CC Minutes 1996 01 22 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 22, 1996
Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Berquist, Councilman Mason and Councilman
Senn
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilwoman Doekendorf
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Kate Aanenson, Sharmin Al~Jaff, John Rask, Charles Folch,
Todd Gerhardt, Dave Hempel, Jill Sinclair, and Harold Brose
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the agenda
as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to approve the following
Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:
a. Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Rezone Property from A2 to RSF, Dempsey Addition, Final Reading.
b. Approval of Drug and Alcohol Policy.
c. Resolution #96-10: Receive Feasibility Study on Coulter Boulevard Phase II Project No. 93-26B; Set
Public Hearing Date.
f. City Council Minutes dated January 8, 1996
Planning Commission Minutes dated January 3, 1996
Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated December 12, 1996
Public Safety Commission Minutes dated January 11, 1996
g. Approve One Day Non-Intoxicating Liquor License, Chanhassen Lions Club, February Festival, February
17, 1996.
All voted in favor and the motion carded unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel: Do you want to hit item (e) Mark?
Councilman Berquist: Why don't we defer it. Why don't you pick it up later.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, that's fine. No rush on it.
Councilman Berquist: We talked a little bit. It's a little longer than short.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Then we'll just pull that from it. Then let's move that item number (e) to item 12(b).
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
City Council Meeting - JanuaI3, 22, 1996
PUBLIC HEARING:
A..~. REQUEST TO VACATE THE EASTERLY PORTION OF AN EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY ON
PAULY DRIVE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE SITE PLAN REVIEW OF THE ENTERTAINMENT
COMPLEX LOCATED NORTH OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS~ EAST OF MARKET BOULEVARD
AND SOUTH OF WEST 78TH STREET~ LOTUS REALTY.
SITE PLAN REVIEW TO REMODEL THE EXISTING CHANHASSEN BOWL AND FIlJ,Y~S AND A
PORTION OF THE FRONTIER BUILDING INTO AN ENTERTAINMENT CENTER; VARIANCE TO
ALLOW WALL PROJECTING SIGNS~ SAND BLASTED SIGNS~ AND NON-STREET FRONTAGE
SIGNS LOCATED NORTH OF TIlE RAILROAD TRACKS, EAST OF MARKET BOULEVARD~ AND
SOUTH OF WEST 78TH STREET~ CHANHASSEN ENTERTAINMENT CENTER~ LOTUS REALTY.
Sharmin Al-Jarl: As you mentioned the site is located north of the railroad tracks on Pauly Drive, east of
Market Boulevard and south of West 78th Street. This item was reviewed by the Planning Commission on
January 3, 1996. It was approved unanimously. The applicant is requesting to remodel the bowling alley,
Filly's building and the Frontier Building into an entertainment center, which xvill include six movie theaters,
Pauly's Sport Bar and Restaurant, the bowling alley, some retail stores and restaurants. The remodeling of the
existing building ;vill include entrances, boardwalks, parking spaces added. Site access is provided via existing
Pauly Drive and a curb cut on Market Boulevard. Internal circulation of the parking lot has been redesigned
since this item appeared before the Planning Commission. Currently Southwest Metro Transit has a parking
easement over the southwest section of the entertainment complex parking lot. This is the only park and ride lot
in the city. One of thc major concerns that Ms. Diane Harberts, ;vho is the Southxvest Metro Transit Director
had with this proposal is the proposed landscaped island xvithin the parking lot. From a public transit
standpoint, it is best to keep parking lots devoid of vegetation for safety reasons. Landscape islands also
constitute physical barriers for individuals using park and ride lots. Staff explained that eliminating the
landscape islands was not an option. We agreed to redesign the landscape islands in a manner that would
accommodate turning movements for Southwest Metro Transit and basically what has happened between the last
time this appeared betbre the Planning Commission and this time. The island extended south to west along the
parking lot creating the barrier that we were talking about and since then xve just eliminated that landscape
island. To provide for additional parking spaces and a more controlled interior traffic circulation, the applicant
requested that xve vacate the portion of Pauly Drive. We're recommending approval of this vacation. The
applicant will be required to provide us with a legal description of the portion that is being vacated. The
building architecture will incorporate the old town theme. I will not get into the architecture because the
applicant xvill be presenting that portion to you. The signage on the building will require a variance, as
mentioned earlier. The current sign ordinance is intended for modern buildings and does not permit signs
requested by the applicant such as directory and projecting signs. This type of signs are a common part of an
old town theme and xvould enhance and compliment the architecture of the buildings. Overall this is a very
good design. Staff has been working with the applicant for a long time. We believe that it will definitely
improve the appearance of the building. It will be compatible ;vith downtown Chanhassen. It will enhance it
and we are recommending approval with conditions outlined in the staff report. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Sharmin. Are there any questions by Council of Sharmin at this time?
