CC 1995 01 09CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 9, 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, Steven Berquist, Colleen Dockendorf, Mike Mason and
Mark Senn
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Todd Gerhardt, Charles Folch, Todd Hoffman, Kate
Aanenson, Bob Generous, John Rask and Scott Harr
OATHS OF OFFICE:
Roger Knutson administered the oaths of office to Mayor Don Chmiel, Councilman Michael Mason and
Councilman Steven Berquist.:
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the
agenda with the following amendments: Mayor Chmiel deleted item 7, Preliminary Plat for Lake Ann
Highlands from the agenda; Don Ashworth added an item regarding escrow fees under Administrative
Presentations. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
ORGANIZATIONAL ITEMS:
Don Ashxvorth: I submitted in the Council packet is the rules of procedure as you had adopted them this past
year. Staff saw really no necessity for making changes. No regular meeting dates are on a holiday with the
exception of Columbus Day, which is not recognized as a city holiday. The question is whether or not this date
might conflict for Council members. Did you want me to go through each of the items?
Mayor Chmiel' I'd like you, yes. I'd like to go through each of the items as we have.
Don Ashworth: That was again number one, Rules of Procedure. Item (b) is Official Newspaper. We have
received a request from the Chanhassen Villager to be designated. They do meet the requirements set under
State Statute. Staff is recommending the Villager. Official Depository. Official Depositor5, is a more difficult
one in that really this is the first year that we're loo 'king at two banks potentially having that designation. We
received a request from both Rand), Schultz, representing Americana Bank, as well as from Chanhassen State
Bank to again remain as the designation as the official depository. The request from Mr. Schultz came quite
late in the year and we simply were not in a position to prepare an RFP through which both of the two banks
could respond to questions as to size and some other type of information that you should really analyze before
making that type of designation. I mean that is a major designation for the city. And accordingly we would
recommend that you instruct staff to prepare an RFP proposal, Request for Proposal, and hopefully having that
completed around mid-year and to submit it to both of the two banks and you'd literally be delaying that
designation by about 6 months. That's staff's recommendation on that item.
Mayor Chmiel: Just a clarification. Then having our existing bank carry that until such time designation is
made?
Don Ashworth: That's correct. The City Attorney. It's recommended the office of Campbell, Knutson, Scott be
reappointed as City Attorney. I think they've done a good job for us. Bond consultant. This office would
recommend reappointing Springsted. Acting Mayor. This is an item that solely is up to the City Council.
Weed Inspector. Under State law the Mayor is officially the weed inspector for the city. I would recommend
1
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
that Public Safety officer Bob Zydowsky continue to be appointed as the Deputy Weed Inspector. Fire Chief is
an item that we typically look back to the Fire Department on. It's typically a 2 year appointment. Jim
McMahon was re-elected to a new two year term by the Fire Department in December of 1993. Last year.
Therefore Jim xvill be serving the second year of his term in 1995. Really no action is necessary. Health
Officer. Dr. McCollum has expressed a willingness to serve as the city's Health Officer again in 1995. He has
held this voluntary position since 1981 and continued appointment is recommended. City Auditors. This is the
third year, 1994, is the last year of a 3 year contract entered into between the city and Deloitte and Touche. In
fact it's the end of a second 3 year contract. During 1994 the Council authorized staff to prepare specifications
to seek proposals for this service in 1995 and that would be effective for the 1995 audit year. We will continue
to pursue that process unless instructed differently by the City Council. The financial policies, as a part of the
audit report, the auditors had recommended that the city adopt financial policies. We have looked to about 10
to 15 different cities for suggestions. We've reviexved these with the various consultants and we would
recommend the adoption of a set of financial policies as has been included in the City Council packet. That
really ends the first of year organizational items Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Is there any discussion on any of the items? The only one I xvould like to
address is regarding Acting Mayor. That one I'd like to have Mike Mason.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I would second that.
Mayor Chmiel: As Acting Mayor.
Councilman Senn: I'd like to talk about (b) and (k).
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilman Berquist: (b) and (k)?
Councilman Senn: (b) as in boy and (k).
Councilman Berquist: I'd like to ask about (c) and (k).
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, go ahead Mark.
Councilman Senn' (b). Official Newspaper. Last year xvhen we took this action on the official newspaper, I
felt we pretty much had an agreement or some type of working arrangement where we were going to start
seeing the Villager get to all the residents of Chanhassen. That is still not happening and I don't know if we
need to say something stronger or do something stronger but I'd really like to stop getting complaints on that.
And I'd really like to see it start happening or change to a paper who can handle it.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I read the article in the paper this last issue, or the issue prior to, indicating that trying
to service all residents within the city of Chanhassen, including the Excelsior zip, the Chaska zip and I don't
think we have any Minnetonka.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I thought there was a comment out on Kings Road.
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Mayor Chmiel: That's about the only area that there is. I think that would probably be a discussion in itself in
trying to make sure that all residents within the city do receive a paper. And we had the newspaper represented
and I see a nod and they will take care of that portion.
Councilman Senn: Okay because the section I keep getting complaints about is that whole section up north of
Lake Lucy that's Excelsior Zip Code. Over off of Galpin and stuff. The complaints haven't changed. I mean
nobody's getting it now that wasn't getting it before and I'd like to see some sort of commitment made that that's
going to be remedied one way or the other.
Mayor Chmiel: I think that's true what I even see on the south side of TH 41. Or TH 7 and TH 41 where the
shopping mall is there. I see them advertising and of course they use an Excelsior location. They don't realize
they're in Chanhassen, or I don't think they do. But it's the same thing with the newspaper. Some of those
same kinds of things with wherever your zip code was. I was in Excelsior previously before they made the
changes within. I think we've tried to make those remedies with the Post Office and the Post Office addressed
that but yet the people are the ones who decide what zip code they'd like to keep for where they're located.
And consequently it came back where they wanted to keep their Excelsior zip because they've had it for a long
time and it takes a lot of different changes, as you well 'know. Drivers license, right down to every credit card
you have. So hopefully with the discussion that we've had, the newspaper will take care of those and make sure
that we get those respective zips. I think probably what we could do, and it's throwing it back onto the city and
it just came to me. On all the water bills that we have, but they don't have respective addresses. I think maybe
we could provide those.
Don Ashworth: Yes, I talked with the editor on this item and he suggested we would provide the mailing list so
what we're looking at is an alternative. He ~vas a little fearful that it might be looked at negatively .... trying to
solicit business type of thing. He would like to see us put a large article into our upcoming newsletter that
would encourage people to call and asked to be put onto the listing. Go through that they are the official
newspaper. That you should try to get that paper so you 'know what's going on, etc and he agreed with that.
And we could do the water bill thing as well.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Don Ashworth: By the xvay, they are distributing 4,500 Villagers each week which is about how many homes
we have so I'm sure we're missing a number of homes but we're also going to a lot of homes.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay Mark, your other item.
Councilman Senn: Let's see, Steve was going to ask about (c) but as I understood that earlier, you're suggesting
tabling that?
Don Ashworth: Yes.
Councilman Senn: Okay, just a clarification, okay. (k), I'm not really prepared to act on this tonight. I'd really
like to see the Council set that aside for a work session. I don't think these, the investment policies serve really
an answer to all the questions nor necessarily are a complete set of xvhat I would like to see as policies so rather
than slam dunk something here tonight, as is being suggested, I'd rather take it off and let's look at it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. What's the Council's feeling on that?
City Council Meeting - January. 9, 1995
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well I think in light of the recent problems that we, as well as other municipalities
have had, it's worth looking at in more depth.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. We've been going through the process of meeting with several people and addressing a
lot of those concerns and items and hopefully within about another 2 weeks I should have some answers back to
Council on this as well.
Councilman Berquist: One of my questions on item (k), I certainly don't have any problems tabling it. Can I
go back to item (c)? The bank?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
Councilman B.erquist: Are you advocating not doing anything? Just holding Chan Bank as the depository for 6
months while Americana sort of becomes qualified?
Don Ashworth: No. Well ;ve develop a request for proposal form so we would, what I would suggest is that
xve go back with Deloitte. They help us in terms of asking questions about the size of each of the two banks.
What are their trust agreements. They put through a request to use a bond.
Councilman Berquist: And what's the advantage to waiting a year to do that? Waiting 6 months to do that.
Why would we not name Chan Bank and then next January bring this up again?
Don Ashworth: Sure. In fact it would make it much easier for staff because then that way we'd start the
request for proposal process probably in September-October, instead of in June. It would be much easier for us.
I just felt that Americana wanted to get a chance at this thing earlier.
Councilman Berquist: His letter was dated the 30th of December.
Don Ashworth: I think it was around December 15th xvhen I first started talking with him. But again that was
really way too late for me to try to come up with answers for the City Council.
Councilman Senn: Didn't he express an interest last year too though?
Don Ashworth: He had talked to me and we were going to get together during the course of 1994 and
determine what might have to be done by them, etc, and then I really never heard from him until the end of the
year.
Councilman Senn: Which may partly be our fault though too because we didn't send out an RFP or anything
though right?
Don Ashworth: Possibly, 5, es.
Councilman Berquist: If you're looking for business, you come to the customer.
Councilman Senn: Well I understand that. The only other thing I was wondering is there necessarily a reason
xvhy we have a depositor3,? I mean a number of cities I'm aware of have multiple depositories for city funds. Is
there any reason why we only have one?
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Don Ashworth: You only have one account. I mean all city business is handled through the one account. I
mean we don't have multiple type of accounts. I mean the HRA doesn't have a separate account from the City
and sewer and water isn't separated from general. It's just one account. And I would highly recommend that
the City Council continue that. I mean if it gets down into a position where you're going to end up wanting to
see the designation go back and forth, then do it over the course of, give one of them the designation for 3
years and then the other for 3 years. I mean ordering all the checks, literally everything that's preprinted with
our account number on it, would end up being changed.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussions?
Councilman Mason: My only comment on that is I think Steve does raise a good point. I does seem like the
middle of December, if they wanted the business, was a little late. I don't, if it's Council's pleasure to table it
and get out the RFP's out, that's fine but Steve does raise a good point on that. I would think if they were
serious about that, they would have started before the middle of December.
Councilman Berquist: I don't see there's any advantage to the city to wait.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. We can move either way. I think I'd like to get a feeling from Council. You've
expressed your opinion Steve. Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'd second the motion that Steve made.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mike.
Councilman Mason: I'm fine with that.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, I don't 'know. To me it's inconsequential. But let's make sure we enter an RFP
process for next year.
Mayor Chmiel: That's going to be a requirement. That's right. And an RFP should be sent out to both of
them. So with that, any other discussion? If not, I'd like to have a motion to accept the organizational items
other than Financial Policies, which will be tabled and be on discussion with a work session. And with that one
change, is there a motion to accept the entirety?
Councilman Senn: I'll move.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, and a second.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adopt the follo~ving organizational items:
Resolution #95-01: Rules of Procedure.
Official Newspaper - The Villager
Official Depositor3, - Chanhassen State Bank
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
d.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
City Attorney - Campbell, Knutson, Scott and Fuchs
Bond Consultant - Springsted
Acting Mayor - Councilman Mike Mason
Weed Inspector - Mayor Chmiel with Public Safety Officer Bob Zydowsky, Deputy Weed Inspector
Fire Chief - Jim McMahon
Health Officer - Dr. McCollum
City Auditors - Deloitte-Touche
Financial Policies have been tabled to a City Council work session.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the following
Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manageffs recommendations:
Resolution #95-02: Accept Street and Storm Drainage Improvements in Bluff Creek Estates 3rd and 4th
Additions, Project Nos. 93-13 and 93-22.
b.
Resolution #95-03: Accept Street and Storm Drainage Improvements in Stone Creek 2nd and 3rd
Additions, Project Nos. 93-17 and 93-30.
Resolution #95-04: Accept Street and Storm Drainage Improvements in Royal Oak Estates, Project No.
93-12.
d. Consider Certificate of Compliance for Oak Ponds, Phase I, Project No. 93-9.
Approve Lease Agreement with Carver County for Winter Storage of Household Hazardous Waste
Material at the Public Works Building.
Resolution #95-05: Approve Property Acquisition Condemnation and Quick-Take of Property from
Lyman Boulevard Reconstruction/Lake Riley Area Trunk Utilities Project No. 93-32.
Resolution #95-06: Set Public Hearing Date to Reinitiate Phase I Galpin Boulevard and McGlynn Road
Extension, Project No. 93-26A.
Resolution #95-07: Approval of Corrected Legal Description for Lot 1, Block 2, West Village Heights
2nd Addition Easement Vacation.
n. Approve Prosecution Contract for 1995.
o. Preliminary Plat Time Extension, Rogers/Dolejsi Property, Lundgren Brothers Construction.
q. Approval of Accounts.
City Council Minutes dated December 12, 1994
Planning Commission Minutes dated December 7, 1994
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Resolution #95-08: Approve Change Order No. 1 to Lake Riley Area Trunk Utility Improvement Project
93-32A.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone here, my next question.
Councilman Mason: I was going to say, I believe there's some people here, or one person here for 3(m). I
wonder if we could discuss that one now.
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
3(m)'. APPROVE JOINT ASSESSMENT CONTRACTS FOR 1995/96 wrrH CARVER COUNTY.
Mayor Chmiel: Charles, do you want to address that one? Or is it Don?
Don Ashworth: Really myself. The contract is really the same as the contract we've entered into for the past
several years. The rate is proposed to go up. I'm son-),, the fees for 1995 are the same as in 1994. A rate
increase is proposed for 1996, which I don't really think you need to act on tonight. Approval is recommended.
Councilman Senn: Well I pulled this item because I would like, basically it's budget time. When we were in
budget considerations and discussions, asked that we really undertake and look hard at the issue of possibly
going to a city assessor as it relates to this function because of the apparent lack of control the city has in this
process and the problems that it creates every year when we go through hearings on assessed values and I'd
really like to make this the year, as I thought xve discussed we were going to, to look hard at that and so I'd like
to see this basically just be a one year contract with no increase in rate and commitment that xve undertake a
study to look at that.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Mark I don't disagree with you but I looked at this as well and have found that we
couldn't really afford to take on our own assessing with an individual assessor at the costs that are being
incurred by the county at this time. But I think as we look to seeing the increases come from the county
regarding assessing, I think then, or maybe even now is to start looking at it and start understanding where our
total dollars are going to be and then move in the direction, whichever is the best for the city. Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I too want to look at the issue and I keep hearing that we can't do it as cost
efficiently. I'd like to see some numbers. And with that study, I'd also like some more information so when we
do have assessment hearings, or when we have our hearings, we can answer people. What their schedule is for
checking people. We hear it's once every 4 years but I want to 'know what percentage of the city gets
reassessed every year. I just ~vant some more facts so we have better answers when people ask us the questions.
I mean I have a gut feeling that we'll come out renewing this contract in subsequent years until we achieve such
growth that we can afford our oxvn but I just want better answers.
Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Don.
City. Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Don Ashworth: I did get an opportunity to talk with Orlin Schafer and he stated that he had gone back to the
County Board really recommending that the Count5, take over the entire assessment process and they would be
looking at that in 1997. If that would occur, you would not have your local board meetings as you had referred
to. It would literally be taken over as a county function. So I think as we move into 1995 and maybe even into
1996, it's going to be interesting to see if the County Board in fact does take over those responsibilities. And I
don't 'know if you would like to get an initial reaction from Commissioner Dimler or not.
Ursula Dimler: Thank you Don.
Mayor Chmiel: If you'd like to make a quick comment.
Ursula Dimler: Oh I guess so. Yeah hi, I'm Ursula Dimler. I'm a Carver County Commissioner. I live at 7203
Kioxva Circle. I haven't had the privilege of looking this over. I came for another issue but we did discuss that.
However, I don't foresee in the future that that would be feasible because we have other entities out in Western
Carver Count3, that are looking also at doing their own. So for us to pull it all together at this time, it would be
really hard for me to... We have hired some other people in that department because of the growth in the
county so I still think at this point that it's more cost effective to do it through the county rather than have their
own. That xvould be my feeling.
