than 3'1 thereafter or 4:1 throughout for safety purposes. 41 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 21. 22. 23. 24. The proposed single family residential development of 17.1 developable acres is responsible for a water quantity connection charge of $50,873.00. These fees are payable to the City prior to the City filing the final plat. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall re-locate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. Site grading shall be compatible with the future widening and of upgrading of Lyman Boulevard and also xvith existing drainage characteristics from the adjacent parcels. Existing sanitary sewer located in the northeast portion of the site xvill need to be relocated prior to development of the area. 25. Lyman Boulevard alignment may be further refined conditioned upon the following: 26. 27. 28. 29. The right-of-way must remain uniform throughout at 80 feet. This applicant at this time is considering a narrowing down or neck in the right-of-way to minimize conveyance of right-of-way. The City would need to have the right-of-way dedicated prior to finalizing construction plans for Lyman Boulevard. b. The street design must meet State Aid, 35 mph design standards. Upon reviexv of the proposed layout with this submittal, it appears the alignment does not meet the 35 mph design standards. c. The proposed alignment should not add any extra cost to the project, i.e. retaining walls, steep slopes, surcharging, etc. The applicant shall meet xvith the Lakeviexv Hills Apartment property owners to discuss a common street access along the easterly property line of the site. The current submittal of the roadway alignment is not acceptable due to the impacts to the wetlands. Lots 1 through 12, Block 2 shall be adjusted northerly to minimize impact to the large wetlands and trees. This also requires the realignment of North Bay Drive through the site. Revise the landscaping plan to provide upland and xvetland plants to naturally blend the pond into the surroundings; provide additional landscaping screening south of Lot 1, Block 1; revegetate the area behind Lots 6-11, Block 2 with central hardxvood species which would expand the forested area adjacent to Basin B; and increase the number of evergreens to 20 percent of the tree plantings. Dedication of the westerly portion of Block 3. This dedication is generally described as lying west of the trail easement at the point where it is perpendicular to Lake Riley Boulevard. This dedication to be a condition of the granting of planned unit development status. 30. Payment of full park and trail fees per city ordinance. 31. Define the options of development for a commons area and access. 32. A guarantee of minimum brick variations and colors of siding be defined. 42 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 33. Define the dock or boat mooring or storage as per proposed use for the shoreline. 34. A heighten guarantee of runoff control and garbage clean-up. 35. A future projection of heighten traffic use without Highway 212 development. All voted in favor and the motion carried. APPEAL DECISION OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS~ 5 FOOT SIDE YARD VARIANCE REQUEST TO BUILD AN ADDITIONAL GARAGE STAI,L~ 650 PLEASANT VIEW ROADa SAM & LAURIE CURNOW. Public Pn~sent: Name Addn~ss Teri Frederick 660 Pleasant View Road John Rask: Thank you Mr. Mayor. The applicants are requesting a 5 foot variance from the 10 foot side yard setback. The property is located at 650 Pleasant Viexv Road. It's approximately 26,000 square feet. It's zoned single family residential. Surrounding land use consists predominantly of single family homes. The site currently contains a home and a two car garage. The entire area slopes to the south towards Lotus Lake. The subject property is located in the Reichert's Addition, which consists of 9 lots along the north side of Pleasant View Road. Staff is unaware of any other variances that have been granted in this subdivision or in this immediate area. Staff is recommending denial of the variance as the applicant has not demonstrated a hardship that ~varrants the granting of a variance. Staff feels that if the request ~vould be approved, that it create a standard that deviates from surrounding properties within this subdivision and the surrounding area. In addition staff feels the applicant has a reasonable use of the property with the existing home and the 2 car garage. On July 12th, or excuse me on June 12th, the Board of Adjustments and Appeals held a public hearing to consider this variance. The board denied the variance appeal on a unanimous vote. The applicants however were not present or represented by anyone at this meeting. The adjoining property owners located to the northwest, it'd be 660 Pleasant View, were in attendance at the meeting and they did express some concern over the addition for the fact that it may block a portion, or some of the view of the lake and they were also concerned with the location of the garage addition in relation to the property line. Staff had pointed out that a survey would be required shoxving the garage addition at the time of the building permit application. The neighbors were also concerned with possible effects on drainage, seeing that their yard kind of slopes down to where the garage addition would be located. Just one other additional. We did receive a letter from the neighbors which would actually be to the south and to the east. You received a copy of that letter earlier. It's from Kevin Benson basically stating that they're in favor of the variance because of the parking situation out there. They don't want to see the cars parked on the road. They'd prefer the applicant have some additional room in his yard in which to park vehicles. And with that I'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks John. Any questions that we have of John at this time? Councilman Berquist: The), currently have a double garage and a 30 foot wide double wide driveway, right? John Rask: Correct. 