Councilman Berquist: I just want to make sure which one I'm looking at. The one that came in the mail to us
is the amended and accurate?
Sharmin AI-Jaff: These are additional changes. They are minor changes that we are requesting the applicant.
2
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Berquist: So this is the one I should, this is the correct plan at this time.
Sharmin Al-Jarl: Yes.
Councilman Berquist: Okay,
Mayor Chmiel: Anyone else? Okay, is the applicant here and please come for~vard. State your name, address
and who you're representing.
Vernelle Clayton: My name is Vernelle Clayton. I live at 422 Santa Fe Circle and I'm representing Lotus
Realty who in turn is representing the composite group of owners that are involved in this project. And as most
of you remember, we were here and showed you a version of this project in 1994. In 1995 we obtained
redevelopment and a TIF district xvas created and moving right along ~ve're back here tonight in 1996 and
hoping to get the project done in 1996. We're back to talk about the site plan and the vacation of Pauly Drive.
Staff has suggested that we be brief as possible because there is a long agenda and to me that means talk faster
than I normally do so. We are going...make a few assumptions. One is we assume that everyone, that's you as
well as everyone in town is anxious to get that particular facade changed from... We assume also that you agree
that the changes in use from a couple of non-conforming warehouse uses over there to a cinema and some
additional retail is also a good one. We assume also that you agree that the change in some of the tenants is
probably a good one and well advised. Changing Filly's that from time to time has caused us some problems, to
an upscale, upgraded Pauly's and therefore providing Pauly's, a 60 year old business in the community, an
opportunity to make a convenient and...rather than some of the details, as I said, we're here to discuss, we have
a formal application for the vacation of Pauly Drive. That meets a need and creates both an opportunity for the
city as well as the developer...response to a number of problems that were...in trying to put as many parking
spots as the project needed into the space that we had. There was some drive openings that created a problem
in turning...some lanes that were a problem. Simply moving Pauly Drive it solved the problem for the city...
virtually every suggestion that we made. It makes it a better parking lot for the applicants of the building and
economically for the city, you won't have to maintain a portion of a road xvithin the development that kind of
leads noxvhere. With the...site plan, our earlier formal application, this is different from most site plans that you
see out here...new building is being approved. In this case, since the buildings are already sited, we're focusing
on the need for a site plan review because of the fact that there's a change in use that requires site plan review.
And even then it's only about 2/3 of the building that we're talking about where we're changing the use but in
order to have a cohesive and... We're also looking for a sign variance and I won't speak at length to that only
because Tim Howell, our architect xvill talk about it briefly. Briefly, those areas that require the variance.
Those areas which are being undertaken to add architectural elements as much as signage. The signage that is
involved in that area is more pedestrian oriented and part of our pedestrian friendly atmosphere we're trying to
create and...look at part of the architecture. So the buildings are already on the site. We're presenting to you
the facade, the boardwalk...landscaping and in response to your comments...we have redone the facade. It is
now much simpler and it's much easier to understand. The primary materials are brick and drivit, which is a
material that you see around town. The_Americana Bank...West 79th Street and others. The boardwalk is
still...as our most pedestrian friendly aspect of the project... One, it breaks up the... 4 feet above grade and it
provides, as I said, a very... The challenge to the architect was to fit in all of this in with the existing
development in town and yet retain a distinctive look for the project .... old to~vn look, more for itself and
because it lends itself to a variation. I would like to just interject here that we have some pictures of some of
the elements of this. The design of the various buildings that go across the front as comparing them to other
elements of buildings around town. We also have some pictures of the view of the project from a couple of
different directions on Highway 5 and Market Boulevard. We shared those and it takes a little while xvith the
City Council Meeting - Januar3, 22, 1996
Planning Commission. Tonight we're not going to do that. We have them. If you'd like to see them, we're
happy to share them. In the interest of time, I won't take your time right now to walk you through them.
We've reviewed the conditions of approval and xve have no problem with them or xvith the changes that are
proposed on Attachment #8. We will, I'll be undertaking the replatting of the property... We're anxious to get
this project underway. The cinema folks would like to open before we reach the doldrums of fall and the
Pauly's have their own set of reasons for wanting to get underway as soon as possible. We are excited to be in
the vanguard of something that is kind of coming across the nation at this point in this project. We knew there
was a lot of public sentiment for this type of look when we first started but frankly we weren't quite prepared
for the reaction we've been hearing lately from various folks of the geographic area which takes the form of
10,000 acre celebration in Florida article in all of the architectural magazines and the fact a symposium the end
of January here in Minneapolis on what is called new urbanism. But for right now and our little contribution to
new urbanism, I'd like to call on Truman Howell who will present the more exciting aspects and I will be happy
to, I won't come back to speak to you but I'I1 be happy to come back if you have a question. Truman.