Mayor Chmiet: Okay, thank you Ursula.
Councilman Senn: Don, just as a comment though. I did read that in Don's staff report and I think that's, I
guess in concept that's a wonderful concept maybe to look at but I'm not sure it's one that necessarily is in the
best interest of the city and I think it's one that we need to look at. I don't think it's purely a decision of the
County Board making a decision. I think Chanhassen has to be involved in that decision.
Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to just respond?
Don Ashworth: Well I was just asking Roger. If the County did take that over, would we still have the ability
and he responded yes. You could still hold the local board meeting if you so desired.
Councilman Senn: And you can still do your own assessments too, is my understanding.
Roger Knutson: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion?
Councilman Senn: If not I'll move approval on that for a one year contract xvith approving an undertaking of
looking at the cost issues and information issues related to the assessment process.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a second?
Councilman Mason: Second.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the Joint Assessment Contract for one year
with Car,'er Count2,, with the unde~tanding that the issues of cost and information related to the assessment
process will be studied during the next 3'ear. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
VISITOR PRESENTATION: None.
PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF WEST 78TH STREET~ ADJACENT TO
LOT 1~ BLOCK 3~ BURDICK PARK ADDITION~ LAND USE REVIEW~ FILE NO. 94-6.
Public Present:
Name Address
B.C. "Jim" Burdick
Ursula Dimler
Excelsior
7302 Kiowa Circle
Charles Folch: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Staff has received a right-of-way vacation
request from Mr. B.C. Burdick, who is the property oxvner of Lot 1, Block 3 of Burdick Park Addition. This
property is located in the southwest quadrant of West 78th Street and Kerber Boulevard. The newly
reconstructed realigned West 78th Street has created some excess right-of-way adjacent to this property. Staff
has reviewed this request and has concluded that it is xvarranted so long as the necessary drainage, utility and
landscaping easements are granted to protect the public infrastructure that has been placed. As required, all
property owners within 500 feet of this vacation request have been noticed, as well as notice has been put in the
city Villager newspaper. Staff has not received any objections to this vacation request and would therefore
recommend that the City Council approve this request for a vacation of a portion of West 78th Street adjacent to
Lot 1, Block 3, Burdick Park Addition as described on Exhibit A in the attachment. Conditioned upon reserving
or rededicating perpetual drainage, utility and landscaping easements as shown on Exhibit B.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you Charles. As I mentioned, this is a public hearing.
Councilman Senn: Could I ask Charles a question?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
Councilman Senn: In terms of these lots now, and I 'know it gets very confusing down there between that side
and the other side and the actions we took but on this side of West 78th that we're talking about. Okay, in the
original acquisition of the properties down there, I thought we paid something for that right-of-way.
Charles Folch: I'm not sure of that. Typically when the property, I would assume that when a subdivision like
that occurred back then, we typically acquire any necessary right-of-way and easements through dedication with
the plat. Sometime prior to that, that road was actually the County's road and there may have been a time
xvhere the County has acquired right-of-way that if they needed for that roadxvay but I'm not aware that the city
has paid for any property. At least in the area proposed for vacation.
Councilman Senn: Okay. So there was nothing included for that, or with that as it related to the overall taking
down after the larger site and all that sort of thing.
Charles Folch: Not to my knowledge, no.
Mayor Chmiel: That's something maybe you're thinking about the assessments that xvere given on 78th Street
through that particular area.
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Senn: No. I thought I remembered specifically some reference to xvhen that overall taking was
done down there, I thought I remembered a reference to the fact that it also included the right-of-way and that
sort of thing which kind of inferred that that xvas included in the negotiation as well as the purchase price and
everything that was granted. I guess personally I'd love to have the answer to that before you just say vacate it
and send it back so to speak at no cost. Because I mean if you purchase it for something, or purchase some
rights there at some cost, then I think ~ve should recover those costs at least in vacating it back.
Mayor Chmiel: At the same time Charles was indicating that to the best of his knowledge, in doing what's
there, he didn't find any of those things within. So I think it'd be just a duplication again of going through that
process and relooking through it. I think if he's researched it once, I don't 'know if we need to do it twice.
Councilman Senn: And Todd, you don't recall any of that?
Don Ashworth: What you may be thinking about is Mr. James had property on both the north side as well as
the south side. To make that as a large, a single entity development proposal in a site where you could take and
put Target and now the 3 restaurants. We ended up purchasing the piece on the south side, including that was a
part of the overall development package that was down there.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, like I say. I mean it gets very confusing down there because that road has shifted
numerous times. I'd just like, if we do take an action on that, I guess I'd like to see some assurances or at least
contingent upon the fact that we didn't so we can just make sure of that before we proceed. And that's...
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. As I mentioned, this is a public hearing. Is there anyone wishing to address this at
this time? If seeing none.
B.C. "Jim" Burdick: Is it appropriate to say something?
Mayor Chrniel: You bet Jim.
B.C. "Jim" Burdick: We've looked at this.
Mayor Chmiel: Could you just state your name and your address please.
B.C. "Jim" Burdick: Oh. B.C. "Jim" Burdick from Excelsior. I requested this vacating because to make it a
straight line in order...Target store and to Market Square to the east. And staff required...because that used to be
Minnesota State Highway 5. I think the county took it over from the state. And there's a slight advantage to...
advantage to the city because if this is taxed at the same rate...the tax ought to be a minimum of $1,000.00 a
year, which isn't a lot but it's something...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you Jim. Is there anyone else? If seeing none, could I have a motion to close
the public hearing?
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and
the motion carried. The public heating was closed.
Mayor Chmiel: Any discussion of Council? Steve, do you have an3,?
10
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Berquist: I have no objections. 'Right-of-way is unused. It's excessive. The vacation is given to
the east and the west and it straightens the lines out.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Nothing.
Mayor Chmiel: Michael.
Councilman Mason: No comment.
Mayor Chmiel: Mark, anything more?
Councilman Senn: No.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there a motion to accept, or have the proposed vacation as such.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'd move it.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilman Berquist: I'll second it.
Mayor Chmiel: Moved and seconded. Any other discussion?
Resolution #95-09: Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to approve the request
for vacating a portion of West 78th Street adjacent to Lot 1, Block 3, Bu~dick Park Addition as shown on
Exhibit A subject to reserving or rededicating a perpetual drainage, utility and landscaping easement as shown
on Exhibit B. Ali voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING: POWERS BOULEVARD (COUNTY ROAD 17 FROM TH 5 SOUTH TO LYMAN
BLVD) RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT NO. 93-29.
'Public Present:
Name Address
Jon Horn, BRW
Greg Broxvn, BRW
Andrew Olson
Julius C. Smith
Kelly VonDeBur
700 3rd St. So, Mpls
700 3rd St. So, Mpls
8290 West Lake Court
7600 France Ave So, #108, Mpls.
1341 Lake Susan Hills Drive
Charles Folch: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. As many of you already 'know, this is a Carver
County, City of Chanhassen cooperative effort project. At your December 9th regular Council meeting a
feasibility study was included in your packets for your information and you were asked to set the public hearing
for tonight's meeting. It was necessary to prepare a feasibility study and hold a public hearing tonight since a
11
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
number of the office industrial and commercial properties adjacent to the project are proposed for special
assessments. The project engineer, Mr. Jon Horn of BRW is here tonight to provide a detailed presentation of
this feasibility study and it's findings and at the conclusion of Jon's presentation, I have just a few comments to
make before we open it up for public discussion. With that I'll turn it over to Jon.
Jon Horn: Mayor, members of the City Council. The project that we're here tonight to present is a Count3,
Road 17, Powers Boulevard improvement project. The project includes a reconstruction of County Road 17,
Powers Boulevard from Highway 5 on the north end to Lyman Boulevard on the south end, along with a small
portion of Lake Drive. The proposed improvements include the reconstruction of the roadway from a two lane
rural roadway to a 4 lane divided urban roadway with concrete curb and gutter and storm sewer. Again this is
the south end of Lyman Blvd running north to Highway 5. As you can see from this exhibit, there's a number
of, there's-turn lanes at all the intersecting roadways as well as the full median along the length of the roadway.
The roadway is currently built within the western half of the right-of-way and the proposed improvements would
include primarily widening to the east. In addition to the roadway improvements there's an 8 foot wide
bituminous trail proposed along both sides of the entire alignment all the way from Lyman Boulevard to
Highway 5. In addition to the pathway improvements along the roadway, staff has requested that a couple of
additional pathway segments be added into the project. The first being, extending a pathway from Powers
Boulevard over to Dove Court and the second being a link from the existing trail along the back side of Lake
Susan Hills Drive over to Barbara Court to provide a nice continuous link through the Lake Susan Hills
development. In addition to the roadway and pathxvay improvements, utility improvements are also proposed as
a part of the project. The first utility improvement I'd like to discuss is water main. There's currently an 18
inch trunk watermain that runs along the west half of the alignment down to a point about here. Staff has
requested that that 18 inch trunk be extended further to the south to Lyman Boulevard and be stubbed out at
that location for the future reconstruction of Lyman Boulevard. Storm sewer improvements were also included
as a part of the project. Again the roadway, in it's current condition is a rural section with ditches. In order to
create an urban section with concrete curb and gutter, storm sexver is proposed along the entire length of the
roadxvay. The storm sewer system is proposed to drain on the southern end of the alignment to a proposed
treatment pond and a wetland in this area. Through the middle portion of the alignment, the storm sewer system
will utilize two existing storm sewer trunks and tie into them. And along the northern portion of the alignment
water will be discharged to an existing treatment pond in the south corner of the Lake Drive and Powers
Boulevard intersection. As a part of the storm sewer improvements, a storm water quality pond will be built in
this area to provide some treatment for that runoff. And then in addition, the roadway impacts approximately 1
1/2 acres of wetlands, which has previously been presented to the Council and wetland permits have submitted
and received approvals from the DNR, Army Corps as well as the City Council as the LGU for the ~vetland
impacts. And the mitigations for the xvetland impacts are an excavation for wetland mitigation in this area as
well as the construction of an outlet structure in this area to back additional water up in this area and improve
the quality of this wetland. The project also includes street lighting improvements along the roadway. As a
part of the feasibility study we're presenting a street lighting scheme that pretty much provides continuous
lighting along the roadway. That results in a light at approximately every 150 feet along each side of the
roadway or staggered at 75 foot intervals. After further discussions with the County and City staff, reviewing
the spacing of the street lighting, to maybe make it remain more consistent with other street lighting in town.
Rather than have a continuously lighted roadxvay, maybe we go with pockets of light which is similar to what
most of the other streets in town are tike. And as a part of the project xve're also providing some aesthetic
improvements, landscaping. The feasibility study provides a couple different alternatives. After having a
neighborhood meeting and reviewing landscaping alternatives with the county and city staff, we're leaning more
towards Alternative B which is the more extensive improvement. What that alternative tries to do is highlight
areas of existing trees as well as provide other trees along the alignment for screening purposes. I guess an
12
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
important thing to know about the landscaping, the proposed landscaping improvements is Carver County has
requested that no landscaping be installed within the medians or along the boulevard areas for safety purposes.
So the landscaping proposed as a part of Alternative B is all behind the pathway, out of the boulevard and out
of the median areas. The proposed construction costs for the improvements that I just presented is
approximately $3.1 million. That's broken down into watermain improvements, storm sewer, roadway, pathway,
street lighting, landscaping for approximately $3.1 million. Of that $3.1 million, approximately $870,000.00 is
proposed to be assessed to properties on the northern portion of the alignment, commercial industrial properties.
The remaining $2,212,000.00 would be funded through the joint city/county agreement. And the proposed
assessments would be to the properties along the northern portion of the roadway, like I just said, which would
be the heavy dashed line show a front footage assessment for the roadway improvements which would be to
these properties. Storm drainage would be assessed to properties on an area basis as identified by the shading
on this... This assessment methodology is consistent with the assessment methodology presented in 1992 when
this'project was previously considered by the Council. And based upon that methodology, we've prepared a
preliminary assessment role for each of the properties to be assessed. And again I would just comment that the
assessment methodology and the amounts are fairly consistent with what was previously presented in 1992.
And based upon the proposed improvements and our desire to try to go under construction this summer yet,
we've prepared a project schedule. Here xve're at January 9th with the public improvement hearing. We're
proposing to have City approval of plans and specs on March 27th with a bidding in April and award that at the
City Council on May 8th with construction late May, ending in November. I know Charles is going to talk a
little bit further about some bonding issues and maybe there might be a need to push this schedule back but this
is the schedule that we originally looked at trying to meet. And I guess just a couple of design issues that I
wanted to bring up with Council before I complete my presentation. I guess there's primarily three issues that
xve're trying to resolve as a part of the final design stage. One would be the street lighting. I talked a little bit
about that already where the feasibility study presents continuous lighting scheme and we may want to back off
of that a little bit to remain consistent with the other streets in town. The second issue being the landscaping
design. How extensive do we want the landscaping to be along the roadway. How important is that? And then
I guess the issue about the County not wanting to see a landscaping within the medians and the boulevard areas
and just so everybody's aware of that. And I guess the third issue would be the method of construction of the
roadway. We've basically got txvo alternatives that we're considering for the final design. One would be to
close the roadxvay to thru traffic and detour traffic over to TH 101. One of the advantages or some of the
advantages to that alternative would be the construction schedule would be a little bit shorter. It'd be a little
easier to get everything done this summer under that scheme. Number two, we'd save a little bit of money.
There'd be a little bit less traffic control. Maybe in the neighborhood of $100,000.00 to $150,000.00 for
additional traffic control. Some of the disadvantages, we'd really have to review the operation of this existing
intersection of Lyman Boulevard with TH 101. How's that going to function and what do we need to do there
to make that xvork? And item number two, I guess there's going to be, obviously going to be some user
inconveniences for people that are used to using County Road 17 and instead have to go over and use TH 101.
The alternative to that would be to build the road~vay under traffic. The way that would be done is to maintain
the existing roadway in service to build the eastern half of the roadway. Once the eastern half of the roadway
was done, xve'd switch traffic over to the east half and rebuild the west half and we would have the ability to
maintain this for thru traffic through the entire construction process. I guess some of the disadvantages for that
one, again increase construction cost. Increased construction schedule but the biggest advantage is you don't
have the inconvenience of people having to go over to TH 101 and you don't have potential problems with that
existing intersection of TH 101 and Lyman Boulevard. So I guess with that I'd like to complete my presentation
and turn it back to Charles.
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Charles Folch: Thank you Jon. Due to the size of this project in terms of dollars, and it will be necessary for
the city to actually bond for this project before we let a construction contract. And the City Manager has
provided some information regarding the financing bonding issue in his commentary and it's anticipated that a
report addressing these issues in more detail will be completed within a month. So it is therefore recommended
that until these findings are noted in this report, that action accepting this feasibility study and officially
ordering the project be tabled until that information is 'known, which we can bring back to you at a later date.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. As I mentioned previously, this is a public hearing. Is there anyone wishing
to address this at this time? Yes sir. If you could just state your name and your address please.
Andrew Olson: Andrexv Olson, 8290 West Lake Court and I just question spending much more county money...
at this time when there's nothing for it to go. No place xvhere this road is going in. They want to bring it south
but I.haven't seen a comprehensive plan for whether they're going to have it connect to TH 212 or if that gets
done eventually, if it does come through there. And why not an emphasis on trying to get this traffic onto TH
41. If the State can upgrade TH 41 or whatever, why are we having a road that makes so many jogs when the
traffic flow should be TH 5 to TH 41, straight south. We're going to have an access to 169, etc, etc. I also
question spending that much money...on lighting xvhen other roads I don't see that are that well lit. It just seems
to me lighting it for nothing. And I haven't heard any projections yet on how much traffic will go through
there. I went to that meeting, the public hearing on the proposal and nobody had any answers for me. How
many cars a day would be going through there. How many at rush house in the morning, how many in the
evening. The speeds they'd be going. I didn't have any answers on that and if nobody 'knows hoxv many cars
are going to be going on there, no guess...xvhy are we building it then.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't 'know if Roger's able to address this in regard to the traffic flow. Unless you can quite
it right off the top of you head. Roger Gustafson is the County Engineer for Carver County. But I thought we
did have some specific total flows running up and down those specific roads, and I know you have them in your
back pocket.