43 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councihnan Berquist: How many cars are normally on the site? Three? Teri Frederick: Well they have a mother and a father and then the son has a Jeep. Councilman Berquist: The neighbor's encouraging the garage addition because with cars parked on Pleasant View it blocks his view when apparently they drive onto Pleasant Vie~v, and with extra cars parked on the road, this is an extra hazard to motorists. With 3 cars in the family and a visitor, that's 4 cars. And you've got a double driveway and double garage... Anybody ever talked about, is it permissible to simply pave next to a garage without a variance? John Rask: Yes, that would be permittable. Councilman Senn: Steve, at Board of Adjustments we talked about additional paving to the side. We also talked about extending the garage back along the north side of the house xvith a tandem bay if they thought they needed an extra bay and also an option of adding a bay effectively to the south rather than to the north property line, all of which could be done without any variances and without affecting the property owner to the north, which was our primary concern, you know given the proximity there. Councilman Berquist: Yeah, 5 feet's pretty close. Councilman Senn: So I mean we thought they were pretty much, there were other pretty viable options to pursue and so that's why we denied it. That's pretty much in keeping with the same...similar type of situation. Councilman Berquist: I don't have any more questions. Mayor Chmiel: Mike. Mark, you don't have any others? Councihnan Senn: No. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there a motion? Councihnan Mason: I'll make a motion to deny the variance request. Roger Knutson: Based upon the findings set forth in the planning report? Mayor Chmiel: That's correct. Councilman Mason: Yes. Councilman Senn: Second. Councilman Berquist: Discussion? During the Board of Adjustments and Appeals when you were talking about all these other alternates, the applicant is just all this, this is what we want to do? Councilman Senn: The applicant wasn't even present so I mean it was real difficult. Councilman Berquist: Are you the applicant? 44 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Teri Frederick: I'm the neighbor. Councilman Mason: Who's this gentleman? Paul Woodruff: I'm also here on this issue. If I...a chance to speak for a minute? Mayor Chmiel: Sure. Paul Woodruff: My name is Paul Woodruff. I'm both the remodeling contractor and the neighbor of the Curnow's and to address some of your questions as far as the additional parking on the driveway. These lots are located on a very steep location and parking on half of the driveway is almost...given the slope. The additional garage staff located on the north of the property is mainly because the entrance to the house is to the south and he xvould have to restructure the whole home in order to enter their house by setting that addition that way. It would be...to add on a third garage stall for the home. As far as additional parking, just paving that area. The cost as far as you xvould have to build retaining walls and such, that would bring the cost up to where they could just about add on a garage stall. With the parking on the street, the traffic on Pleasant View Road has just become unbelievable due to all the construction west of the area with a couple to the north and the process that you were talking about this evening. I think the traffic is only going to get worst with Town Line Road and Crosstoxvn opening up in the future as well. And those are just some of our concerns... Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Teri Frederick: May I say something? Mayor Chmiel: Sure. Teri Frederick: I'm Teri Frederick and I live next door on Pleasant View Road. This has been an issue for... about 4 years. They originally just asked to build a garage and we told them at that point we didn't, we wish that they wouldn't, even though they had... Now it's to the point where they have, we have a fence line. They put up a fence, which is actually on the lot line, maybe even a little over on our side, which is fine. It looks nice. It looks great but we measure from the garage to the lot line and it's only 15 feet and they're proposing an 11 foot garage and we live on, more up on the hill. They live down...and the water runoff from even the top of Near Mountain comes straight down and it sits right at their service door right now. In the winter time...and I don't see xvhere that, all that water's going to go if they build over further, unless they build a trench into the side of our yard and the runoff and I also want to note that we have sold the house. The buyers could not be here tonight but they also just do not want this garage. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks. Okay, we do have a motion on the floor with a second. Councilman Senn: Steve, did I ans~ver your question? Councilman Berquist: I think so. Councilman Senn: I mean basically they weren't present. We asked staff to go back and explore the other alternatives with them but that's essentially the way... 45 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded that the City Council deny the five foot front yanl variance request based on the findings presented in the staff report. More specifically, the CiD' Council finds the following: 1. The applicant has a reasonable use of the property xvith the existing home and txvo car garage. 2. The applicant has not demonstrated a hardship that xvould xvarrant the granting of a variance. 3. The request, if approved, would create a standard that deviates from the surrounding properties. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA: D.~. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 5 TO WEST 78TH STREET IMPROVEMENT~ PROJECT 92-3. Councilman Berquist: I was just kind of struck by a couple of things, none of them earth shattering. What's a pedestrian pedestal pole? Councilman Senn: To place a pedestrian on. Charles Folch: Basically that's the indicator function basically for pedestrians. Actually in many cases it's actually mounted on the signal pole. Councilman Berquist: And you push it to change the light? $382.00 a piece, I didn't figure they could be too terribly much. And a loop detector is for the emergency vehicles? Charles Folch: No, loop detector is, you typically put at all the entrances to a signalized intersection. The one that's right at the intersection will pick up a car that's coming to an intersection and then you also put an advance one farther up which basically functions to extend the signal. If it's green and someone's coming down, we kind of give them more time to clear the intersection. So they're typically associated xvith a signalized intersection. Councilman Berquist: I just see them as change orders and I don't knoxv why they weren't. Charles Folch: Actually that xvas, that particular one there is for the signal at the entrance to Target and the other one that goes north up into the Byerly's development. At the time that the plans were done we basically weren't sure hoxv far along that development was going to be. Whether they were even going to have the road in at that time so we basically didn't plan on having a detector but during the process of the construction project, their project moved along and it seemed appropriate to put in and do a change order to install the loop detectors now. Councilman Berquist: Will you absolutely promise, can you absolutely promise that when we extend West 78th up to Lake Ann, that this $83,000.00 wilt be saved? Charles Folch: Well it won't be saved. 46 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councihnan Mason: Well. Councilman Senn: You got your answer, first word. Well. Charles Folch: It's money spent now that you would have spent then but the thing that you do save is, if you would have just built the embankment now, you would have had the additional expense of removing all that fill and then going back in and doing the correction. Councilman Berquist: What did the boring show? Did the boring show solid ground under there? Charles Folch: Well, the borings ',','ere hit and miss. And a lot of miss... Part of the other problem was, we did the borings based on a preliminary alignment and we actually ended up, through the preliminary plan process and development that was going on with Target and such, actually shifted the alignment slightly to the south for the touch down point on CR 17 so that affected the alignment, if you will to the west. But again, we didn't even hit a bad spot when we took some borings out there so, again hit or miss. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, do you want to make a motion? Councilman Senn: Quick question. Quick one too. We're up over a quarter million. Was that budgeted? I mean was that budgeted a contingency or where's this coming from? Charles Folch: Let me look at the contract here. Councilman Senn: And if it wasn't budgeted a contingency, where are we stealing it from? Mayor Chmiel: No, borrowing. Councilman Senn: Excuse me, where are we borrowing it from. Charles Folch: Well at the time that the, most of this work you'll notice. Well, may or may not notice but a lot of this xvork, particularly like all these change order items and the soil correction were done back actually in '93 and a lot of these numbers were knoxvn at the time we did the assessments last fall. So a lot of the numbers xvere incorporated into the assessments that were levied last fall. Councilman Senn: A lot of meaning? Almost all $250,000.00 or? Charles Folch: Well, the percentages carried through. The percentages that we were assessing, based on the total project cost, those percentages incorporated