Truman Hoxvell: Thank you Vernelle. I think Vernelle has said about everything. I don't know what's left for
me to say other than I'd like to show you what xve have designed and it is fairly comprehensive at this point in
a preliminary sense. We've gone through a lot of the investigation of materials...that we'll be dealing with and I
think on the information that you have there...show you how we've prepared the documents that we'll be using
to do the working drawings on the project. This is the existing conditions as we have them today. This is the
parking lot that is presently there. This is the unpaved area in front of the Frontier building. This is the
complex that we're discussing, as specifically the restaurant area here. The entrance to the bowling alley is here
and then the xvarehouse on the side. The idea was developed to raise the portion of this in front of the land, in
front of this building to form a streetscape. It's been referred to as a boardwalk. That's somewhat impractical
so we are using masonry materials and we will have a concrete surface that will have texture and we will keep
it xvith some variety so it's not a big fiat slab of concrete. We are bordering it with keystone material and the
border of concrete curbing around the top. I'll shoxv you a drawing of that specific portion here. This is a
diagrammatic indication of not only what the retaining wall would be like, but also some of the...that will go
onto the streetscape, including the handrail course and the classical type of light fixtures. The streetscape itself
will include such things as ramps for the handicapped, several stairway locations. The undulation of that
retaining wall. There will be a hidden dumpster and trash enclosures for the occupants in the building and the
use of, for containment of the trash and also deliver3, areas for the various needs. The retail area will be in this
area. The theaters will be located in here. Small retail area on this side. The Frontier building on this side and
then the bowling alley and video games in the back and then of course the restaurant here. The site plan as
revised, and will be revised again subsequent to the changes that were indicated and suggested by the staff,
provides a parking area that in fact is concurrent with the present Pauly Drive so we're not looking down a
straight line parking lot. We also, by taking out Pauly Drive at this point, from here over, we have been able to
incorporate a planted and sodded area right in front of the retaining wall, as I indicated to you before. We think
that's an improvement to the overall scheme. The method xvith which we're going to accomplish this on the
existing building, if we can go now to the building themselves. As you are undoubtedly aware, the pre-cast
walls that extend the full length of this building will not be removed. We will in fact put on top of them the
treatments that we're going to be doing for the various buildings. These two sections indicate the materials that
are existing in the green and then the addition of the product EIFS, which is a generic term for a drivit or
another materials similar to that which is a product that consists of a backer board, styrofoam, reinforcing
material, a scratch coat, finish cost and then the final texturing on the fact. You may be familiar with it. If not,
I can certainly get more information if you wish on that. It's a very plastic material which allows us to do
various kinds of things in terms of undulations on the face of the building where we can actually put in niches.
We can shape croxvns over the doorways. That kind of thing. We'll be doing that on some of the buildings.
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Another feature of the building will be the cornices. Those will be done with reinforced fiberglass. This is that
product. Actually it will fit against the building...this particular one in this fashion. And it has a multitude of
color opportunities so it does not go on just ~vhite, and I'll show you some of those in a moment. The other
option that we're going to be going after is the brick on the exterior. We'll be applying that as well. And we'll
be cutting openings into the existing pre-cast for doors, for windows, that kind of thing. To give you a quick
idea, which I guess we're supposed to be doing. I'll try to do that. This is the, I suppose I should bring this
forward. Can everyone see that.'? This is the series of buildings that we'll be using to bring off what we're
talking about. Everything you see here is at the streetscape line. The dark... Over here on this end will be the
restaurant area. It actually will-include this building as well. As you recall in the elevation of this building, it
jogs up at one point and xve're taking that opportunity to enhance that area with a prairie type of building. This
is reminiscent of a bank. This then a clock tower and finally a movie theater. Now we've studied all of these
buildings at different perspectives and you're actually seeing the movie theater at an angle because we're turning
the corner with it and it will be at a 45 degree angle to that comer, and this will be the actual front of the
building. The Frontier building will be of this nature. That will be brick on the face. The alleyway, we're
going to treat it as an alley. As the theater tums the corner, suddenly it stops and the alley continues on and
there will in fact be retail stores in here. That kind of thing and it will all be obviously repaired from ~vhat it is
existing now and painted. Now be a~vare that the materials that we'll be using here are not as bright as you see
here. That was done for presentation purposes. Obviously we'll be using bricks that are of a different, or
slightly different color. In this light it's not particularly beneficial but the prairie building for example ~vill be
done in the mountain red, ~vhich is xvhat the Interstate...can match that kind of brick but I used these because
they xvere available to me...rather wide range. Buckwheat ;vould be the clock tower building. This product
there would be the bank building and the Frontier building. So we do have a variety of colors that we're using
there and we have identified all the colors and we've presented them to staff for their review, both of, well of all
the materials. There's probably a color schedule, one building probably has 10 or 15 different colors that we've
integrated into the buildings to give the proper effect. I can go through as many of those as you would like.