Roger Gustafson: Good evening Mayor...I didn't expect to be addressing you this evening but I surely agree
with the comments made about the...TH 5 to TH 41. We are really supportive of improvements on that corridor
and will continue to press forxvard with MnDot as far as programming in expansion of those txvo roads in
Chanhassen and xvesterly towards Victoria and Waconia. And moving forward xvith details, as I understand it,
we xvill be developing a finite projection with traffic on this corridor and basing actual structural capacity of the
roadway on that figure. We have some ballpark figures as far as what was developed in our Eastern Carver
County Transportation Plan in 1990 as a guide... As far as the lighting, that's really a review item for the city
itself. Landscaping has been mentioned and I have responded in a manner that prefers not doing any, xvhat I
call heavy landscaping in the median as a initial...of this project, initial construction because I am very
interested in the resulting sight lines, safety, visibility of vehicles at alt intersections...corridor and would prefer
it being initially constructed at least without, or with as little obstruction in the median area as possible...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Charles.
Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, I can address the lighting issue. The project proposed to construct two neighboring
community trails, if you will along both the east and west sides of the boulevards and if you compare this to
similar facilities along Kerber Boulevard and Audubon Road. Whenever we have a trail facility on typically a
collector road which is wider than a residential street, we do provide the necessary lighting. Not only for both
14
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
..
the street but also for the pedestrian use of those trails to make them more usable, more hours of the day. So
that's the main purpose for having the lighting behind this.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Plus the safety aspects of it also. Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to
address this? This is your opportunity. If seeing none, can I have a motion to close the public hearing?
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Mayor Chmiel: As you noted by the Manager's comments, because of the cost of what's here and what our
ability to bonding might be, I think it probably would be best to find out once whether or not we can really
afford to pay a million dollars or not. Or wherever it's going to be going less than that particular amount. So
Steve, do you have any.
· .
Councilman Berquist: If you're advocating tabling it, I'm certainly for that.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: A couple issues, just to give my opinion. I guess first of all, why are we having a
trail on both sides of the road? Is that typical? Is it because it's a large collector street or?
Charles Folch: That's correct. It's a major corridor or roadway where you're going to have a median.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: So it will be tough to cross.
Charles Folch: Tough to cross and you've got extensive neighborhood development along both sides of the
corridor and you'd hate to have people trying to cross to get over to one side and with the speeds that you're
going to have the road, we hope to have the road posted at a 45 mph speed. It's higher now but we're hoping to
get it down to 45, and that's still quite fast for crossing pedestrians that are unprotected with a traffic light.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. Lighting, I would certainly agree that more, less is more. Staggered along.
Landscaping, I would certainly encourage you to work with the county. I mean we've got some fairly long
stretches without an intersection. There's no reason why we can't have plantings in it. Who's responsible for
maintaining that median in terms of mowing? Is that the County or City?
Charles Folch: Well, in the past this rural section has been the County. I would guess that Roger would lean
towards negotiating with the city if we have some special elements like that which they aren't necessarily
equipped to maintain, that we would end up maintaining those.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. And my final comment is about how ~ve route traffic. In thinking of, I take
that back way every day and TH 101 is awfully curx3, and we've got that large Klingelhutz subdivision that
xve'll be constructing this summer. That's going to be a nightmare if we try to route traffic on TH 101. If we
go up to Audubon, first of all most people are over shooting where they want to go and you've got the problem
of the Highway 5 and Audubon turn there so I'm not sure closing a road is really the option. Maybe for a week
at most but not for the entire duration of the project. That's it.
Mayor Chmiel: .Okay' Michael.
15
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Mason: People will be having a discussion about whether that road should be closed or not
because I hear we can save that kind, and I don't dispute Colteen's points. Heaven 'knows but Jon, did you say
$100,000.00 to $150,000.00 we could save if we shut that? And how, ballpark, what would that shorten
construction time? I know who knows but.
Jon Horn: It's difficult...
Councilman Mason: I -kno~v weather and all that stuff. Boy I think, you -know I agree with the land, more is
better in terms of landscaping and I know Alternative B is more expensive if we shut the road down and I think
that's something xve'll have to discuss at a later date. I certainly agree with tabling. How wide is the median,
do you 'know off hand?
Jon Horn: 20 foot.
Councilman Mason: 20 feet, okay. Yeah, we'll talk about landscaping later I suspect. I agree with Colleen
about the lighting. Less is better as far as I'm concerned. I understand the other concerns but I question at 2:00
in the morning whether there are going to be a whole lot of people using that trail. But that's something we'll
be talking about later. Yeah, let's table it now but there certainly are some questions that need to be discussed
here.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: Number of people in the neighborhood down there refer to this as the 4 lane highway to
nowhere I think. You know a number of questions were really raised up front in terms of the 4 lanes going in
here and hoxv that was going to affect other traffic patterns in the area and I thought we were going to address
and get answers to some of those as it related to the feasibility study and I didn't see it addressed in here at all.
Remember there were some concerns from people basically. You know if we put this big 4 lane in there, is it
going to encourage a big dump of traffic off TH 5 there rather than going out to TH 41 and how is that going
to affect beyond this new 4 lane, which is a very small distance. And areas around there and there was a fair
amount of concern on that and I'd like to see those issues still addressed. I share Colleen and Mike's comments
on the excessive lighting. I guess I'd personally like to see some rationale or explanation as to why the only
parties being assessed here are the commercial properties. I guess I don't understand that. I mean commercial
properties are the highest taxpayers already in the city and here xve're doing a project and we're saying, let's nail
them for a million bucks and let's leave everybody else alone. Especially when all those commercial properties
are served by other routes. I jus would like to 'know what the justification is basically to singling them out and
assessing them for it. And then last but not least, the same concern I had mentioned a number of times before
on other projects. I still fail to understand why it should take $1 million in administrative costs to do a $3
million project. I still have real trouble swallowing those kinds of numbers as it relates to administrative
overhead on a project. And I will continue to keep raising the problem over that. That's it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you.
Councilman Mason: Mr. Mayor. Could I make one quick comment?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure Mike.
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Mason: I think Mr. Olson raised some good points too. I do think we need to look into the future
a little bit here and I'm hearing what, 35,000 by the year 2010 in the city of Chanhassen. It may be a 4 lane
road that goes to nowhere now but how many years down the road xvill Lyman have to be changed from a rural
to an urban.
Charles Folch: Well the current schedule calls for 1996.
Councilman Mason: Yeah.
Councilman Senn: Well and again, that's the study that I thought we were going to get into will explain all that
and show the interim affect and I think the people should be showing that or they're going to continue to be
concerned, is the only point I'm making.
Councilman Mason: Right.
Don Ashworth: I think I could respond to Councilman Senn's assessment question, if you'd like Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Chmiel: Would you please.
Don Ash~vorth: Okay. I think in most of our neighborhoods, especially where there's been a collector in the
area, or at least some of those we've kind of gotten ahead of the development. So for example before they
subdivided along Kerber Boulevard, we were able to tell the developers how much money that they would have
to pay and they actually paid that before the houses went in. In a similar fashion we've made sure that the
businesses along there 'knew that there would be an upcoming assessment at some point in time so they're a~vare
of that. But as it deals with the residents areas, especially south of the creek and down to Lyman, you can be
assured that every house adjacent to Powers Boulevard would be coming in here and telling you that that
roadway was a detriment to them and not something they should pay for. And then if you did an area wide
assessment, like we did with Minnewashta Parkway or Bluff Creek you get, those were tough hearings. I mean
they xvere tough, tough hearings for what, $180.00 per household or something. I mean it really didn't generate
all that much money but we needed to do it to meet the 20% assess requirement for the bonding. At least for
those projects. So that's the reasons we didn't bring back the residential section. I think that the room here
xvould just be filled. People would not xvant to take and pay for that upgrading and I think the Council would
have a real, real tough time with it.
Councilman Senn: Don, don't get me wrong but that's what I was suggesting. What I was asking is I guess
why aren't we treating the commercial property owners the same way as we are treating the residential ones.
Don Ash~vorth: Well the other part along.
Councilman Senn: I mean I'm not suggesting we assess the residential one. I mean my understanding of this
project from day one is it was going to be part of this deal that Chanhassen was doing for the County as part of
this reciprocal agreement. So I mean I'm just saying, why isn't that going all the way and covering the total
cost of the project?
Don Ashworth: Well, in a number of the commercial agreements, such as Empak have already, and noxv I'm
talking about the contract between the HRA and Empak, have already dealt with the assessments as they might
be proposed here. Any of those properties along there would be eligible under the city's special assessment
17
City Council Meeting - Janual3, 9, 1995
reduction program. Any of the commercial properties. But you do have some parcels in there that haven't
developed and one of the reasons that you originally put through the special assessment reduction was to
encourage that development. And not to have an individual owner just speculating on the property. And so by
putting in the assessment and then offering basically an incentive back if they develop the property, it's kind of
a win/win situation. So I think.
Councilman Senn: They can apply under the same program and get the, okay.
Don Ashworth: Whereas again some of the parcels that have made a decision that they just don't want to
develop at this time, they're going to end up having starting to pay on those specials.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other questions? Mark?
Councilman Senn: No.
Mayor Chmiel: ...we see eventually under Appendix "A", detailed cost estimates for the proposed
improvements, which is a blank page that I have anyway.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I think you have your own blank page.
Charles Folch: Which schedule are you missing?
Mayor Chmiel: This one right here.
Charles Folch: It does have the detailed breakdowns. It should be in the middle. Yeah, last page is the
assessment roll. If you go to the middle of the report, you'll see the different schedules for the, you have a bad
print on that one?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. I think so.
Charles Folch: Okay. Well we'll see to it that you get the correct page.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I'd appreciate that.
Charles Folch: ScUrry about that.
Mayor Chmiet: The other thing is, Mark had brought up the fact that being a total estimated administrative cost
of $925,000.00. That seems a little healthy for that particular project.
Charles Folch: Typically that's about right in line when you do an improvement project, you're looking at about
25%. The engineering fees, depending on the level of difficulty with designs could run anywhere from 12% to
16%. You've got your legal administrative. You've got land acquisition. You've got the bond holding costs.
All those things you add 1% here, 2% there and before you know it you're up to that 25%.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Because I see in the land acquisition easement costs to be roughly about $5,000.00.
Charles Folch: Yeah. This particular project they'll be relatively minimal.
18
Cit3~ Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to see that just probably a little more clarification.
Charles Folch: Break out on that?
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Charles Folch: Okay.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Can I have a motion for tabling?
Councilman Berquist: I'll motion approval of this.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Second.
Councilman Berquist moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to table approving the feasibility study on
the Powers Boulevard (County Road 17 from TH 5 South to Lyman Boulevard) Reconstmction Project 93-29
until the bonding report is completed. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
PRELIMINARY PLAT TO CREATE 48 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND 30UTLOTS; REZONING OF 39
ACRES FROM A2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATE TO RSF, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY; A WETLAND
ALTERATION PERMIT FOR MITIGATION OF PONDING AREAS; AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR ALTERATION OF AREAS WITIAIN A FLOOD PLAIN; LOCATED NORTH OF THE TC & W
RAILROAD TRACKS~ WEST OF BLUFF CREEK AND EAST OF TIMBERWOOD ESTATES AND STONE
CREEK; CREEKSIDE ADDITION (FORMERLY HERITAGE FIRST ADDITION); HERITAGE
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY.
Public Present:
Name Address
John Dietrich, RLK Associates
Lloyd Grooms
John Dobbs
Jim Manders
Tahir Khan
900 Mainstreet, Hopkins
1691 Lincoln Avenue, St. Paul
645 5th Avenue, Newport
Park and Recreation Commission
2040 Renaissance Court
Bob Generous: Thank you Mr. Mayor, Councilmembers. This project has been in process since early last year
in one form or another. Initially it was part of a mixed development. Thereafter it came back as a separate
single family planned unit development and now it's coming in as a separate straight subdivision. The project
site is located south of Highway 5 in the Bluff Creek corridor. It would receive access for the property will be
through the extension of the Stone Creek Drive roadway which will come up through the Stone Creek
subdivision and eventually connect to the South Highway 5 frontage road. The street alignment, in reviewing
this plat, staff was looking at 3 different alignments. Possible alignments for the roadway. The first alignment
that xve looked at xvas through the PUD process was to follow the Bluff Creek corridor. It xvould provide the
city xvith a sense of ownership of the land. However this alignment was done within the PUD as an alternative
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
that staff recommended. The developer was opposed to this idea but he went along and provided us with a
schematic to show how that plat would work. As I said they ~vorked within the confines of a planned unit
development. Through the use of smaller lots he was able to shift his, the number of lots to the west side of the
property. However, in reviewing the alignment further we believe that the benefit resulting from the open space
corridor within the Bluff Creek area would be better through a more intimate experience that could be created
through the trail system and xve're willing to compromise to go along with the applicant's curvalinear street
design which ran down the middle of the plat. A third alignment would be to make a sharp turn to the north
and try to follow the NSP corridor immediately adjacent to the Timberwood Estates. However there are some
design problems that would result from that and we didn't believe that the city would gain very much from that
sort of alignment. So staff is supporting the applicant propose a street alignment. The applicant will be
extending the Upper Bluff Creek utility, sewer utilities through this plat within the road right-of-way. This will
eventually hook into servicing the elementary school site and properties to the north of Highway 5. Within the
plat, part of the approval is for a wetland alteration permit. That is a result of the roadway alignment through
the southern part of the plat and on the northern end of the plat and there's a small wetland located in the knoll
area of the plat. They're also requesting a conditional use permit to alter within, to do excavation and grading
within the flood plain. This is so they can put in a ponding area for storm water quality improvements and also
to provide a platform for a trail segment. The major issue that we had and it took many revisions was
regarding minimizing the grading of this site. There's approximately a 60 foot elevation change within this
property with the high point located in the north central portion of the site and the loxv point adjacent to the
Bluff Creek corridor. In reviewing the plat staff was unable to come up with feasible alternatives to provide the
roadxvay alignment and reduce the grading. We were able to make some suggestions that minimizes the grading
but because of the steep topography changes, it was impossible for the developer not to do mass grading of this
site. The final issue that staff had ~vith this development regarding the parkland dedication. The developer is
showing on this plat a dedication of park trail along the Bluff Creek corridor xvithin the wetland area. Staff is
recommending that the city accept that dedication and also require the dedication of additional land in the
southeast corner of the site. This is a heavily wooded area and it will provide a unique environmental
opportunity for residents of this development and the rest of Chanhassen. For the land that is in excess of the
dedication requirements, the city would be willing to purchase or condemn the property. Staff is recommending
approval of the rezoning of this property from A2 to Residential Single Family, which is consistent xvith the
comprehensive plan land use designation for low density residential. We also are recommending approval of the
subdivision, the wetland alteration permit and the conditional use permit subject to the conditions contained in
the staff report.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Is there any questions that anyone may have of Mr. Generous? Okay. Is the
applicant, would you like to do your presentation?