with basically these totals. Councilman Senn: But I thought we had the highest percentages in that project. In fact we had the highest percentages by a long shot in that project, which means again it's coming out of our money somewhere. Charles Folch: Well I think ~ve were assessing about 35, 35 to 40% we are assessing in the project. Councilman Senn: Yeah, which means we're paying 60-65% so. Charles Folch: So in terms of...the ratios remain the same through the add-on's. 47 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councilman Senn: So where are we finding the 65% of the additional $250,000.00? Charles Folch: Well, the local share was being funded through TIF. Don Ashworth: TIF. I don't knoxv what we had bonded for and hoxv that compares to change order. I don't know at this point if that construction project still has a surplus or a deficit. It would have... Councilman Senn: Well, that's part of what I was getting at. Secondly what I'm getting at is if we have to take it out of the TIF district to pay this, what else is going to go b3' the side as a result of it? I mean you're not talking about a small chunk of change here. You're talking a rather substantial chunk of change. I mean ~vhat other project could be impacted or is impacted by it. Don Ashworth: Does it hurt any if it's tabled for 2 xveeks? Councilman Senn: Well, I mean you've already spent it so it's kind of like a silly after the fact question but I would hope that type of analysis or consideration is available and it'd be nice to know that because otherwise you're back here 60 days from now saying oops, we're short here you know. It'd be nice to knoxv xvhat we're doing on the other side. Councilman Berquist: And lastly, just for my edification, I notice you didn't put a dollar amount on the widening of West 78th Street. From the Riv to the stop light. I suppose I can figure it out by subtracting. Charles Folch: That's under the item number 5 which is that $3,300.00. They call it the concrete curb and gutter, special design. That all incorporated that work basically. Councilman Berquist: $3,300.002 Charles Folch: Yeah, $3,295.00. That was basically for the curb. What happened in terms of the paving area, we ended up having a decrease. Actually on the actual bid quantity amount so the actual payment was absorbed into what was already bid and the big quantities so there's no additional increase. So what you're seeing there is just basically a change order for the concrete curb. Councilman Berquist: So that's xvhat that referred to? Okay. Well I'll move approval. Councilman Mason: I'll second. Resolution #95-70: Cotmcilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Change Order No. 5 to West 78th Street Improvement Project 92-3. All voted in favor and the motion carried. G.~. APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL CONTRACT, KKE~ CITY HALL EXPANSION. Don Ashworth: We will respond to any questions... Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Unless there's some specific questions that you have on this, maybe we should just carry this over until next meeting. 48 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councilman Berquist: Well I think, the reason I pulled this is because I still think we're putting the cart before my horse. Maybe not. Councilman Senn: And I agree with that so it probably would be best to. Councilman Berquist: To table it. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Let's table it until the next meeting. Councilman Mason: Second. Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Mason seconded to table action on the a~ehitectural contract ~vith KKE for the City Hall Expansion. All voted in favor and the motion carded. H. APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT~ APPLE VALLEY RED-E-MIX. Councilman Berquist: H, I pulled because I was, I called one of the HRA members today to talk to him about this and, is somebody here? Gary Fuchs negotiated $110,000.00 additional settlement to get this thing done. I'm gone through a State condemnation so I know how the game is, I'm pretty sure I -know how the game is played. We did similar things with MnDot. This completely gets everything, everybody off?. It does away with anything, any rights that they have? It settles it. We don't have to go to hearings. We don't have to meet with any commissioners. And does Gar5, honestly feel that if we met with, if this thing went through the process and met with the commissioners, that it would go for a greater amount than $420,000.00? Don Ashworth: ...xvere you as close to it as I was? Roger Knutson: No... First, this is not a great forum when we're on cable to discuss the merits of the settlement other than to say, we think it's an excellent settlement. There are a lot of things going on herel If you really want to talk about the details, I suggest an Executive Session. Don Ashworth: See I would have gone ahead and talked about it. Roger Knutson: Someone may be listening out there. Councilman Senn: Roger next time, just put your hand over his mouth. Councilman Berquist: I xvish you had told me that before I... Roger Knutson: This is pending litigation and people are listening. Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Do you want to motion that? Councilman Berquist: Well I don't want to motion. Yeah, I'll motion approval and then we can talk about it at another point in time. Councilman Mason: I'll second it. 49 City' Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councilman Ber~luist moved, Councilman Ma,son seconded to approve the Settlement Agreement with Apple Valley Red-E-Mix as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried. I. APPROVAL OF ACCOUNTS. Councilman Berquist: Mark pulled (i). Mayor Chmiel: Did you pull (i) Mark? Councilman Senn: I think you pulled (i) and I...so you may have something different than I do. Councilman Berquist: I'm son3'. I pulled (i). No, I just want to know. The big check to the, and I probably shouldn't have pulled it. I should have just talked about it. I really would like to know how this stuff works. And after reading the entire packet, I still really don't have a good grasp on how it's calculated and how it's figured. Councilman Senn: Are you talking about the school one? Councilman Berquist: I'm talking about the $340,000.00 to the school and it looks like next year it's going to be $400,000.00 and some odd thousand. Councilman Senn: Yeah, I was totally confused and I've been through it. Councilman Berquist: ...but I'd like to know how it's. Councilman Senn: I was confused because I thought we did the agreement with the, well we did one agreement with the County. We did one agreement with the School District. The one with the School District xve did revolved around the elementary school and our contribution to it with the land breakdoxvn and all kinds of other things like that. I didn't see anything budgeted at that time for direct payments going back in lieu of to the school district on top of the other subsidies. The County, I knoxv we had a separate deal on the road improvements and I know that's been, well I guess some of it's been done. Some of it's been delayed but. Don Ashworth: There's two with the School District. First...McGlynn Tax Increment District and calculations were made there as to both the land write down and special assessments dollars and those would equal then the dollars that the School District would have otherwise received had the McGlynn District not have been in existence. The big one is really is a part of the TID No. 1 and recognizes that the School District is proposing to go back to the voters for a referendum to build their...$50 million in schools and their first run at doing that had significant increase in property taxes as a result of that referendum. The City of Chaska and Chanhassen both approached the School District saying, these numbers that you're coming back with of $300.00-$400.00, it seemed higher than that, on a $150,000.00 house, xvas simply not going to be accepted. Besides that, in the process of doing that, in the process of raising taxes 15%, what you're going to do is you create a windfall situation in the tax increment district because what they do is they calculate, general property taxes that are going to be collected on a city xvide basis so you've got a gas station on one side of the road outside of the district and one inside the district. They use the entire city and they come up, okay his taxes go up 15%. And then they apply that same percent against the gas station inside the district. If you had not been planning on those dollars, they become windfall dollars. So the agreement we reached with the School District was, as a result of the additional taxes that you're going to be generating as a part of this referendum, which really doesn't 50 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 have really anything to do with our TIF district except we're going to collect these extra dollars now as a part of your doing this. If we agree to take and pass those back to you, and you agree to change the thing from a 15% increase to I think the average was like 7%, maybe 9%. Councilman Senn: Well, but the thing I don't understand is, we sat here for countless meetings looking at effectively a budget breakdown for that district and the fact that you were going to have x revenue to pay for x project. Noxv xve've had to take our list of projects and cut it dramatically because those revenues did not materialize to the level that we expected them to materialize to. You know here we have revenues that I never saw any~vhere in any budget shown as an expenditure back to the School District in those budget presentations and I would look at it and say, oh geez good. We got some money to help fund some of these projects we've had to cut. Now, why when it was, I mean if that was the agreement, why wasn't it shown when xve were going through that budgeting and looking at those specific items as being an expense item that we were obligated to.'