However, I think that time might prevents us from doing that. For example this would be the bank and this
would be the columns that would project slightly...project from the theater. Now the signage. We've done a
couple things with the signage. We have projecting signs that are perpendicular to the wall and ;ye feel that
when people are down there at that scale on the streetscape, that they are ;valking back and forth obviously and
the buildings with the signs are up above it. And we're suggesting that we have those do;vn there because we
do think that this place will have an awful lot of people there. It's going to probably develop a lot of people for
the bowling area, and certainly for the theater, and we think that's an added part of the architecture and it's
conducive, or a part of what the old town theme is about. If there are questions, I did go rather quickly but if I
can answer some questions, I'll certainly try to do so.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Truman. Steve, do you have any questions?
Councilman Berquist: Yeah, a few here real quickly. The exterior face brick. Is that really, you're going to put
real face brick on there or is it going to be fake brick.'/ It's real face brick?
Truman Hoxvell: No, it's real face brick.
Councilman Berquist: The drivit. How repairable, is that going to all come doxvn to people level?
Truman Howell: Yes it will. What we're going to do is we're going to put planters so people stay away from
anything that's accessible.
5
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Berquist: Okay, and the alleyxvay currently...Frontier building from the bowling alley building, will
that be an active drive yet?
Truman Howell: Yes it will be.
Councilman Berquist: Okay. Those are the only ones I have written down.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael.
Councilman Mason: Along with the alley. What's going to be going along there for pedestrians?
Truman Howell: ...walkway. This is the alleyway between. Okay, there is a dock area for trash enclosure but
we've incorporated a sidewalk area here about 8 foot wide that comes down and splits...
Councihnan Mason: Right, okay. Right. Yeah, yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, anything else? Mark.
Councilman Senn: Do you have any applications where that drivit materials is in place or has been in place for
a long time and been maintained? The drivit?
Truman Howell: The drivit?
Councilman Senn: Yeah.
Truman Howell: Yes. Universal Studios in Orlando, Florida has had it for probably 8 to 10 years at this point.
It's on, I used it the first time back in 1977.
Councilman Senn: How about in Minnesota?
Truman Howell: Yes, in Minnesota.
Councilman Senn: Where about's?
Truman Howell: It's a retirement center for Ebenezer. It's on.
Vernelle Clayton: Mark, it's on the Americana Bank building...
Councilman Senn: That hasn't been there very long though. I'm looking for an application that's been around.
Truman Howell: ...one that I personally know. I know there are many, many others but I can certainly get you
a list.
Councilman Senn: The only question for now. Sharmin, can you kind of explain to me a little bit more what
the variances are on the signage?
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Sharmin AI-Jaff: Sure. Currently our ordinance allows channeled letters only and they are typically back lit.
With old town you have more of sand blasted wood signs, so that's the first variance. And I've highlighted in
red the location of all of the signs. They will be all along here. Our ordinance also prohibits signage if a
building is not facing. If a facia is not facing a street. Well we have some retail businesses along the alleyway
and the alleyway is not a public street. Therefore it's going to need a variance for the sign along the alleyway.
So that's another variance. Third one pertains to menu signs. I'm sorry, it pertains to projecting signs. Our
ordinance does not permit projecting signs at all. However they are very much a part of old town and we
believe they will enhance the architectural appearance of the building and that's why we are recommending
approval of that as well. We have developed a criteria, a covenant and we are allowing them. They have given
us three different scenarios. Three different types of projecting signs. They were only permitted to choose one
of those three types of signs. We're limiting the number of signs that they will be able to use along the
building. None of the signage that you see here, or none of the variances are area variances. They're more of
type of signage variance.
Councilman Senn: So volume xvise, size xvise, all that sort of thing.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: They xvill have to meet all the ordinance requirements,
Kate Aanenson: We're just trying to match the architecture really is what it comes down to.
Councilman Senn: That's clear. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Question that I have Sharmin too is what is right-of-way that we have presently within
that specific area that we're requesting to vacate. We're talking about the easterly portion. What is the total
amount of right-of~way that we have?
Sharmin Al~Jarl: Currently Pauly Drive extends from West 78th Street and then it terminates immediately
before the scene shop. What we wanted to see is traffic continuing to flow from Market Boulevard to Great
Plains Boulevard. They will be able to continue that circulation by coming in between the scene shop and the
millxvork shop. It won't be a major thoroughfare but the traffic will continue to flow. There is truly no need for
that right-of-way. We figured if the applicant could utilize it to use it as parking, then we will xvork with them
on that.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright, good. Thanks. As I mentioned before, this is a public hearing. Is there anyone
wishing to address this specific project? If you would please state your name and your address.