John Dietrich: Thank you Mayor. Councilmembers. John Dietrich, RLK Associates. I will be representing the
Creekside Addition for preliminary plat tonight. With me also is John Dobbs of Heritage Development who
will also address the Council... First off I'd like to introduce that I'm a registered landscape architect and project
manager for Creekside Subdivision. We have worked with Heritage Development and the city on this area for
close to 9+ months in order to come up with a quality residential subdivision that we feel meets all the
objections of the city and those of the developer. We're pleased to be able to present tonight the preliminary
plat that's in front of you and we will ask for your concurrence with the plat as is shown in the packet in the
staff report. Again the applicant, or Heritage Development is asking for a preliminary plat approval for 39
acres, a rezoning from A2 to RSF and a Wetland Alteration Permit and Conditional Use Permit for placing of
fill and excavation in a wetland. We are pleased to be able to present this and I would like to go over to the
overhead to present a few more maps that would help in order to orient yourself with the site and also to... If I
20
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
need to use the microphone and please, thank you Bob. The site as illustrated is outlined in the red. That is the
39 acre Heritage parcel and I've used as a background here the 2000 Land Use Plan from the City .of
Chanhassen. It's identified for Single Family Residential development within the entire parcel except for the
very eastern comer of this site and with that we are looking to provide a quality development that addresses the
issues of the Bluff Creek corridor and the open space and sensitive areas that are existing within this 39 acre
development. This larger scale plan shows north up. Timberwood Estates to the west and the Bluff Creek area
to the east. The red areas identified on the map illustrate the areas that are currently wetlands as delineated by
Franklin Svoboda and Associates. The blue areas are proposed storm water ponding areas for water quality and
the yellow area is a 100 foot setback from the center line of the creek, which all of these structures are proposed
to stay behind. Along the tributary through the Timberwood Estates there would be a 50 foot setback from the
center line of that tributary for any type of housing development. All of the plans will address the sensitive area
of no grading within 50 feet of the creek corridor, except where we're proposed to cross the creek and the
tributary and we will not have any structures within 100 feet of the center line of the creek. In addition we are
proposing to continue the Bluff Creek corridor with a 2 acre park dedication within the confines of the corridor.
The proposed dedication would be a linear park system that would mn from the south where the existing
underpass for the Twin City and Western Railroad exists at this time and would be in conformance with the
Comprehensive Plan which would identify the trail system running north and south along Bluff Creek from the
Minnesota River up towards Highway 5 and beyond. All of the lots shown within this development are over the
minimum 15,000 square foot. The average lot size is 21,000 square feet which is a change that we have put in
since coming before you last time when it was a conceptual PUD. That ,,vas addressing 53 lots. We have
dropped it down to a 48 lot subdivision in order to reduce the density, increase the lot size and work on the
transition between the single family homes of the Creekside subdivision and the Heritage, and the Timberwood
Estates. The proposed grading plan is shown to identify where the areas of sensitive slopes are and those would
not be graded. We would be proposing to have approximately a 15 to 20 foot cut up in the northern area of the
slope with a bench for the roadway to follow through the site. The lower end of the site has significant
woodlands within it and we are proposing to have custom graded homesites within the wooded areas. Those
would have approved grading plans prior to any construction going in within the woodland area. Our intent at
this time would be to grade the roadway and right-of-way only and to continue the road coming from the Stone
Creek subdivision and eventually tying into the east/west frontage road that would be part of the city project
running between Galpin Road and Audubon Road. One way to illustrate the proposed grading plan, we've done
a computer model that identifies the existing site. This is the Creekside Subdivision if we were standing -
basically on the southeast comer of the area across the creek. The intent was to show the hillsides that are in
there, the creek as it runs through, and the wetland areas. The proposed view identifies how the road would
come across and follow through the site with two benches of homesites that would be on either side of the
roadway while protecting the wetland areas and enhancing the creek corridor' with a trail system running north
and south. The landscape plan is also part of the woodland management plan. It is proposed that we will
install 212 overstory trees that would enable this site to be in conformance with the woodland management and
city codes for landscaping. The lower end of the site where the significant woodlands are, we have identified
the 60 x 60 foot pads and have calculated those as a worst case scenario in' terms of the number of trees that
would have to be replaced if in fact the entire 60 x 60 pad was eliminated. With the woodland management
plan we have designed a linear boulevard system along the main access road north to south and have also added
significant plantings along the east, excuse me the ~vest side of the homes between the Timberwood Estates and
the proposed single family homes. We feel this meets the objectives of the Planning Commission which we're
concerned with the transition between Timberwood Estates and the proposed single family homes. We've also
identified two cross sectional areas. A to AA and B to BB. This cross section identifies cross section A where
the proposed grade is the darker line versus the existing grade. The intent is to show how we transition down
from the homes in Timberwood Estates, coming down the slope so the views from Timberwood xvould be
21
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
maintained. We also are showing the location of the proposed landscape plant materials along the eastern side,
a cluster of trees right down the center of the site, and the location ;vhere the proposed grade would meet the
existing grade at the north and where ;ye would come down and meet the proposed park area along the eastern
side of the subdivision. We would like to emphasize that the proposal in front of you has gone through a
number of transitions and...over the last 9 months and the plan before you takes into account the curvalinear
element of the roadway and of a comprehensive trail plan for the eastern side of the site which abuts the Bluff
Creek corridor. We are intending to protect the wetlands. Enhance the storm water runoff and maintain the
wooded area with single family lots individually designed and graded so that we would minimize the disruption
within the southern 1/3 of the site. This plan meets code in terms of it's layout and it's design and we fully
intend that it exceeds code wherever possible. We intend to deed the 2 acre of parkland which is code
requirements. Anything over 2 acres is in excess of the code for parkland dedication. We have within the site
over 10 acres of area that would become essentially public open space. If you look at the wetland area, the
storm water ponding area and the parkland dedication as potentially adds up to 10.2 acres from the 39 acre site,
not including the 60 foot roadway. So we're excited that this plan identifies a trail system within the Bluff
Creek corridor and utilizes the public open space and protection of the wetlands. The Bluff Creek corridor has
many unique characteristics and the trail system within the parkland dedication will take advantage of those.
Again this colored plan is the same plan that we have been looking at but with the woodland areas in the south
is identified how these homes would be proposed to be cut into the woodland areas with the areas completely
around the outside of the lot to be maintained in the over story coverage. The trail system ;vould follow and go
through the woodland areas. Come out, have an opportunity for picnic areas at central areas of the site. Access
to the north/south roadway. Access also to the project side that's proposed to be along the entire western side of
the road while...between the storm water pond and the large wetland to the east of the trail. Lastly it will come
up to the north and wrap around the site utilizing...where we can have the trail fit in there. There are a few...up
there that would have to be sensitively put in and also protection of a few of the large... We're looking to have
a linear park system in conformance with the comprehensive plan so that we have an opportunity for
enhancement and access to the Bluff Creek corridor. With the tree preservation and the 212 trees...woodland
management code, we are in compliance ;vith that and agreement with city staff as to the number of trees that
are necessary. In addition to the additional trees that are placed along the Timberwood Estates edge for the
transitional area. And we would also look at in the final roadway design to shift the roadway to the west side
of the right-of-way to try and avoid as much impact as possible to the wetlands on the south side of the site.
We are excited and pleased to present this plan and I would appreciate the opportuni .ty to address or answer any
other questions or comments you have on this site. At this time I'd like to, if there are any comments, I'd like
Mr. Dobbs...
Mayor Chmiel: Does the Council have any questions at this time?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well one quick one, yeah. Do we have a sidewalk along the roadway?
John Dietrich: Yes. There's a sidewalk along the ;vestern side of the road. I believe that's already there in the
Stone Creek subdivision.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: So kids can Walk to school that ;vay.
John Dietrich: ...and it xvould continue all the way up.
Councilman Berquist: I had noticed that there ,,vas a sanitary sewer that came right through that tributary that
you called it, that xvould access, that gains access to Timberwood.
22
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
John Dietrich: Yes.
Councilman Berquist: Is there anyway, I mean xvhat's that going to do to that little ravine and that creek? Is
there any way to get to Timberwood besides that way?
John Dietrich: I would like to say there's another opportunity to do that. City staff has looked at other options
with that sanitary sewer and is their opinion that this is the lowest area and the only point feasible without a lift
station. It is not in an area that we would like to see a sanitary sewer go, but we will have to work with staff as
to if that's the only location.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Charles, what's the complication of bringing it off of Galpin? Lift station?
Charles Folch: Exactly. A lift station. It would be very difficult to serve the elevations.
Councilman Mason: How expensive is a lift station?
Charles Folch: Depending on the size of course and it's depending on the area that needs to be serviced but,
even a smaller lift station, by the time you get the structure in and all the controls and everything, you'd be
looking at $40,000.00-$50,000.00...
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Which would be directly assessed to the residents?
Charles Folch: Well actually, no. That would be included as a part of, we've established the uniform trunk
assessments and basically that would fall into that category.
Councilman Berquist: There's nothing that goes through Stone Creek that can be accessed through that
Timberwood Road that was terminated there?
Charles Folch: Not to serve the entire area.
Councilman Berquist: Not big enough?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: It seems real close.
Charles Folch: Unfortunately the elevation drops for the parcels going to the east so again you'd be looking at a
lift station to pump it back to that access point at Stone Creek and then taking it down to the southeast. They
could come up the creek corridor, or come up that kind of ravine, wooded ravine corridor even though it's...very
valuable natural element. It's not uncommon, typically when you go to put in sewer lines they typically follow
these creeks and ravine corridors to get everything to drain down to it naturally by gravity. The overland flow
so typically sewer lines tend to follow those type of corridors if they're going to be served by gravity.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: But how much damage xvould you have to.
Charles Folch: Well there certainly will be tree loss running through that corridor. There's no doubt about it.
We can take special construction measures such as using a...trench widths and things like that but I won't fool
you, there will be tree loss getting equipment in and out of there.
23
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilxvoman Dockendorf: And does that come between the lot lines?
Charles Folch: We would propose to bring that between the common lot lines.
John Dietrich: In the final plat we would have the lot lines so they would be right along...
Councilwoman Dockendorf: So between...does it follow that one or does it go directly through Cohen's
property?
Charles Folch: Actually it would follow the common line...proposed development but it actually would be...
Councilman Berquist: Is there a road easement between, no? Is there a road easement on lot line 7 and 8 on
Oakwood Ridge?
Councilxvoman Dockendorf: It's an impossible road alignment.
Councilman Berquist: Well I'm not suggesting a road. I'm just wondering if there's another access for sanitary.
Charles Folch: Existing road easement now?
Councilman Berquist: Well it could be less damaging if torn up. And there's an existing easement now. I don't
know if it would work.
Councilxvoman Dockendorf: I think actually it goes straight through. I can't see the numbers on that but.
Councilman Berquist: Here's 7 and 8. Right through there.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: My understanding is it goes straight through 8.
Councilman Berquist: That'd be a tough easement.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah, right through a household. That's why I said it was an impossible one.
Kate Aanenson: I think it's somewhere through there.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh it is through there?
Kate Aanenson: I think so.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: And that's really.
Bob Generous: But I don't believe it was ever recorded. It was made a condition of the plat but it's not on any
map that we have.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: You'd really be, you'd be running within 10 feet of a house with this.
24
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Charles Folch: Do we have an overhead on the topo out there as far as the grading? The grading could be hurt.
Elevation wise, you're starting to leave that island in the southeast comer of the area. I think most of the...going
down to the southeast.
Kate Aanenson: To the West?
Mayor Chmiel: Any other questions? If not.
John Dobbs: Good evening. My name is John Dobbs. I'm the representative from Heritage Development. We
have some of the extra 3-D views that just happen to be laying around. I'll make my comments very brief. I'd
just like to touch on a few points in the staff recommendations. In particular on page 28. I believe it was
number 21. I understand the need for individual grading, drainage and erosion control plans and that's
acceptable. I'd just like to reiterate...that we've already accounted for...going to replace those trees whether they
get taken oi- not... Number 25. Number 25 is about this...and during the various redra~vings that we've done and
the various presentations to the staff and Planning Commission, it's been drawn on our plat both ways. As a
public and a private and I'm amenable to either or. We have it as a private. It would be best if we could make
it public. If we made it public, then I guess we'd go back to private. Either way, as long as... Number 26 is
what we've been talking about, the sanitary line. One part I think that was forgotten was also that we can
perhaps if we go out in the field and put the sewer pipe in, if that's what the pleasure of...it's possible, I think
Charles would...try to maneuver around some trees and try to save some...and we'd be happy to try to do that...
There are some things that perhaps could be done...and also obviously there's an issue of credit given back to us
for the... And then I'd like to turn back to page 26 and talk about number 9. From the very beginning Mr.
Generous has mentioned that this has been going on since early last year. From the very beginning of this
process there have been discussions about the linear park system that is adjacent to Bluff Creek and they can
make use of the open space that is wetlands and...in the Bluff Creek corridor. By this linear trail dedication is
actually 2 acres, which is signified by this dark line right here and the brown that goes up and it's adjacent to
the creek. According to the number of lots we had...and this actually dedicates 2 acres the way it sits. During
the Planning Commission there was some discussion about acquiring the extra land that has been mentioned but
there's a few alternatives that were demonstrated...ability to try to purchase and...purchase of property. Todd
Hoffman and myself, Roger Knutson... had a meeting...week ago, about the potential purchase. I'll take some
responsibility for that not being a very productive meeting. I don't, it just wasn't very productive. I walked
away feeling that it wasn't productive. I wouldn't want to speak for the other side but I would assume that was
a mutual feeling on that side. I then recontacted Roger Knutson about trying to talk about the issue of purchase.
What I believe the property was worth. What the city was offering. And it seems to me that there's a very
large gap bet~veen what the city believes and what I believe it's worth. I think we have an honest disagreement
on that point. I don't see that we are going to be able to get across that gap...very large chasm and I don't see
how we can get across it so the option to purchase... That being said, if this dedication is accepted, this is 2
acres. I've like to...that I'm xvilling to go along with that. One of them is there's a 1.4 acre outlot down here
which happens to have a storm water pond that they're upgrading as part of this plat...fairly significant wetland.
It has a...There's a lot of trees around the outside of it that don't shoxvn up on this particular drawing. So there's
1.47 acres of wetland... There's also a large wetland down here of 5.3 acres... Inside that is a significant stand
of bottom land hardwoods...that are fairly significant in height somewhere out in here, which I think enhance the
overall open space corridor system. So even though the park dedication in itself is only 2 acres and it's dry
land, along with that, if the dedication is accepted as I've proposed it, then the outlot of 1.47 and this outlot of
5.3, we'd be able to...we aren't given credit for under the park code but I think greatly enhances the overall feel
of the...and unless there's specific questions of me, that's all I have.'
25
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Mayor Chmiel: Are there any questions?
Councilman Berquist: What would you do with the outlot if it xvasn't approved?
John Dobbs: I just requested the plat be submitted to be approved as it is. A 48 lot subdivision with the 2 acre
of trail...from the outlot to the wetland.
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe I've got a question. Todd, in that particular area, that is a park deficient area2
Todd Hoffman: Correct.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Maybe I could ask a question of the presenter. And you don't have to answer if you
don't'want to. The adjacent properties that are to this, being a developer I would presume that you would look
at acquiring or maybe optioning some of those properties accordingly or in and around. Do you have any other
options within that particular area for additional properties?
John Dobbs: I own, Heritage Development owns the property, do xve have a bigger picture of that? Heritage
Development o~vns this property here, up and back across to Timberwood. And you did see that in the original
proposal which was the Chanhassen, part of the Chanhassen Corporate Center so we already are a fee owner. I
don't have a.
Mayor Chmiel: Hoxv many acres might that be?
John Dobbs: I think it's 21 acres across the creek. 5 acres to the north. The creek, there's a pod of dry land
here and the frontage is proposed to go this way. About 5 acres here and I believe 21 acres...
Mayor Chmiel: Todd, did you have anything additional that you'd like to say or mention?
Todd Hoffman: If you'd like, I'll go over a somewhat brief synopsis of the Park and Recreation Commission's
reviexv of the item.
Mayor Chmiel: Why don't you do that.