? Under those districts. Don Ash~vorth: I can run upstairs and grab the TIF plan. The financing plan that we did bring back that shows them right in there. There's a line in there that says, excess levy payment ISD #112 and basically these same amounts. Councilman Senn: Then when we broke everything down out of that and put library a million and then you know, all the other things you had doxvn here as far as priority decisions, that was left out? I mean as a major expense item under the district. Because that's in any of the memo's I got. That's why I was real surprised here and I started to match this with in effect what you were talking about in terms of the subsidy back to the elementary school. Don Ashxvorth: The community center did go by the wayside. Entry monuments, currently have not been bonded for and I don't what the general interest on those area. But otherxvise, literally all of the other projects remain in there as they had been originally scheduled. The community center...but the rest of the projects pretty much stay intact. I've got some major ~vork to do to make sure that the County's 17 points stays alive but we're working at it. And you're right. I met with the School District. I informed them of the major loss in that whole area. And I guess at the very minimum they would like to take and' see, their levies literally occurred a year and a half in advance of our's so for the fiscal year that is ending right now, they have been counting on these dollars coming in. If you would, if this Council would take the position saying...dollars. We should be using those for local projects, at a minimum, we should be honoring the contract payments for '93 and '94 which literally occur in '95 and '96. And if you then would like me to go back to the School Board and say, we're going to re-orient those dollars back to city type purposes because we lost these major valuations, I'll do it. I mean I just had this conversation with Clough. Right afterwards he sent this correspondence back to me. So they're fully axvare of the major reductions we saw in valuations. They're fully aware that that reduced the overall dollars that we had available to us. That we lost the community center in that process. Clough continues to feel very strongly that they made their end of the bargain, meaning they did generate the increase in taxes. I mean that wasn't their objective but I mean. Councilman Senn: I could argue that, especially when we buy a whole bunch of land, take it off the tax rolls. Write it down. Subsidize it. Give it to them. You know give a bunch of subsidy on the school and then on top of that, give them this? I don't know. Don Ashworth: As it deals with. 51 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councilman Senn: I wish it all would have been packaged together at the time. Don Ashworth: As it deals xvith the calculations itself, I would suggest sometime when both you and Steve are in, or if either one of you, I'll go down and do the actual calculation itself. Councilman Berquist: Well you had something about you wanted, you want the formula to be written down so you don't have to go through this. Don Ashworth: See you're going to see the formula again in, I don't knox,,,, 2 weeks. A month. However long it takes to get... Councilman Senn: Well I'd really like to understand how these are excess because given xvhat's happened to us, I really have a hard time putting a label on them as excess. That's just a reality when you sit here telling me we've... Don Ashworth: Well I did show a portion of the calculation in there. The sheets that I included were Jeff Griese's calculations...auditor and Springsted and whoever else. Councilman Berquist: And this agreement extends through the lift of the. Don Ashworth: It was intended to go through the lift of the district but again, if this City Council feels as though the losses that we've sustained should somehow, there should be some joint burden in there... Usually we've negotiated those and discussed them. Councilman Berquist: We being? Don Ashworth: Meaning the School District and the City. Hopefully I was bringing back all of those discussions. But we did not really anticipate that there'd be a possibility that you'd see major reductions in commercial and industrial values. Councilman Senn: Well in fact Orlin was telling us it's the opposite. That there xvouldn't be. I mean he was telling us we were different than what was happening in Hennepin County. He was telling us we wouldn't see those kind of adjustments. Don Ashworth: I think you're right. Councilman Senn: And so, you know I guess from my standpoint, unless that's something we have to act on tonight, xvhy don't we just approve accounts and I'd really like to understand that better and have a Council discussion on that issue as to whether it's just kind of automatic at this point or not. I don't know what everybody else feels tike. Don Ashxvorth: Again, they were real anxious to take and try to, we have...June of '95 for them. July 1st of '94 to June of '95. Councilman Berquist: Well I'll move approval of item l(i). Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a second? 52 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councihnan Mason: I'll second it. Councilman Benluist moved, Councihnan Mason seconded to approve the Accounts. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who opposed and the motion carded with a vote of 3 to 1. APPOINTMENTS: PARK REFERENDUM TASK FORCE. Todd Hoffman: Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. We have 12 applications and we need 6 to be elected or appointed to the open space task force. If you want to vote, I've got a graph available. If you want to do it some other method. Mayor Chmiel: Well, xvhat I did is go through each of the numbers that we had and assigned a number to each applicant, 1 thru 12 and tried to come up Avith 3 in each of those respective districts of 2 and 3, being we didn't get anybody coming out of 1. Councilman Senn: I just went through and picked 6. Then I picked 7 because I figured you needed an alternate. Councilman Mason: What do you do but draw names out of a hat. I would like to see Marcus Zbinden on there only in that he has been applying for a number. I think he xvants to start getting involved in some city stuff. He's had his name on... Councilman Senn: Well, why don't you give him your 6. Mayor Chmiel: Give him your numbers. Councilman Mason: Other than that, I mean hoax, do you pick these? Councilman Senn: Well let's start by each of us giving the 6 and let's see ~vhere we've got the common points and you set those aside and leave the rest then. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Do you want to start your's? Councilman Mason: Fine. I don't remember the names so if someone else wants to go first. Mayor Chmiel: I've got mine. Councilman Mason: Okay, go ahead. Mayor Chmiel: From District #2 I had Sandra Resnick, Dave Van Sant, and Craig Blechta. In District #3 I had Mark Wetsch, Anne Graupman, and Allison Blackowiak. Councilman Berquist: Okay. Graupman, Donnay, Quilling, Van Sant, Blechta, Blackowiak. Councilman Mason: Resnick, Franks, Van Sant... 53 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 (There was a tape change during Councilman Mason's presentation of names.) Councilman Senn: Blechta, Van Sant, Quilling, and Graupman. What have we got, 4 of the 6? Todd Hoffman: That's it. Okay, as a formality. Jeff Farmakes has stepped do~vn as the representative for the Planning Commission and Nancy Mancino has volunteered... Councilman Senn: Isn't there anybody other than the Chair that's xvilling to do that on the Planning Commission? I think I'd rather see one of the, I mean I'd much rather see somebody other than the Chair. Especially maybe one of the new ones or something like that. Kate Aanenson: They were reluctant. Some of them had conflicts with the meeting time. They needed a liaison for the HRA and... Mayor Chmiel: Can we have that as a motion as to the total numbers up above as to what we've chosen as a change from Farmakes to Mancino. Councilman Senn: Sure. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to appoint Graupman, Quilling, Van Sant, Blechta, Ports and Blackoxvialq and changing the Planning Commission reprcsentative from Jeff Fannakes to Nancy Mancino for the Park Refercndum Task Force. All voted in favor and the motion carried. B. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY. Todd Gerhardt: Mr. Mayor, the term of commissioner of Donald J. Chmiel has expired as of May 31st. Under State Statute that the Mayor appoint or make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the vacancy. Mr. Chmiel has told staff that he would like to be reappointed to the HRA. I've got a neat chart... Councilman Senn: I want my annual chart up there though. My annual suggestion that we make the Council the HRA. I mean you ought to have a place for that up there too Don. I mean every year. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a motion on the floor? Todd Gerhardt: The Mayor must appoint, or make a recommendation. Mayor Chmiel: There's a motion on the floor. Is there a second? Councilman Berquist: There is a motion on the floor? Councilman Mason: I so moved. Councilman Berquist: You did? Mayor Chmiet: Second. 54 City Council Meeting - June 26, 1995 Councilman Mason moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to appoint Donald J. Chmiel to the Housing and Redevelopment Authori~'. Councilman Mason and Mayor Chmiel voted in favor, Councilman Senn and Councihnan Benluist opposed. The motion failed with a tied vote of 2 to 2. Mayor Chmiel: We'll go back to putting this on the next agenda rather than continuing as we are and xve'll go from there. Councilman Berquist: No discuss? Councilman Senn: Could we ever have some discussion? Mayor Chmiel: We took a vote. It ,,vas tied so you don't have to discuss. Okay. Councilman Senn: Usually there's discussion on the motion. Councilman Berquist: Well let me tell you what I think. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, go ahead. Councilman Berquist: I will anyway. I think that one Council representative on the HRA is plenty for communication purposes. If there's going to be more, than I think the HRA should be Council. Mayor Chmiel: Well, that's why we came up with the 2 to 3. 2 members from the Council, 3 members from the constituency of the city. That's hoxv it was determined before. Councilman Berquist: By? Mayor Chmiel: By the Council. Councilman Berquist: The previous Council? Mayor Chmiel: That's right. Councilman Senn: Not in totality... Councilman Berquist: Well I'm not necessarily in agreement with that. I do think that if there's 2, there should be more and then it should b~ all. So let's do it next time? Mayor Chmiel: Sounds like a winner. Bring it up at the next one. Is there a motion for adjournment? Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to adjoum the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:43 p.m. Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 55