Nancy Mancino: Thank you. My name is Nancy Mancino, 6620 Galpin Boulevard. Mr. Mayor, City Council,
My only question is for the City Council to discuss is when this came in front of the Planning Commission, the
landscaping ;vas certainly different from what we're seeing tonight for the parking lot and my only question is,
are we still within our ordinance. Our city code ;vith what is done interior to the parking area. Do we still
have the 100 square feet...landscape area, etc. So I just wondered. I see a lot of changes and I see a lot of
reduction of overstory trees in the landscape area so I just wondered if they ;vere still follo;ving city code.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you.
Nancy Mancino: And secondly I'd just like to say I'm glad I don't have to go to Waconia or Excelsior to go to
the theater. We much appreciate it. Thank you.
7
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Sharmin, can you address that.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: In order to meet ordinance requirements as far as parking within, I mean landscaping within
parking, the applicant will need to add three landscape islands within the westerly parking lot. Easterly parking
lot, sort3,. And that will make it meet ordinance requirements.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, good. Thank you. Is there anyone else? If seeing none, can I have a motion to close
the public hearing?
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Benluist seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and
the motion canied. The public heating wa~s closed.
Mayor Chmiel: Steve. Do you have any additional questions that you'd like answered?
Councilman Berquist: The Frontier building is part of, Todd? The Frontier building is part of this, part of that
district that was created in '95, right?
Todd Gerhardt: That's correct.
Councilman Berquist: Are there any changes contemplated for the Frontier building? I've heard about, and
maybe I'm not reading this right but I know there's, Pauly's is going to move down there. The movie theater
and the shops along the alley way. Is the Frontier building at all part of this presentation? The facade is
changing, I know that. And perhaps I should have defined the question a little bit more.
Truman Howell: You mean the function?
Councilman Berquist: Yeah, the function of the Frontier building.
Truman Howell: I believe they're trying to lease the building out to either retail or some other function.
Vernelle Clayton: Yeah, it hasn't been leased yet but.
Councilman Berquist: Conceptually it's going to be retail.
Vernelle Clayton: The proposal is that we change from a non-conforming warehouse use to retail use. And the
premise under xvhich we calculated the park and everything else is that that would be retail...and that should be
retail under that... We met with Steve Kirchman also because he had a similar question. What would change...
Councilman Berquist: Okay. I'll just quickly go through my notes here and then I've got a couple of
comments. I'm not quite certain how to put this. The parking area that's been designed. There's an area, there's
a retail area in town that has a parkiug area that is very, very difficult in which to maneuver. I would hope that
some of those concerns have been addressed and not incorporated into this plan.
Kate Aanenson: Yes. I think we've all learned from that example. I think that's safe to say.
Councilman Berquist: Well since I can't look at it and tell for sure, I just want to bring it up. The only other
comment I wanted to make is, I kuow this has been in the planning stages for a long time. I support it
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
conceptually. I think it will bring an enormous improvement to the area. Not that I dislike pre-stressed
concrete with flaking paint but it desperately needs a facelift. And the other side of it is, as it develops it will
also allow us to do some other things in our long range plan for the other end of to~vn so I support it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Michael.
Councilman Mason: Only to add that it's been a while since Planning Commission, staff and developers have
been in such complete agreement on everything. It's been a long process. I think it's been very worthwhile. I
think sometimes a developer that lives and works in the city is a double edged sword but I'm looking forward to
seeing this and I agree with Nancy. It's going to be very nice to have theaters in to~vn. Among other things I
might add.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: In terms of conditions, have all the back taxes been paid on this property? If not, can we
make that a condition of approval?
Kate Aanenson: We're just doing a vacation and site plan review. I don't know what.
Mayor Chmiel: Before we go into that part of it, I don't 'know if there's any legalities. Let me get an opinion.
Roger?
Councilman Senn: That's what I'm asking.
Roger Knutson: There's nothing in our ordinance that addresses that issue for this. I'll just share with you
though since I, there's been discussion in the legislature about requiring that sort of thing but there is no law on
the books. There's no ordinance that allows the city.
Todd Gerhardt: We do have it tied to that they will not get reimbursement for these improvements unless they
pay taxes so if they do not pay their taxes, they do not get the money to help finance this facade. So from that.
Councilman Senn: That's forward. What about backwards?
Don Ashworth: You can't pay taxes forward unless you pay taxes backwards.
Todd Gerhardt: You can't leave outstanding taxes due.
Don Ashworth: You could not pay your 1996 taxes if you were delinquent in '94 and '95. Any amount you
paid would first be applied to 1994.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay?
Councilman Berquist: So in effect that insures that the taxes will be brought up to date.
Don Ashxvorth: I would think so.