Todd Hoffman:. First off, we do have Commissioner Jim Manders with us here tonight if you have questions of
the commissioner. He'll be happy to ansxver those as well. I think you get the impression that this has been a
tough nut to crack for everyone that's been working on it. We're still looking for a bigger plot here and that's
xvhy ~ve're here this evening. Figure it's up to the City Council. If we go back to March of 1994, that's the first
time the Park and Recreation Commission went ahead and looked at a conceptual plan. At that time they had
some past history in order to go ahead and benefit from in their review process. Most recently the Meadows at
Longacres, which abut this corridor north of Highway 5. At that point Bluff Creek spreads out into the
headxvaters really of Bluff Creek, and in that particular instance the city was granted a trail easement at no cost
to the city for construction of the initial phase, if you could call it that, of the Bluff Creek trail. As a part of
that application and then the city is also receiving full park and trail fee credits so that applicant or developer
saxv the trail aspect of the city's comprehensive trail plan in a different light in that particular example. The
second one occurred just south of here in the Bluff Creek Estates area where the entire corridor, the entire creek
corridor, including the area of high and dr3~ land or dry land if you will, necessary for construction of the creek,
was dedicated to the city by the applicant in lieu of trail tee credit. So they xvere given trail fee credit for that.
26
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
:.
In response to those two past experiences, that's about the how the Commission started off. They looked for a
trail easement, dedication from the applicant and they would certainly take a look at some trail fee credit for
that. In response to that the applicant came back to the commission or came into the commission with the idea
that parkland dedication or the dedication of 2 acres of a long, linear strip, it's been referenced as a park system.
I would certainly not call a 20 foot wide strip of land, the length of the Heritage proposed plat, as a park system
but simply a component of the Bluff Creek corridor. Looking to enhance the corridor further we took, a Bluff
Creek charette was initiated. The first meeting of that was held on May 26th of 1994. Out of that meeting
came the concept of a boulevard aligning with the creek corridor allowing all residents of the city the ability to
go ahead and benefit from the tree corridor by being adjacent to it in their vehicles as they would travel north
and south on that roadway. That position was held by the city for a time, a month, month and a half with the
applicant as Bob mentioned. They did go ahead and respond with a concept plan showing that type of
application. In further negotiations we said they would, throughout that entire time they said they would like to
retain their walkout lots if you will, backing up to the creek corridor. So again in further negotiations we said
we would back off that position but we would like to retain a portion of the wooded property in the southern
region of the plat described as we've seen tonight both in verse and then in pictures. The reason for doing that
are numerous. First and foremost is the fact that you'd like to provide diversity along the creek corridor and
that the preservation of woodland in the city of Chanhassen is coming to the forefront in recent times. It also
allows for a more contiguous trail connection under, to the viaduct under the railroad corridor as presented by
the applicant. You would need to negotiate about a 90 degree turn coming out of that tunnel which obviously
limits your sight lines and does not allow for crossing of the viaduct. There's also an existing farm road that
passes through that area of trees, which would serve nicely for that trail corridor. We recognize that the
addition of this property puts us up and above the amount required for par'k_land dedication and so we offered to
go ahead and purchase that property at a fair market value. That is where we're at this evening. We have not
come to a conclusion on where that, what the purchase price of that property would be. Thus the City Council
needs to go ahead and address that issue. Whether or not you would like to back the recommendations by the
Park and Recreation Commission and the city Planning Commission in regard to going ahead and obtaining the
4 acre area comprised by the, xvith the 4 lots in the southern region which is east of the road. The Park
Commission feels very strongly about that, as did the Planning Commission. So we'd just like to hear your
opinion in that regard.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any questions?
Councilman Senn: Todd I want to ask you...that 4 acres that you're recommending, how is that to be utilized?
Todd Hoffman: It'd be preserved as open space with a trail corridor running through it.
Councilman Senn: Okay, so it's really visual ambience kind of thing. It's not any kind of active park use?
Todd Hoffman: No, not whatsoever. In fact it's simply an addition to the creek corridor similar to one obtained
by the city south of this property across the railroad tracks. The triangular shaped piece of property which was
a part of the Chanhassen Business Center. When the Chan Business Center came in, that was thought to be the
number one amenity as a part of that creek corridor, which could benefit the public use of the corridor so it was
retained as well. This is a similar type of application.
Councilman Senn: But with that kind of a price tag? I mean does it really bring you the added value one way
or the other? I mean with the trail going through the way it's being suggested on the plan, I mean it seems like
you're not getting a big trade off one xvay or the other. I mean I'd rather see a dollar amount like that go into
City Council Meeting - Januars, 9, 1995
meeting some of the park shortage problems in terms of finding some more productive parkland and putting it
into productive use. It just seems like that becomes a rather high price tag for a little, and I don't mean to be
facetious but in my mind it starts to split hairs and say, boy that's a lot of money to pay for a little bit better
ambience because you're running a trail through it because by the plans I see most of that ambience being
maintained anyway in relationship to that wooded area and everything. And the housing pads being help_ed
forward...
Todd Hoffman: Sure. Probably 5 years ago you wouldn't see this recommendation coming forward from the
Park and Recreation Commission and Commissioner Manders can fill you in a little bit more on the feelings and
the desires coming out of the commission. The fact is that the preservation of treed areas, the preservation of
what you see in the corridor today as it stands, to preserve a part of that for the future of Chanhassen, today I
can sit here and say that it'd be worth ever5, penny and that only becomes an easier phrase to express each year
you go down the line. So 5 years from now the pain ~vill be gone in it's totality but the pleasure of retaining
those trees will be there and it will be even more enjoyable than it is today. So time makes the heart grow
fonder and that's one xvay I can try to explain it to you here today that in my opinion it's worth the price and
that will only be more true as time goes by.
Councilman Mason: Does Park and Rec have the money to buy this land?
Todd Hoffman: It has not been a budgeted 1990, we can't predict whether or not it was going to occur or not
so it's not budgeted as a part of the 1995 CIP but a budget amendment can occur under the guidance of the City
Council and the current CIP does hold the money to go ahead and make this action.
Councilman Mason: So what did you just say? Do you have the money or not?
Todd Hoffman: We have the money. We spent $175,000.00 in 1994 and xve bankrolled $500,000.00 so.
Councilman Mason: So the money could come out of your budget?
Todd Hoffman: Correct.
Councilman Senn: At the expense of what else did you have planned for it?
Todd Hoffman: What else do we have planned for that?
Councilman Senn: Yeah. Is there anything that will take a back seat as a result of that?
Todd Hoffman: Not that has been identified. A major component is the acquisition of the Minnewashta West
Park on Kings Road which has got a price tag of about $250,000.00-$300,000.00 for that additional 8 acres. So
that's where the other excess, if you want to call it that, has been dedicated to.
Councilman Mason: You 'know this is a real major philosophical issue, and you 'know we're talking legacy.
We're talking who's going to care 100 years from now. Who cars now. It certainly is true, once that, once
those homes are built, that spots gone forever and I, that's a real tough one. I think xve need to think long and
hard about that. I mean I don't know if now's the time for comments or not but this is, I think one of the better
presentations we've had here. Well should I just keep going or should I zip it for now?
28
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Mayor Chmiel: Go ahead.
Councilman Mason: It's not my zipper tie, it's my wood tie so I can xvear it tonight. I think, my opinion is this
a very well conceived plan. I 'know there's been some friction. You know when isn't there? I hear what Mark's
saying. Well, we got the trail, and that's going to look real nice. I was out there over the weekend. Boy, it's a
pretty spot. And it's still going to be pretty when those homes are there but as, I don't know, as we look down
the future I, well I want to 'hear, I've got a bunch of other questions to ask but I think Mark essentially we're, I
mean this is kind of the crux of the issue here on those.
Councilman Senn: I wasn't trying to comment.
Councilman Mason: No, I know. I know but it just, I mean this is the thing that I've been thinking most about
but we'll get back to that later. I'll be quiet for now. Sorry.
Mayor Chmiel: There's a lot of philosophical things you can think about.
Councilman Mason: Boy, on this one there sure are.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there anyone wishing to address this proposal at this time, before we bring it back to
Council? Is there anyone here?
Jim Manders: My name is Jim Manders and I'm a member of the Park and Recreation Commission. I just
would like to comment that the commission is totally in favor of the tree preservation site as part of the Bluff
Creek corridor. A few months ago we were at this very site in a joint meeting with the Council and the Park
Commission, looking at development and...and the Bluff Creek corridor is a major component in our
development plan as it ties in with the school and it being a creek corridor through the entire length of city.
And preservation of that tree site, in lieu of a road alignment where one would have a view of that...I think
would be a great help. I would go with preservation of that tree site primarily because of the trail access along
the wetlands. Anyone that would like to view that wetlands would have access to use the trail. But if we put
houses on the tree site, you're foregoing what is...so I would pose that as the primary concern with what we
have in the trees...
Tahir Khan: My name is Tahir Khan and I'm one of the owners in Timberwood Estates... I'm going to say this
proposal is an improvement on the past one. Some issues still remain in my mind, which is maybe you can
clarify them. The house I'm in right now is Lot # 13 and there's an issue of a drainage pond that is shared
bet;veen Lot #9 and Lot #13. And the water kind of collects on that pond and drains straight to the east. I've
asked in the past to make some...to make these homes, two homes don't get the water that...
John Dietrich: John Dietrich. Our intent would be that we would grade into the property and remove the...from
walking the site it's our evaluation that the...picked up from the plows. They've been plowing fields for.., that
that would be taken down so that the grades would allow a swale to run behind the home and down towards
the.
Tahir Khan: And I don't know if the detailed grading map, the water never did go this way. The water runs
straight east. So I don't know, what kind of grading you're planning but in order for this water to drain to the
creek, you'll probably have to grade much heavier than it was graded before we...or whatever reason there's a
slight valley from here that runs straight east.
29
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
John Dietrich: The grade will floxv towards the creek and it will also flow...
Tahir Khan: Okay. From this property...a little bit before going down and the xvater has no hope of reaching
this...heavy rain, the water cuts straight east.
John Dietrich: I can blow up that area and I'd be happy to talk with you and show how we...
Tahir Khan: Okay. In the last year I have asked if anyone was interested during the rainy season, it's very
obvious drainage...that shows a small trickle of water.
John Dietrich: If we had to we could put drain tile and draw it down towards...
Tahir Khan: The other question maybe, or it is the right time to do it noxv I guess. Is the fact that the
discussion on the sewer system, when xve purchased, or when I purchased the property back in March everything
xvas tree...on my property signifying which trees would be taken down and have to go through a normal
approval through the city of Chanhassen and even though technically the idea makes sense that to...but it will
have a great, a bigger impact on my property, # t2 and a corner of # 14. There are some trees that are more in a
creek area. They're like 3 or 4 foot diameter trees and the creek itself meanders as most creeks do. I can't
imagine that anybody can...~ve all see more and more trees disappearing each year, as each year passes. As a
matter of fact I commend the Council's proposal to try to keep this area as a tree growth...cut down trees to
bring in the sewer system, even though I don't knoxv if too many people who would want sewer at this point in
time. Who knows 5 years down the road... So I don't know what avenues...I xvould have but I'm going to try
and do whatever I can to prevent that from happening. It doesn't make sense to, the creek runs about here. So
you're literally destroying a substantial amount of trees and these are... If you folks had walked the area, you
might have a feeling a little bit of... I'm sure there's ways to, somebody was saying you could redirect it but, if
you've seen the creek, it meanders and you'd have an awfully curD, sewer that went around the creek. That's
basically my main questions. Otherwise I think this is a lot better than the previous proposal. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Okay, anyone else? If not, we'll bring it back to Council for, sure go ahead. By
the way, I missed you this morning at 11:30.
John Dobbs: I called about 10:00 and they said you weren't here yet.
Mayor Chmiel: Well I was around but not directly here. But I was here at 11:30 waiting for you and Todd and
I did go out and look at it so.
John Dobbs: I'm son3,. My day got very complex. John Dobbs with Heritage Development. Just a quick
clarification. From the very beginning of this process we, and when the charette was done and then the road
was requested to be pushed all the way to the edge, we did a drawing of that. We did a PUD drawing that...
All I'm asking again is that any excess that you're buying by the city, any excess land, any excess construction
costs, that we financially don't suffer.., it's just from my initial contacts with various people and my initial
contacts with staff, it just seems like a very large gap that I'm not sure we can get across and I just...if they're
going to do it and can agree on price, that's great. If we can't agree on a price where there's no hope that xve
can come even close to agreeing on a price, then I guess it just doesn't seem fruitful to continue...thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks John. I think some of the things that we have worked with other developers who
have come in and just automatically say I'd like to dedicate x number of acres for your park within a particular
30
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
area. Only because I think that they feel that by providing those additional things, additional amenities to that
particular area and probably a little better for the people looking to buy land within that particular area as well.
It enhances their buying position and normally some of those developers also would just pick up those costs and
spread those costs accordingly and come back with that and it didn't put it way out of the ballpark. So I guess
maybe having discussions xvith you and some of the problems that have come up, it's probably a little different
than most developers that have come in within the city to do their proposed developments. But with that I'll go
back to Council. Do you have any questions Steve?
Councilman Berquist: Regarding the sewer into Timberwood. Are there plans? I mean that thing, Timberwood
was put together what, 5 years ago?
Charles Folch: Probably 10 years ago now.
'Councilman Berquist: And each lot was developed with, 10 years ago?
Mayor Chmiel: At least.
Councilman Berquist: Each lot was developed with it's own septic, it's own water.
Charles Folch: That was rural zoning.
Councilman Berquist: So the proposal to bring this line in does nothing except plan for the future and the
future is ~vhen?
Mayor Chmiel: Well I would imagine probably when those septic systems fail.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: When a certain number fail, you take a vote of the neighborhood.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, that's the xvay we set it up. That we would respond to petitions from the neighborhood
for rezoning. Otherwise it's the zoning's in place so they have to maintain their 2 1/2 acre minimum.
Councilman Berquist: How long does a septic system usually run?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: 15-20.
Charles Folch: Steve Kirchman's gone now. The building officials gone now but I think, I'm trying to quote
him back from previous discussions on this. I think the new ones, if they're maintained properly should go
about 20 years unless there's problems with the drainfield but they should be good for 20 years.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: And everyone has two sites.
Councilman Berquist: That's the only question I guess I have on the sewer. John, when xve xvere out walking
the site on Saturday, did you express interest in proceeding with the condemnation procedure if we xvere unable
to come to an agreement on dollars?
31
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
John Dobbs: I would have no objection to moving this along however it takes for everybody to get it resolved.
I think that... We've been here for a long time. I'd just like to see us move forward...if xve can't come to terms,
perhaps that's the best way to solve it is going through the...
Councilman Berquist: Okay. And the last comment in regards to the woods, I had the same exact thoughts. Is
it of value to the city to spend that kind of money for a 2 1/2 acre piece of woods and finally I decided that yes,
it is to the benefit of the city to spend that kind of money for those woods. I remember when I was a kid there
was plenty of playgrounds and plenty of places to play organized sports in Minnetonka but you spent as much
time in the woods doxvn the street screwing around as you did down at the ballfield. And I think we're all in
the same position. And that piece of woods would serve not only this development obviously but it would
serve Timberxvood as well as Stone Creek and the adjacent properties. I think it is of definite value. That's the
end of my comments.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well, it's a very, very unique piece of property. In fact it reminds me a lot of the
Ryan piece xvith the rolling hills, the woods. The street running right through the stand of trees and we have
the complicating factor of the creek. It's a difficult piece of land and it calls for more unique planning for it and
I think we're 3/4 of the way there. My main concern for the Timberwood residents are the McCurry Hafner
piece of property and Gestach which were I think the most severely impacted. Their back yards are really
looking over 5 or 6 homes easily. So I xvould like staff to pay close attention as to what that landscaping buffer
will be. I understand that mostly from the schematics you did, they'll be looking at...