9
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Senn: That's what I'm hearing. Otherwise just you know, just generally speaking the, you know it
really looks like it's going to be a nice project. I think it will be a good project and it will help, how would
say, beautify an area that badly needs to be...beautification. From the context of the project, I'd like to say that
I really support it and hope that it goes forxvard. From a financing perspective, and I don't believe the Council
here has anything to say about it one xvay or another but it's something that I think needs to be commented on
and that is the, I don't agree with taking this property off the tax rolls another 20 years when it's already been
off 20 years to provide TIF for improvements. But that's all. I think it will be an excellent project.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. You're saying Vernelle that the start time would be approximately when? You said
xvhen you'd like to have it in operation. When is your actual start time that you can start this particular project
going.
Vernelle Clayton: Well at minimum, if everything went really well, it would have to be at least 60 days from
now but I don't know if we'll make it. We have to come back here to you ~vith the plans approval which ~vill
take...45 days at least and...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. With that, we have a recommendation from staff. I'd like to take the first one as a
motion to request to vacate that easterly portion of the right-of-way. Is there a motion on that?
Councihnan Mason: So moved.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilman Berquist: Second.
Resolution #96-11: Councihnan Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to approve the vacation of Pauly
Drive as shown in plans dated January 16, 1996 with the following conditions:
Tile applicant shall provide a legal description of the portion of Pauly Drive right-of-way proposed to be
vacated for review and approval.
Approval of this vacation is contingent upon the applicant entering into a site plan agreement xvith the
city.
All voted in favor and tile motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel: And I'd like then to take the site plan review.
Councilman Mason: I'll move site plan review to remodel existing Chanhassen Boxvl/Filly's and a portion of
Frontier building, ere to include variances as stated, contingent upon conditions in the staff report.
Mayor Chmiel: Very good. And also with the site plans dated December 12, 1995, revised January 16, 1996.
Councilman Mason: So moved.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there a second?
10
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Berquist: Second.
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Benlulst seconded to approve Site Plan for the Entegminment Complex
#95-21 SPR as shown on the site plan dated December 12, 1995, revised January 16, 1996, ~vith the following
conditions:
The existing four trees located east of the existing bus shelter shall be relocated within the bus shelter
area. Three landscape islands shall be added to the southeasterly portion of the parking lot.
The applicant shall incorporate a sidewalk along Pauly Drive xvith the landscaping. Landscaping other
than the city's boulevard trees shall be prohibited within the city's right-of-way or trail easement area.
Any/all damaged sidewalk as a result of construction activities on the site shall be replaced in kind by the
applicant.
3. All existing and proposed rooftop equipment shall be screened from views, specifically from Highxvay 5.
4. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site.
o
Window signage shall comply with the sign ordinance and the staff and applicant shall xvork together to
define what constitutes real window space to be used in the calculations.
6. The following sign criteria is adopted as part of the site plan which includes variances:
Signage Plan and Restrictions:
Neon Illuminated
a. The location of letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign bands as indicated
on Exhibit A. The letters and logos shall be restricted to 30 inches in height and must be back lit if
illuminated. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall have a minimum depth of
five inches and shall be constructed with a translucent facing over neon tube illumination. (Elevation
draxving to be attached upon approval.)
b. All individual dimensional letters and logos comprising each sign shall be back lit with neon tube
illumination. Letter styles shall reflect the period style of the facades and/or corporate logos. At the
cinema marquee and restaurant sign bands, lettering on a "Plexiglass" face shall be permitted and at
the cinema marquee temporary individual letters and numbers may be used to display current and/or
coming attractions, ratings and show times and dates.
c. Tenant neon illuminated signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the
tenant's proper name and major product or service offered. Corporate logos, emblems and similar
identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band and do not
occupy more than 15% of the sign area.
Sandblasted Wood, Tenant Identification
a. Tim letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign bands as indicated on Exhibit
A. Projecting signs may not exceed 4 feet in height and 3 feet in width.
11
City Council Meeting ~ January 22, 1996
b. All xvooden signs shall be sandblasted and letters shall be an integral part of the building's
architecture.
c. Signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the tenant's proper name and
major product or service offered and such minimal messages such as date of establishment of
business. Corporate logos, emblems and similar identifying devices are permitted provided they are
confined within the signage band or within the projecting sign and do not occupy more than fifteen
(15) percent of the sign display area.
d. Projecting signs shall be stationary, may be lighted by spotlight and must use one of the three frame
designs set forth on Exhibit A.
e. Projecting signs shall be limited to one per tenant and may not exceed 12 square feet. The maximum
number of projecting signs may not exceed 6 signs for the entire building.
Menu Signs
a. Shall be located at eye level adjacent to tenant entries as indicated on Exhibit A and shall not exceed
4 feet in height.
b. Shall be used ouly to convey daily specials, menus and offerings and shall be xvood framed
chalkboard and/or electronic board with temporary handwritten lettering. No paper construction or
messages will be permitted.
¢. Menu signs shall be limited to one per tenant and may not exceed 8 square feet.
Posters
a. The cinema shall be permitted framed poster displays for current and/or coming attractions at the
south elevation only.
Building Directory
a. One building director'), shall be permitted at the sign band indicated on Exhibit A at the "Bank
Building" location. The directory sign shall not exceed 12 square feet.
Cross access easements and maintenance agreements need to be provided over the parking lot and
driveways.
Building Official conditions:
a. Amend site plan review application to include replatting with the object of removing critical property
lines, or redraw plans to comply xvith code requirements for opening protection.
b. Have a qualified engineer perform a structure evaluation of the subject building. This should be done
prior to building permit issuance.
c. Revise plans to relocate disabled parking spaces closer to other building entrances. This should be
done prior to building permit issuance.
Fire Marshal conditions:
a. "No Parking Fire Lane" xvill be established by the Fire Marshal. Contact Fire Marshal for exact
details and comply xvith Policy //06-1991. Copy enclosed.
12
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
b. A remote fire department sprinkler connection must be relocated to the south side of the building.
Contact Fire Marshal for exact location.
c. Maintain a ten foot clear space around new or existing fire hydrants.
d. Submit radius turn dimensions to City Engineering and Fire Marshal for approval.
The northwest elevation shall be remodeled as part of this proposal.
The applicant's engineer shall submit to the city for review and approval a storm drainage management
plan. The plan shall also include detailed stormwater calculations and area drainage maps for a 10 year
storm event.
The applicant shall redesign the site plans to avoid conflict ~vith the city's sanitary server and water lines.
The applicant also has the option to relocate the City's utility lines or to encase/sleeve the sewer and
water lines. The applicant will be required then to dedicate to the city the appropriate drainage and utility
easements for lines relocated. All utility construction shall be in accordance with the latest edition of the
City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Since most of these improvements will be considered
private, separate building permits will be required through the City's Public Safety Department for all
storm sexver and utility lines.
The applicant and/or contractor will be responsible for adjustment of all existing gate valves, manholes,
and catch basins on the site. The City's Utility Department will require inspection of these adjustments.
The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance ~vith the City's Best
Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water Management Plan requirements for new
development. The plans shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. Type I erosion control
fence and rock construction entrances shall be employed and maintained at all access points until streets
have been paved xvith a bituminous surface. Catch basins shall be protected with silt fence and/or hay
bales until the parking lot has been paved with bituminous surface.
All disturbed areas as a result of construction shall be restored ~vith sod and/or landscaping materials
within two xveeks of completion of the parking lot.
The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary financial
security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee compliance with the conditions of
approval and to guarantee restoration of city boulevards and adjustments to the city's infrastructures.
17. The applicant shall redesign thc site plan parking lot configuration to include the follo~ving items:
18.
a. Staft's rendering labeled as Attachment//8 of the staff report.
b. Enter into an agreement with the City allowing city snowplows to utilize the parking lot facility.
c. The applicant shall prepare a traffic control plan for city staff to review and approve prior to issuance
of a building permit.
The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tile found during construction
and abandon or reconnect all tiles as directed by the City Engineer.
13
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
19. The applicant shall apply for and obtain all the necessary permits of the regulatory agencies such as
health dept., watershed district and MPCA.
20. In conjunction with the subdivision process, the city reserves the right to require the necessary drainage
and utility easements or street right-of-way based on the subdivision proposal.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously,
AWARD OF BIDS: AUTHORIZE ACQUISITION OF CITY VEHICLES ON STATE/COUNTY BID
CONTRACT, FILE NO. PW-016DDD, AND 1(I)) AUTHORIZE ADVERTISING FOR BIDS FOR 1996
PUBLIC WORKS VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENTi FILE NO. PW-016DDD.
Charles Folch: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Maybe starting off with item l(d) from the
consent agenda. Basically included a list of the vehicles and equipment that were listed on the proposed 1996
equipment replacement budget, which we also discussed at a work session back in October. And as we
typically do with that, even though these items were included in the approved budget, we still bring them back
to you for authorization to go ahead and advertise for bids. Item 3 basically contains the equipment which we
can obtain through the Hennepin County or State of Minnesota Vehicle and Equipment bid contracts, which in
the past have shown to be very, very favorable and those are listed as equipment items number 1 through 6.