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, the Planning Commission had that same concern and they did request additional
landscaping be placed on the site plan.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: So if you're comfortable with it and just pay attention to that. I personally will not
approve even a preliminary plat without seeing those 4 homes to the east removed. Yeah, east. That should be
parkland. I think calling a 20 foot trail easement a linear park is silly, for lack of a better word. I think we
need to do more negotiations for parkland. I don't want the sexver stub there, to put it completely bluntly. If we
have to run it up from Galpin or through, from Stone Creek, I think that's the way to go. I mean for the same
reasons xvhy we want to preserve the wooded stand in this development. Running along a creek site is really
destroying not only one person's piece of property but all of Timberwood is surrounded by trees but we have
only.this one site of trees internal and I think that's worth preserving. Just an administrative note. I did look on
the notification Kate and it doesn't look like anyone at Stone Creek was notified. However, I'm not certain that
homes there are built that far east to this point so on future considerations of this plat, let's make sure that Stone
Creek, if any.
Kate Aanenson: There are some under construction. I'm not sure they're occupied yet.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah. At least let the builder know so... You 'know I don't like the grading cuts
but that's one of the compromises we make with a difficult piece of land like this. In the best of ali possible
worlds, this would not be zoned for residential but I think we're doing a good job with it given the constraints.
I guess that's all I have to say.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael.
32
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Mason: First of all I certainly concur with Steve's comments. This is not a case of penny wise and
a pound foolish. 2 acres of trees is 2 acres of trees and that's a real nice spot. That is one of those things that
once it goes, it can never be replaced and I, your comment about messing around in the woods is well taken.
And I think that's an important part of it. I really do. I'm really concerned about that -knoll on the John, what
end is that that we walked on that's going to disappear? Is that the south end?
Kate Aanenson: North end.
Councilman Mason: Yeah, the north end. Boy, you 'know we got how many months and how much angst did
we spend With topography on the Ryan development and here we're saying well, what the heck. Let's take 60
feet out. I mean that's ~vhat it's going to be right. Well 20. I mean okay. 20. I mean 20 feet, holy moley
Rocky. That's a lot of feet. I think at some point we need to start talking about, you -know is one of the
reasons we're going up and over that hill is because we refuse to do anything in the wetland?
Kate Aanenson: No. We laid out several different xvays of evening using private drives. Staff worked on
numerous alternatives. The applicants worked on numerous alternatives and there just really wasn't a lot of
flexibility based on any road alignment. Whether it was the main collector went towards Timberwood or the
others, there just wasn't a lot of flexibility as far as design.
Councilman Mason: So pretty much everyone's in agreement on that one huh?
Kate Aanenson: Yes. It's similar to the Ryan situation.
Councilman Mason: Well but everyone wasn't in agreement. And everyone is here.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: But you had more land to work with there.
Councilman Mason: Yeah right. You had a lot more land. Okay I would, I don't feel quite as strongly as
Colleen does about the sewer but I'm close to it. So I would continue to like to look at other possibilities other
than going through that ravine with it. This is again maybe, a philosophical issue but I'm hearing an awful lot
about buffering Timberxvood and that's right and I agree with that but I know for example ;vhen Triple Crown
Estates went in next to, along Woodhill there in Carver Beach, nobody said anything about buffering. And are
xve too concerned about buffering? I'm just throwing that out. I don't want to get into a pitched battle tonight
about that. But that is already a pretty wooded area in there and I mean this is a done deal and I'm not, we
don't need to change anything now but as we move along here, this issue of buffering I think needs to be talked
about. I certainly share, I would like to see the developer and the Mayor and the city or whoever it takes to see
if xve need to go through condemnation, so be it. I sure would like to see us do something other than that and I
do, I think in all fairness to Chanhassen, the development and etc, 20 feet isn't much of a linear park. Todd, off
the top of your head, the linear park down in my neck of the woods along Lotus Lake there, how wide is that?
Todd Hoffman: 120 feet in most areas. 40 to 120 to...
Councilman Mason: Okay. So I certainly don't degrudge the developer putting the trail in along there and
doing that easement but I hope that both sides can talk about this some more. I mean I want to move on it. I
xvant to, let's move on it but I hope we can talk some more about that issue.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
33
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Senn: As I indicated to the developer before, or when we talked before tonight, I really was
leaning and still lean strongly to maintaining that section of xvoods. At the same time though, this becomes a
difficult site and, xvell we know it's a difficult site I should say I guess from a lot of ways but one of the ways
it's a difficult site is the sheer size of the site, or the limited size of the site. And the expense of improvements
or public improvements to do that. I mean there's all costs with that and there's cost...and everything else. I
mean the issue of ho~v much open park land gets dedicated in other developments is largely predicated on how
much land they start with and what they can distribute that cost over. There's not a whole lot of room here to
distribute it across. I would support basically a position from the city standpoint that unless we're going to
change the ordinance to do it differently, you 'knoxv the 2 acres meets the requirement and we ought to enter
into condemnation or whatever process to work out with the renumerations for the wooded land to keep that for
park purposes. I guess really just the one other comment I had was, I really wanted to compliment staff and the
developer because I think going back to when this started out, this has real come a heck of a long ways and I
think it turned into what I'm going to say, a rather superb result given what there is to xvork with. And so I
guess I'd really like to again compliment staff and the developer. I 'know there's been a lot of give and take on
both sides of the deal and I really think it's where it's got to be and I think all the issues have primarily been
resolved. I think we really just need to get on with it and let the condemnation process or whatever resolve the
issue...That's it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. t guess I'm not going to go into reiterate what just about everybody has said here. The
only thing that I was wondering with that sewer portion, has there been other areas that have been considered?
And if so, what were the dollars costs between one to the other.
Charles Folch: We do have in the file, staff has looked at I think probably 4 options for providing future
service for Timberwood. If you so wish, we could certainly pull that information together and get that back to
you either inbetxveen now and the time of final plat or at the time of final plat.
Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to see that.
Charles Folch: To give you the options...provide that information.
Councilman Senn: And do you have costs on those...
Charles Folch: I don't know if we do but we will certainly put costs in there.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Trees are a precious thing within the city, as everyone has said and it is. More
specifically where it's in and adjacent to Bluff Creek. I think just what Steve said is what I remember in our
area that we lived. Three of my sons lived in woods. The only time they came home was for dinner,
unfortunately. And they ate like horses. But it is something that's sort of a neat thing and they live those
memories even yet, and my oldest son is 34. He just, you can listen to them sometimes talking and some of the
things they did make me wonder too but that's besides the point. But anyway, getting back into this. Okay, I'd
ask for a recommendation. We have four specific things to go through. One is the rezoning. The subdivision
segment. In addition to that, the conditional use permit as well as the wetland alteration permit.
Councilman Senn: I'll move approval with the.
Mayor Chmiel: Now just let me throw one more thing in. There xvas also discussion of the different conditions
contained. I don't see many of these as a given problem that was brought up by John. Item 25, 26.
34
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Senn: ...that those were all resolved. I didn't really hear any issues, other than the one over the
condemnation.
John Dobbs: Yeah, the only one I guess I'd like to know is about number 25. Whether it should be a private or
public cul-de-sac...
Kate Aanenson: We can work that out at the time of final plat, unless you have specific.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that can be all worked out before it comes back. Okay. And also the rezoning from A2
to RSF. Wetland alteration permit to fill or alter wetlands and conditional use permit for replacement of fill and
excavation within a flood plain. Each of those as indicated within the staff report for that. Did you move that.
Mark?
Councilman Senn: Yep. I move it and with the caveat that Charles give us back those options by the final plat
time with the costs attached to them. And that the city undertake maybe a final attempt at negotiation. If not,
proceed with condemnation on the wooded property.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there a second?
Councilman Berquist: I'll second that.
Mayor Chmiel: Discussion. Okay, Mike.
Councilman Mason: Well I just, now where do we stand then with, I just want to make this real clear. Where
do Ave stand with the sewer going along the ravine?
Councilman Senn: It's still an open issue.
Councilman Mason: It's still an open issue, alright.
Councilman Senn: And that doesn't impact anything the developer is doing at this point.
Councilman Mason: Right, right. Okay. That's, okay.
Councilman Berquist: Specifically we're talking about Block 2, Lots 8, 9, 10 and 11, right?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Two comments. Condition 21. I'd really like to see the lots spelled out so we
knoxv what we're talking about. Which ones we're talking about. And just another comment, when we see this
coming back for final, I don't want to see those four lots there. I want to see that as open...
Mayor Chmiel: I'm sorl-y, I didn't get what you said the last part of it.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: When I see it come back for final, I don't want to see those 4 lots there.
Councilman Senn: Oh yeah, that's already in the motion.
35
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Bentuist seconded to approve Rezoning #94-4, rezoning 39.5 acres from
A2, Agricultural Estate to RSF, Residential Single Family Residential, consistent with the City of Chanhassen
Land Use Plan and approve Preliminary Plat of Subdivision #94-7, Creekside Addition, subdividing 39.5 acres
of land into 44 lots and 4 outlots subject to the plans dated November 8, 1994 and subject to the following
conditions:
The applicant shall attempt to retain the natural topographic features to preserve the rolling terrain effect
and drainage characteristics with the final grading plan.
2 A woodland management plan will be required as part of the platting process.
· Revise Grading and Drainage Plan to indicate lowest floor elevation, top of foundation elevation and
garage floor elevation. Revise the Grading and Drainage Plan to show standard designations for
dwellings. This should be done prior to final plat approval.
Submit street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division for review prior to final plat
approval.
5 Submit street names to Chanhassen Fire Marshall for approval.
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 safety operated. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance Section 9-1.
Submit plans to Fire Marshal shoxving the connection to either existing or proposed streets at the north
end or south end of the proposed road.
8. Fire hydrant locations are acceptable.
9. Park and Recreation conditions as follows:
The land bounded by Bluff Creek on the east, the railroad on the south, the extension of Stone Creek
Drive and Outlot B on the xvest, and the arm of Bluff Creek on the north be shown as parkland. Said
property to be purchased through a combination of park dedication, fee credit and cash. If a
resolution cannot be reached on this item, to proceed with condemnation.
b. A 30 foot trail easement shall be dedicated along the Bluff Creek Corridor/wetland complex along the
north and east portions of the plat.
The alignment of the 8 foot bituminous trail be amended to reflect the direction given the applicant
by staff specifically that the trail shall depart the creek corridor enter the parkland and meet the road
extension at the southern wetland prior to its connection with the railroad underpass. Said trail to be
constructed with the first phase of improvements completed by the applicant xvith a lump sum cost
for the trail being reimbursed by the city. Note: The applicant shall supply the city with three
quotes for the construction of said trail xvith the final alignment being staked for approval by the
City's Park and Recreation and Engineering Department prior to construction.
36
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
.,
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
The applicant shall revise the development plans to include a 100 foot setback buffer around Bluff Creek
and a 50 foot setback buffer along the tributary to Bluff Creek.
All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-
mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with
the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 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 new developments. The plan shall be submitted to the City for
review and formal approval by the City Council. Type III erosion control will be required adjacent to all.
wetlands except where storm ponds will intercept runoff prior to discharging into the wetlands. In these
areas Type I erosion control is required.
All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City's
Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and utility plans and specifications shall be
submitted for staff review and City Council approval.
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 storm ~vater calculations for 100 year storm events and normal
water level and high water level calculations in existing basins. Individual storm sewer calculations for a
10 year storm event betxveen 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 with the terms of the development contract.
The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Carver
County Watershed District, MWCC, Health Department, PCA, DNR, Army Corps of Engineers and
MnDot, and comply with their conditions of approval.
Prior to final plat approval the applicant shall submit to the City soil boring information. On lots with fill
material that have been mass graded as part of a multi-lot grading project, a satisfactory soils report from
a qualified soils engineer shall be provided to the Building Official before the City issues a building
permit for the lot.
The appropriate drainage and utility easements should be dedicated on the final plat for all utilities and
ponding areas lying outside the right-of-xvay. The easement width shall be a minimum of 20 feet.
Consideration should also be given for access for maintenance of the ponding areas.
18. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within right-of-way areas.
19.
The lowest floor elevation of all buildings should be a minimum of 3 feet above the high water level
calculated according to the shoreland ordinance guidelines.
37
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
The proposed storm water ponds shall be designed with 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. The storm
ponds shall be constructed xvith the initial site grading.
Individual grading, drainage and erosion control plans will be required for each wooded lot prior to
issuance of a building permit.
Water quality fees will be based in accordance with the City's SWMP. If the applicant constructs the
water quality ponds as proposed, these fees will be waived.
Water quantity fees will be based in accordance with the City's SWMP. Storm sewer trunk fees will be
evaluated based on the applicant's contribution to the SWlx~ design requirements. The fees will be
determined by staff upon approval of the construction plans.
The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction
and shall relocate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer.
The southerly cul-de-sac shall be re-evaluated for a private driveway in an effort to pull the house pads
away from the tree line. A turn around in accordance xvith the Fire Marshal's recommendations shall be
provided.
The applicant shall be required to extend an 8 inch sanitary sewer line to the westerly edge of the plat
along the Bluff Creek tributary (Lots 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25, Block 3).
The northerly proposed interim storm pond shall be shown on the grading plan. Details such as contour
lines and the outlet control structure shall be included.
The north/south street shall be extended through to the frontage road within three years after the final plat
is approved. The applicant shall provide the city with a financial security to guarantee the roadway
extension will be completed. A temporary cul-de-sac (42 foot radius) shall be constructed until such time
as the roadway is extended. At that time, the temporary cul-de-sac shall be removed. A barrier shall be
erected at the end of the paved right-of-way. A sign indicating that THIS STREET WlI, L BE
EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE" will be erected upon the barrier. The developer shall file a notice in the
chain of title of each lot notifying each owner that the north/south road is to be extended in the future.
The trail alignment around the xvetlands (Bluff Creek corridor) shall be determined in the field after
xvalking the site and consulting a soils engineer.
The final plat shall dedicate the appropriate utility and drainage easements for access and maintenance of
the storm sewer lines as well as ponding areas and wetlands. The wetlands and ponding areas may be
deeded to the city as outlots as xvell.
The applicant shall employ the use of retaining walls along the east side of the southerly creek crossing to
minimize tree loss.
Ad.iust the lot lines for those properties that abut the Bluff Creek tributary to use the tributary/bottom of
ravine as the lot line.
38
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
33.
The applicant shall investigate modification of the landscaping plans to further intensify planting along
the northern Timberxvood property line to enhance the screening effect from existing Timberwood
development, particularly those dwellings at 8001 Acorn Avenue and 2050 Oakwood Ridge.
34.
Applicant shall adjust the alignment of the roadway at the southern end of the parcel to adjust the
roadway alignment at the southern end of the parcel within the right-of-way to minimize the impact to the
existing wetland in that area.
35. Staff will present to Council the different options and costs available for sewer extension to Timberwood
at the time of final plat.
All voted in favor and the motion carded unanimously.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Berquist s~conded to approve Conditional Use Permit #94-4 to permit the
placement of fill and excavations and alterations within the flood plain subject to the following condition:
The applicant shall comply with the wetland fill/excavation and wetland mitigation conditions as stated in
Corps of Engineers Section 404 permit. Mitigation work shall be implemented prior to or concurrent with
wetland fill activity in future phases of the projectl All mitigation work shall be limited to the Bluff
Creek corridor and not in the wetland located at the sduthwest corner of the site.
All voted in favor and the motion carded unanimously.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Berquist seconded approval of Wetland Alteration Permit #94-4 to permit
filling and replacing wetlands on the site subject to the following conditions:
All buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked by the applicant in accordance with the City's ~vetland
ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and will charge the
applicant $20.00 per sign.
Wetland buffer areas are required around the wetlands in accordance with the City Wetland Ordinance.
The applicant shall revise the development plans to include a 50 foot buffer around Bluff Creek with a
100 foot building setback and a 10 to 30 foot buffer with a minimum average of 20 feet around the
tributary to Bluff Creek xvith a 50 foot building setback.
All voted in favor and the motion carded unanimously.
REVIEW OF LAKE ANN PARKING FEES.
Todd Hoffman: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Thank you. Section 14-59, Parking Permits of your city
code requires that Lake Ann Park fees be established by resolution each year. So following each summer
season an annual report of gate attendant activities, gate receipt activity is prepared. That's presented to the Park
and Recreation Commission in the fall and is then reviewed by the commission in order to make a determination
or to at least initiate the discussion for the subsequent establishment of...fees. Those items took place at the
November and December meetings by the Park and Recreation Commission during 1994. As you may be
aware, the debate over the Lake Ann gate program is spirited and lively on an annual basis simply because the
number of public comments which are received both by commissioners, Council members, staff members and
39
City Council Meeting - Januar5, 9, 1995
then obviously the first source of attack, the gate attendants or the employees that work the gate. So xve receive
a number of comments throughout the year. Specifically, the negative comments which we hear are, this is just
another user fee. We've already paid taxes for these services so why are you charging us again. And when we
have out of town visitors, our parks are free. Speaking specifically to most municipal parks, why do we have to
pay to get into yours? On the other hand, it is a positive, it has a positive impact on the city because it is a
revenue source. It grosses about $25,000.00 a year, netting approximately $15,000.00+ on an annual basis. It
creates some employment for the city of Chanhassen, specifically our youth. However, now with Target and
Byerly's and Festival, we're not quite as worried about that as we were 6 or 7 years ago. We can't find
employees any longer. And then it does provide, and the one which is most intangible but most discussed is
that it does provide a gate keeper type security to the entrance of Lake Ann Park. So the Park Commission, to
cut right to the chase, finally took the dive and would like to make a recommendation that the fees be struck in
their entirety but then to attempt to retain this gate keeper effect, they would like to see some sort of park patrol
maintained within the city' of Chanhassen. That does not have to be exclusively for Lake Ann Park but could be
for the park system in it's entirety. That motion passed unanimously. At first glance this may seem severe.
This action. But again as my prelude pointed out, they've been debating it year in and year out since I've been
here. Really what it comes down to is the financial impacts. If the City Council endorses would be that you'd
lose approximately $20,000.00 to $25,000.00 in revenue from the revenue stream for '95. We'd save about
$1,500.00 in printing costs for the entrance passes and then by their recommendation, keeping a gate attendants
or this park patrol if you will, you would still need to retain some expenditure of approximately $7,200.00. So
in other words, we operate to the good now about $15,000.00 and they xvant to put you in the red about
$7,000.00 to $10,000.00. For your information I did attach an annual budget, which is part of the general fund
budget for Lake Ann Park which totals $63,000.00 so you can see the $15,000.00 in revenue offsets that by a
percentage, but nearly enough to pay for the entire operation of Lake Ann Park. So again the recommendation
from the Park Commission is to strike the entrance fees in their entirety and retain the gate attendant program
modifying it to a park patrol. You will note the manager's comments, which I accept and which I knew this
issue xvould come up. In that the adopted 1995 budget includes those gate receipts so that revenue is included
in our budget. Should the Council wish to change something, we would have to cut an item so the item should
have really been included in the 1995 budget request but the process just on an annual basis does not work that
way so we either have to amend our budget or set ourselves up for the 1996 budget.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I don't even go to my husband's softball games anymore. I get such an earful on
this issue. I would agree with the Park and Rec's recommendation. However, I know that we are used as
regional park. There are a lot of non-residents and did the commission discuss just a non-resident fee?
Todd Hoffman: No, they did not.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Is there anyxvay it could be worked into softball fees or any other league fees? To
somehow offset our costs for the gate keeper.
Todd Hoffman: Sure. At present xve charge the softball players $2.00 per person on top of their regularly
charge to go into the parking fee so we already charge the adult softball. By policy we do not charge youth or
youth participants or youth spectators so anybody coming into the park involved in a youth swimming lesson or
a youth ballgame or spectator, drives in free anyway.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: So it would just be the spectators of the adult softball?
40
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Todd Hoffman: Correct.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: That I hear from basically.
Councilman Senn: Clarification. You said the softball players also have to have a parking permit though. So if
they're a non-resident, there is a separation. Or there could be a separation, to answer her question.
Todd Hoffman: Yeah, for another $2.00 they each receive, each roster player receives a sticker, there's a
minority of our softball players who are non-residents. Only up to 4 players per team can be a non-resident so
there's a minority there but yes, they are.
Councilman Berquist: But they still get the sticker?
Todd Hoffman: Correct. Excuse me, it is $5.00 because they pay for an annual permit.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I don't think we can do it for this year, for '95 but I would say let's, well. In the
greater scheme of things this is probably the worth the lack of headache, not collecting them and not having
them. The printing costs, etc. Hoxvever I do like the idea .of keeping someone at the front gate, just to direct
traffic if nothing else and changing into a roving security element so I guess I'd support the recommendation but
not for '95.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael.
Councilman Mason: Well, I've paid the Lake Ann Park fee every year I've lived here and I figure it's just, I
mean it's a nice park. It comes with the territory. I think Colleen's comments about it being used as a regional
park are well put. I 'know an a~vful lot of people from Eden Prairie that camp out there in the summer. Having
said that, if Park and Rec doesn't xvant it, I certainly understand. I agree with the Manager's and Colleen's
comments. I think if they don't want it for next year, I think they've got to find the money because, and I know
that's kind of hardball and all that but I mean that is mine, yeah and we've got kind of tight budget the way it is
so. I guess I'll defer to that judgment but I don't think it's that big a deal. Paying a $5.00 fee to use that park
as many times as I've go to it in a year.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks. Mark.
Councilman Senn: Well I guess my position hasn't I guess really changed from last year. I would really like to
see us get rid of the charge for residents. I'd like to see us get rid of it this year because last year when it came
up, we said we'll look at it and maybe get rid of it next year and it seems like every year we just put it off
another year. I however would like a different approach than what the Park Commission is recommending
because I would like to see a charge for non-residents to maintain some of that revenue and some of that cost. I
guess I'm used to paying for that wherever else I go to use park systems. Directly or indirectly. A ~vonderful
example of that is Excelsior. I mean you go up to the Commons Park, whether you 'know it or not you're
paying for it because you're putting the quarters in the meter. Every resident of Excelsior has a sticker on their
car xvhich means they can park at those meters without putting quarters in those meters. Okay. And you can
call that reverse stickering or whatever but it is reverse stickering, whatever but.
Councilman Mason: A phrase has been coined here folks.
41
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Senn: It does work and I buy my permits to Hennepin County parks every year and I buy my
permits to several other parks and t even, I suppose some of them that don't charge me, I make donations to
anyway. I mean I think from a standpoint of our residents, they pay their taxes. Something that ought to be
included in that. I don't think xve ought to be charging them to go in and use their park system. As far as non-
residents go, I have absolutely no qualms about charging them to use it and I could care less even if you raise
the fee a little bit higher to help offset some of those costs and Todd, I somehow think you could probably be
ingenious enough to find a way to take care of that revenue this year. And he's shaking his head yes. And we
could get this thing implemented and get on with it. I think it's a silly issue to come up every year. t think the
only xvay we're going to get rid of the issue is to do what we should do and that is get rid of the fee.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Steve.
Councilman Berquist: Well I wasn't aware that it's been such a thorn in everyone's side as it appears to have
been. My thought is that $15,000.00 is $15,000.00. Where else can you make $15,000.00 and $25,000.00
worth of revenue? Hoxv much time is actually spent policing this thing? That's question one. Question two,
how much money is made off of concessions? I mean there's certain things that are done at that park to
generate income. I've never, I'm not privy to all these complaints that you folks apparently have been. I'm sure
because of the positions that you've been in for much, much longer than I have.
Councilman Mason: I quite honestly have never heard a complaint.
Councilxvoman Dockendorf: Oh really?
Councilman Senn: You haven't?
Mayor Chmiel: In my 6 years I've not heard one complaint about the cost of parking.
Councilman Berquist: I mean if you look at Lake Ann Park and you compare that to some of the other city
parks that are here and in other cities, Lake Ann Park is, I mean there's no comparison. It's silly to even say
let's compare it because it's far and away a superior facility. I understand your concern Todd. You say it ~vould
make your job that much easier. I believe it. But that's not our problem. One thing that I've got a question
about. How many times has that gate keeper perceive a threat or get an implied threat and is there any of that
that comes up as this security aspect of it?
Todd Hoffman: There certainly is. In fact when I was first employed, that person was responsible for taking
the money and then transporting it to City Hall. That has since been discontinued. The deputies now pick it up
from that person. It is a very difficult position. We work with those people on their public relation skills when
people enter the park and they're confronted to pay an entry fee to get into the park because obviously there are
a number of folks xvho xvould just as soon drive right in. A comment on xvhich way you go, I would say please
don't separate the thing and just charge non-residents and not charge residents simply based on, we don't get rid
of any of the administrative issues and we drop our revenues, at least based on the last 5 years, season non-
residents made up $3,700.00 last year. Daily passes were $10,000.00. If you split that in half and give non-
residents $5,000.00, you've got about $9,000.00 in non-resident fees coming in. Your softball teams xvere
$5,100.00 so that's a pretty big chunk that is tacked on as a surcharge on your softball teams. So if xve only
charge non-residents, we will recoup all our costs but not much more than that. To answer your question, the
first couple of years of concessions we averaged $5,000.00 to $7,000.00 in revenue at the concession and that
does not designate profits. 1' can't quote you on the profits.
42
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Berquist: And who mans the concessions? An employee?
Todd Hoffman: Concession employees, yes.
Councilman Berquist: Much the same as these people that run the gate?
Todd Hoffman: Correct.
Councilman Berquist: And if the gate keeper system is abandoned, you're looking at paying $5.50-$5.25 an
hour for a gate keeper. What are your costs per hour? How much is that going to go up if you have a traveling,
a roving security person?
Todd Hoffman: At least $2.00 an hour. $8.00 an hour. You're going to be looking for a different caliber
person so a gate attendant is going to be an enforcer of some type and that's going to be a different caliber
person.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah but we have our, some of the security within the park in itself. We have our CSO's
going through there. They're driving through on a constant basis. And Sheriff Deputies are driving through
there as well as well as our own.
Councilman Senn: In fact they go through a great deal because they usually have to clean up the accidents out
at the entry first.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that's the next thing we've got to take care of.
Todd Hoffman: That's xvhat the gate attendants do, they dial 911 a lot.
Mayor Chmiel: Do you have anything else?
Councilman Berquist: No, I don't...
Mayor Chmiel: I guess you 'know, parks really are an amenity within the city and as beautiful as Lake Ann
Park basically is, and maintained, even with the upkeep of the fields and everything else that we have, there are
some additional costs incurred with that, just as it is with any park. But that one I think is just a little bit more.
I think with the Park and Rec Commission coming back and asking to drop these fees probably should have
been brought to us much earlier in 1994 for the budgeting purposes. I'm of the same opinion that Colleen is.
Not for this year. I don't see that, and maybe I don't even see it for next year. But to be able to pick up
additional dollars as such is one less way for us putting things into our budget and increasing our budget and
raising taxes to a certain point as well. And I just feel that the way we have it, I think we should just keep it as
is and continue in that particular vein. I guess I would be, and Don and I did have discussions on this as well,
regarding what we should do with it and I think he expressed my position rather well here as well. So I would
ask for a motion. In fact I'd even make the motion to keep and retain our daily park passes and seasonal pass
for residents as well as seasonal passes for non-residents at the existing fees that we have and is there a second?
Councilman Mason: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: Moved and seconded. Any other discussion?
43
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Mason seconded to keep the Parking Fees for 1995 at the same rote as the
1994 fees: S2.00, Daily Park Pass; $5.00, Seasonal Pass for Residents; and $10.00, Seasonal Pass for Non-
Residents. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn and Councilwoman Dockendorf who opposed, and the
motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2.
Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to clarify as to why, other than what you've probably already had said.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well you knoxv in listening to Mark I think, I liked his solution. Just charging
non-residents because the complaints you get are from residents who think they're being double taxed.
Mayor Chmiel: $5.00.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Plus the daily. I mean if you're not expecting it and you drive up and you just
want to use the lake and you're hit for $2.00, you won't go back because that's a negative experience. However,
for non-residents, you know as I said, it's viewed as a regional park system and I wouldn't have a problem
charging non-residents.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: Maybe it's the area I live in but the favorite comment I get from that area is, and I get it
ever5' year because we raise their taxes every year but, you know they raise my taxes but they still charge me to
get into my park and I tell you, talk about a negative PR for this city, I think that's right up there as the number
one and I spoke strongly about this last year. I'm going to speak strongly about it every year until we do
something about it. If not, I see no problem...
Mayor Chmiel: Well as I said, let them come in a little sooner and present it.
Councilman Senn: Well I'm son3,. I'm going to take issue with that because I brought this up last year. We
were going to study it. We were going to look at it and it was going to come back to us. And this year it was
supposed to be gotten rid of and there's absolutely nothing thatfs happened except I talked with Todd and Todd
tells me that we can pull this off and it's not going to hurt the budget.
Mayor Chmiel: Did you follow through with it?
Councilman Senn: Yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: To make sure that it came to us in time for the budget...
Councilman Senn: Brought it up again at budget time. That was in September-October. I mean I don't k_noxv
what more follow-up I can do other than keep bringing it up. Okay.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mike.
Councilman Mason: You know what, I can ride my bike over there on the trails and I don't have to pay
anything to get into the park.
Councilman Senn: Well you're lucky you have trails too.
44
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Mason: Yeah, I have in the 8 years that I have lived here, I mean just a little counter point here, I
have never heard anyone complain about paying, a city resident, I've never heard a city resident complain about
having to pay to go to Lake Ann. Like I said, I've paid my bucks ever3, year I've lived here and if it's a...tax, so
be it. I think it's worth it.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
SET DATE TO INTERVIEW COMMISSION CANDIDATES~ CITY MANAGER.
Don Ashworth: Yes, the City Council asked that this item not appear until after the first of the year. It's after
the first of the year so I'm bringing it back to you. In hopes we can arrive at a date. Unfortunately we only
have one off Monday in January because the other is Martin Luther King Day. The city is prohibited from
conducting business on that day. Once we select a date, you had raised various questions the last time this item
had come up and kind of wanted to 'knoxv what your thoughts were on some of these. The issue about term
limits for example we don't need to tackle tonight but do you wish to take and interview incumbents.
Councilman Senn: Well Don these are the issues I thought we wanted to discuss at the work session. I mean
that's why I was surprised to kind of see the questions posed for tonight because these are the questions we
outlined but we said these are what we really want to sit down and discuss and figure out which route we want
to go on them.
Don Ashworth: I didn't interpret it that way so.
Councilman Senn: Am I wrong?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well, to respond to Mark's question. I don't want to have a whole work session
deciding how we select commission members.
Councilman Senn: Well I'm not saying it has to be the whole work session but I mean, I feel strongly that we
should have the work session and get it set one way or the other.
Don Ashworth: Well you did say you xvanted to look at the financial policies. I mentioned two other items that
could be a part of the next work session so if you wanted to follow Mark's suggestion. Answer these questions
as a part of the work session then move on to the financial thing and the construction...we could do that. The
other problem with the commission, let's assume we don't meet until January to figure out answers to these
questions and then Ave pick out some time in February to actually do it. That means we're going to have
commission members starting 2 to 3 months after they could have started.
Councilman Senn: We have commissioners in place don't we?
Don Ashworth: Right but they're, and they xvill continue to, the policy is they continue to serve until they're
replaced but I mean, you're taking away x number of months from a potential commissioner going on.
Councilman Senn: Maybe I'm xvrong but I don't see this as a multiple work session item. I mean I think we'll
have a discussion and reach some conclusions at the xvork session and then it's a matter of putting it on the next
Council agenda, up or down or whatever. I think most of these questions will be answered at the work session.
45
City Council Meeting - Janua13f 9, 1995
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, what's Council's position?
Councilman Berquist: I'm not that familiar with procedures but I mean I read the questions and ansxvered them.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, I did too but I mean We've got to get together and do that.
Don Ashworth: If you all did that and just passed them in, I'd 'know the answer.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, but xve'll have different answers I'm afraid.
Councilxvoman Dockendorf: Yes, 10 minutes, yes, no, February.
Councilman Mason: Number one is a yes.
Councilxvoman Dockendorf: Number two is 10 minutes.
Councilman Mason: Well, 10 is kind of short. 15.
Councilman Senn: I had 20 down.
Mayor Chmiel: I think you can get things accomplished within 10 minutes myself.
Councilman Senn: The next one I had no.
Councilman Mason: The subcommittee, no.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I put yes but that just means I won't show so.
Mayor Chmiel: What month would you like terms to take effect?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: February.
Mayor Chmiel: Of this' coming year.
Councilman Senn: Well I had first quarter down because I'd like to get away from this bit where we're trying to
do it in the rush, that we're trying to rush everything else through up through December.
Mayor Chmiel: I think first quarter would be good.
Councilman Berquist: That they fill the position at the end of the first quarter.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, like March 31st or April 1 or something like that and then we're on a cycle where
we're not so hurried.
Mayor Chmiel: And then we stagger those anyway with the times that they're elected and when they go.
Councilman Mason: January 30th.
46
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Kate, does that work for you? Todd, does that make sense?
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, they're in a continued stand. The only deal is on Board of Adjustments where nobody
wanted to be on the Board of Adjustments. The 3 people on want to stay on so.
Mayor Chmiel: 5:30 p.m. on when?
Don Ashworth: The 30th.
Mayor Chmiel: January 30th. Council work session... Okay, we'll do it. 30th. 5:30. Where?
Don Ashworth: Courtyard conference room.
Resolution #95-10: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded establishing commission
appointment policies. All voted in favor and the motion carded.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Escrow.
Don Ashworth: We have a requirement that an individual put up $750.00 to insure landscaping. The two trees,
the sod and what not. I had a young lady approach me, or a couple are building a new home. They're trying to
do the thing themselves. I think it really came down to a case of they thought that they could be kind of
developers and never really understood the full costs associated with that, and I think that it's fair to say at this
point in time, they have gotten in far beyond their abilities to finance this thing. And she's looking for some
form of relief and felt that that $750.00 to guarantee the landscaping and the trees, etc. Where we have an
instance where an individual, let's say their septic system is going over. They don't have the $5,000.00. We
xvill allow them to Sign off on an assessment form that allows us to certify against that property, probably in
that case like $1,000.00 per year to pay off that septic system. We'll also do that as it deals with trunk charges.
If there is a real financial problem. Allow it to be certified with the taxes. So what I have suggested for, if I
can find the name.
Mayor Chmiel: We don't want the name.
Don Ashworth: Oh, you don't want the name? Okay. For this young couple, is that she would sign one of
those agreements.
Councilwoman Dockendorfi First child agreement.
Don Ashworth: And then if she carries out the sodding and the tree work, etc, then I will take that. We'll
never end up certifying it and I sincerely believe that, they put a lot of swear equity into this property. They'll
continue to do that. They'll plant the trees. They'll put in the sod and we'll never end up certifying it but I do
need a resolution from the City Council that would allow me to make that certification and to actually pull it
back off when the work is done.
Mayor Chmiel: I xvould so move that resolution.
Councilman Mason: Second.
47
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve a resolution authorizing the
Cit3, Manager to certify the $750.00 landscaping fee and pull the certification off when the landscaping work is
completed. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I just had a question along those same lines. It seemed my neighbors and I were
all building at the same time and all using different builders. There seemed to be absolutely no standards as to
who had to put escrow. I mean we didn't have to put anything down and our neighbors across the street had to
put $700.00-$800.00 to make sure that they would sod the next summer. Or seed it. There just didn't seem to
be any set policy. Is there?
Don Ashworth: Yeah, I think there is but I think that over the period of time we had this silt fence type of a
thing and that was a requirement and we had so many abuses that we finally had to take and get something in
place. The same way with the trees. I think the policies have really firmed themselves up within the last 2 to 3
years.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, I'd say the same thing. We've been modifying that. We've had flexibility where we
xvork with, instead of the individual homeowner, maybe a developer posting all that so there's different ways of
doing it.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: But it is a policy?
Kate Aanenson: Oh yeah. But it depends, if there's a tree already on your lot, you don't have to post surety
for a tree. That's $250.00 so you just post for the sod, which is $500.00. So we look at individuals, depending
on what's required but the standard requirements, you have to have a tree and you have to re-establish
vegetation. So that would be $750.00 and depending what's on the lot, we'd look at.
Mayor Chmiel: Was that about 4 to 6 years ago?
Kate Aanenson: Yes. But it's been tighten up.
May, or Chmiel: Yeah, right. Okay. There's a lot of discussions on that, believe me. We'll go to item 3.
(Councilwoman Dockendorf left the meeting at this point and xvas not present to vote on the remaining items.)
3(E). CONSIDER RELEASE FROM DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT FOR WEST VII,LAGE HEIGHTS 2ND
ADDITION~ PROJECT NO. 88-4.
Councilman Senn: Charles, I kept trying to hook up with Dave today and we didn't hook up but I was uneasy
because why are we doing it now before it's completed? I mean are we sure there's no impact by doing it now,
considering the fact that there is still stuff to be completed on the project, or on the site? There's a fair amount
of work to be done up there yet. It says the release does not affect the conditions approved set forth in the
Byerly's site plan but what about the other site plans and stuff'?.
Charles Folch: The conditions within the development contract for this addition of West Village Heights, those
elements have been completed within that development contract. There's another one for the latest addition
and...Byerly's is still into effect. We would not, if there's still development.
48
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Senn: Let me tell you part of my confusion. You said Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4. Then looking at the
attached map, I mean I really got confused because it looked like you were releasing the entire project area.
Because there's 4 lots designated there so I mean that's kind of, maybe I'm just lacking the right information but
that's why I was kind of getting uneasy. It seems like we were releasing the whole thing and the whole thing
isn't anywhere near being completed.
Chai-les Folch: No.
Councilman Senn: If there's no urgency, maybe we don't need to deal with it tonight. I don't know. Is there an
urgency to it?
Charles Folch: I think there is a closing going on that they need to have this released. Why don't, if you
wouldn't mind, making it a condition of approval on Dave get in touch with you first thing in the morning. If
we address your issues properly, we'll just leave it stand as an approval. If not, we won't proceed with it.
Councilman Senn: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: So a condition is just make sure it's just for the Byerly's store only, that you want to make
sure.
Councilman Senn: Well I want to make sure that we're not releasing stuff that is uncompleted basically.
Mayor Chmiel: When Dave goes through those processes he's pretty much sure, believe me.
Councilman Senn: No, I understand. That's just why I tried to get a hold of him but like I say...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, do you want to move that?
Councilman Senn: Yeah, xvith that stipulation, yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there a second?
Councilman Mason: Second.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Release from Development Contract for
West Village Heights 2nd Addition, Project No. 88-4 subject to clarification from staff to Councilman Senn.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Mayor Chmiel: Let it be noted for the Minutes that Councilwoman Dockendorf has left so it's a 4 to 0.
3(,1). RECREATIONAL BEACHLOT ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING GAZEBOS~
FINAL READING AND APPROVAL OF SUMMARY ORDINANCE FOR PUBLICATION PURPOSES.
49
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Senn: Okay 3(j), I asked 3(j) to be pulled because I just, I understand xvhere staff is coming from
but I quite honestly can't agree with 20 foot as the height on these structures. And I also have problems xvith
250 square feet. I just, I mean that's a 10 x 25 building. I'm sorry, that exceeds my definitions or expectations
one way or another of what we're going to call a gazebo on a recreational beachtot.
Mayor Chmiel: That's a dance hall.
Councilman Senn: ...Yeah, at 20 feet in height is too so I can't vote for those or support it so that's why I
wanted to remove it. If eve~body else wants to, that's up to them.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I looked at my neighbor's gazebo in back of me and his is probably about 15 feet in
height. It's probably about 10 feet as round.
Councilman Senn: I went and measured my parents. Their's is 10 and I think their's was 12 feet high.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, 20 feet is sort of an edifice too when I looked at that.
Kate Aanenson: Let me just back up again where this standard came from. As you recall, there's only probably
one or two recreational beachlots that would come into the city that would meet this criteria and this was
developed specifically for the Minnewashta Landings where they have a large 40,000 square foot lot. Because
anybody that is non-conforming so they can't get this. They're already non-conforming. Okay, so that's where
the standards came. And I understand if you're uncomfortable but the direction you gave us, when you looked
at that plan, is it was palatable. It looked like a good design so we used those numbers. But if you want to
reduce them, that's great. That's where it came from.
Councilman Senn: Yeah but last meeting when this came up t guess I really expressed my discomfort with
those numbers and the discomfort's still there because I think this is going to set the precedent and now xve're
going to see more of these.
Kate Aanenson: Well there isn't too many other beachlots that have 40,000 square feet.
Councilman Senn: Well, we're not limiting this.
Kate Aanenson: Yes we are. What we're saying is, the non-conforming ones we permitted. We went through
that painful process. We permitted them all. They can't come back and ask for this because they're legal non-
conforming. It xvould only be any new ones and it's also a conditional use which you have the right to go
through these standards.
Councilman Senn: Well any new ones. But I mean any new developments coming in.
Kate Aanenson: Well you're not going to have that many more on the lake though.
Mayor Chmiel: Well you may have one.
Kate Aanenson: Well we had the one on the Newman plat that had 4 lots but that was all trees. I mean yeah,
they could come back as part of the conditional use and ask for that, but if you're uncomfortable and you want
to go 15 feet, and 150 square feet but again, we just based it on the.
50
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Senn: If you don't think in any way, shape or form it will establish a basis for the other ones to
come back and request.
Councilman Mason: They can't because they're non-conforming.
Kate Aanenson: You can check with Roger but they're legal non-conforming. We already permitted them.
They can't come back and ask for a.
Councilman Senn: Can't they come back and ask for a variance to do it?
Roger Knutson: They can ask...they can ask to change your ordinance but.
Councilman Senn: But can they ask for a variance to do it?
Roger Knutson: To expand a non-conforming use?
Councilman Senn: Yeah.
Roger Knutson: I suppose they could. We'd never issue one. Never.
Councilman Senn: Well I'm just xvondering if it then becomes a standard that they will.
Kate Aanenson: But that wouldn't stop them for asking for anything else right now. Asking for another boat or
asking for a restroom.
Roger Knutson: They can ask for it but their entitlements ~vould be nil.
Councilman Senn: And all the lots are under that basis rather than...
Kate Aanenson: The 12 that xve permitted ~vere legal non-conforming. We only have a handful, 3 or 4 that are
40,000 square feet that could ask for this. And they're all 40,000 square feet. That's why if they're over an
acre, we felt 250 with this high on 40,000 square feet, where you're almost an acre, seem like a reasonable
scale. You're right. On a little narrow beachlot, 60 feet wide, this would not xvork. But again ;ve were looking
at an acre lot and we felt like that would work.
Mayor Chmiel: The only problem I had with that was the sight line. If you had people on either side who have
complete visibility of the lake now.
Kate Aanenson: That's why it's a conditional use so you would review the architecture and the siting, where it
xvould be. Just like you would if they were to put a port-a-potty.
Councilman Senn: And if a resident came in and said it screwed up their sight lines, we'd have a chance to...
Kate Aanenson: Well it's a conditional use, right. You could set it back and mitigate the impacts and put what
standards you felt were appropriate.
51
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Berquist: Is the beachlot on Frontier Trail, 7200 block of Frontier Trail conform xvith that? Could
I build something of this size on that?
Kate Aanenson: No. It's non-conforming.
Councilman Berquist: It's in excess of 40,000 I believe.
Kate Aanenson: But it's still non-conforming. They don't, there's other criteria. There's a square footage
requirement. There's a lakeshore requirement. So it has to meet both those standards.
Councilman Senn: What about our's? We have a ton of lakeshore on our's and we have a ton of acreage on
our's. I mean can somebody come back in there and say now xve want to put this thing up there, basically like
a picnic shelter?...
Kate Aanenson: You may have a conditional use...Then lower the standards. We just went by what you told us
on the other one so if you ~vant to go 150 and 15 feet high, fine.
Councilman Berquist: Is that easy?
Councilman Senn: I'd be more comfortable with that.
Councilman Berquist: Let's change it. 15 feet, 150.
Councilman Senn: I'i1 move that.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, with those txvo changes on as such, can I have a motion?
Councilman Mason: So moved.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilman Senn: Second.
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the f'mal reading for the Recreational
Beachlot Zoning Ordinance Amendment regarding gazebo amended to change the height to 15 feet with the total
square footage to 150 square feet, and approve the Summary Ordinance for Publication Purposes. All voted in
favor and the motion carded.
3(K). AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE, ARTICLE XXVI REGARDING THE SIGN ORDINANCE, FINAl,
READING AND APPROVAL OF SUMMARY ORDINANCE FOR PUBLICATION PURPOSES.
Councilman Senn: The sign ordinance. 3(k), sign ordinance. I guess like I addressed last time, good job done.
It really makes sense. I just, it really rubs me the wrong way that we're basing it on square footage and it hurts
small businesses so, call it a final plea or whatever but.
Mayor Chmiel: Well you've got to have something somexvhere.
52
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Senn: Well I 'know that you have to have something somewhere but to me it's the wrong people to
be penalizing. I mean we ought to be penalizing the big guy, not the little guy and we've set an ordinance up
here that does precisely that.
Mayor Chmiel: Oh, that's a double standard now. If you're going from small to large.
Councilman Senn: Well, I look at the signage all over the side of Byerly's and believe me I think they can get
away with a little bit less of it, okay.
Kate Aanenson: That went through a variance though.
Councilman Senn: ...look at the signage they're stuck with and I say, they're really having a hard time.
Councilman Berquist: What would be your ultimate criteria?
Councilman Senn: Rather than square footage of the building?
Councilman Berquist: There is no other alternative.
Councilman Senn: Oh yeah, xvell there is. There is. I mean there's, I can't remember them off the top of my
head. I've seen several other ordinances that use square footage as a basis to start from but then they start
qualifying it based on you 'knoxv like one front surface. You -know or one surface of the ~vall versus all surfaces
of walls. And then it also has some maximum set-up that have absolutely nothing to do with the size of your
business one way or the other. And then I've seen ordinances which also allow for basically some special sign
treatments when it relates to one type of a building versus another. For example, I take a Byerly's center where
xve have a lot of signage up actually on the buildings. All over the place and stuff and now we've also got a
pylon sign and we also have a monument sign. So I mean there you have 3 levels of signage. A small free
standing building could never achieve that. Yet, you know how do you tell me their needs are any more
different than the businesses in that scope.
Kate Aanenson: Well we did take out, free standing signs were taken out from the, unless you're on Highway
5. That xvas eliminated.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess with this being done through the Chamber of Commerce and all the other businesses,
small and large businesses as well, we didn't get any unfavorable comments. At least I didn't.
Councilman Berquist: There was a consensus.
Councilman Mason: Yeah, the business community seemed pretty happy with it.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, they're the ones that really pulled it together.
Councilman Senn: Well consensus or compromise. I mean compromise was the word I heard a lot. Well but
again, it depends on a little bit xvho's involved in that committee and xvas it big businessmen or was it small
businessmen. I don't know.
53
City Council Meeting - January 9, 1995
Councilman Berquist: Well I do and the one gentlemen that I trusted to advise me as best as he could, owns
the sign shop and he worked long and hard on this. And I asked him, I called today and I asked him if he had
read it and he was comfortable with it. He said it's a good document.
Councilman Senn: Are you comfortable xvith it as a small business person?
Councilman Berquist: Yeah I am. I am very much.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, so xvith that, can I have a motion?
Councilman Mason: I move approval of item 3(k).
Councilman Berquist: I'll second it.
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Benluist seconded to approve the Final Reading of the Amendment to
the City. Code, Article XXVI Regarding the Sign Ordinance and approval of Summary Ordinance for Publication
Purposes. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:53 p.rm
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
54