Item 7 is the nexv crack sealer, which we've actually taken for quotes since it's in the dollar amount that we are
not required to necessarily go out for bids. However, there are only a couple of companies in the State of
Minnesota which provide this type of, or manufacture this type of equipment so xve've acquired quotes from the
three and have found the most favorable quote to come from Stepp Manufacturing. It's also important for us to
obtain this piece of equipment as soon as possible because typically our biggest time of the year to use the
crack sealer is actually iu March and April, xvhich is surprising to most people but that's xvhen most of our street
cracks are their xvidest and so that's when we find our crack sealing program to be most effective. And the
eighth item which is basically acquiring the portable weight scales for our new program which was approved
this year during the seasonal road restriction and we've got a little over a month to obtain those pieces of
equipment and get the training necessary with the Carver County Sheriff's Office so we also would like to award
quotes on that item tonight. With that, it's staff's recommendation that the above listed items 1 through 8 as
included in the staff report be recommended for acquisition.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Is there any discussion on these? Steve.
Councilman Berquist: Well it's a little bit surprising to me that we get authorization to receive bids and then we
get a desire to, or an authorization to approve purchase all in the same night. Is that unusual?
Charles Folch: Yes. Typically we try to do that on separate nights. Unfortunately there's a number of pieces
of equipment on a state bid contract which have to be basically ordered by January 31st. This is our last City
Council meeting and opportunity to try to get them listed. But you're correct. Typically in the past xve've gone
separate nights for that.
Councilman Berquist: I'm not certain how, who else has questions or how long this could possibly take but I'd
be interested in taking it item by item. You know budget versus purchase price.
Charles Folch: Sure.
14
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Berquist: Just to, and I don't know if anybody else is interested in that much detail. This was all,
Pam makes reference to the fact that it was all within the budget, or it's all within the budget for 1996.
Charles Folch: That's correct.
Councilman Berquist: I don't remember a planning department van.
Charles Folch: Well it.
Councilman Berquist: Nor do I see one on the...
Charles Folch: On the item l(d), the attachment includes the page from the '96 budget. It actually lists, about
the seventh item down it says planning department. Actually it was listed as a sedan type vehicle with a
budgetary item amount of $20,000.00. But through discussions with the planning department, they believe that
a more all terrain type vehicle would benefit them, if it's possible, to still acquire that within the budget since
what this vehicle xvould be used for is a lot of site inspections, erosion control, landscaping, grading, that type
of thing. And so they feel that it would better serve their department if they ~vere able to obtain some sort of 4
wheel drive capable vehicle.
Councilman Berquist: Okay. Well, I don't know. I hate to delay everyone here over this item. I'll see ~vhat
Mark's got to say.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: Roger, can we? I mean can we ask pass it tonight on advertising for bids and award bids on
the same items on the same evening?
Roger Knutson: Yes.
Councihnan Senn: That's the question I had Written down. That's okay?
Roger Knutson: Technically the staff can put an ad in the paper for bids without coming to Council. That's just
soliciting proposals. Soliciting the bids. Now you can reject all of those if you want to. The only time, by
statute, by statute that's policy xvhich you ~vant...statute they're required to come to you before going out for bids
to put an ad in the paper. If it's a 429 public improvement project, then they have to come here first and say,
will you allow us to put an ad in the paper. Otherwise, they don't have to. In fact it varies from community to
community. Some communities have where they would never go to the Council and ask permission to put the
ad in the paper. If it's consistent with the budget, they can just put it in the paper and then the bids ~vould come
in and then they'd get approval or reject it.
Charles Folch: I should point out, going back to the staff report, item l(d). On items number 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 and
13, are not able to be obtained through the state bid contract at this time so we will be, pending your approval,
formally advertising for those and bringing back those prices and bids received to you at a future Council for
approval. Only the items tonight which we asked for approval on is the 6 items which can be bought under the
State and Hennepin County bid contracts which we do not believe that going through spending the time and
expense to go through the formal bidding solicitation process, we do not believe that we would have received
any more favorable bids than what the State and Hennepin County have through their larger bidding contracts.
15
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
And then again items 7 and 8, it's more of a timing thing. We need to obtain the equipment within the next
30 days so.
Councilman Senn: Steve I did check. They're all within the budget...
Councilman Berquist: Okay.
Councilman Senn: Charles what's the, on your attachment there it's penciled in at the bottom, the water tanker
truck $200,000.00. What is that? I checked my budget documents and I didn't see that.
Charles Folch: I belie`,,e that is a fire department item. I'm not familiar with that to be totally honest.
Councilman Senn: So that's not part of this at all?
Charles Folch: Is that correct Harry?
Harold Brose: Yes.
Councilman Senn: Okay. So that's not part of this at all.
Charles Folch: No.
Councihnan Senn: In terms of the, I guess I have some questions also on the planning department van. It
speaks to the fact here that they want to have a van that will haul a whole bunch of people, 12 people or
something like that. But also you want to use it for basically staff work and checking, you know checking
things.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. We do not have a vehicle right now, except for the station wagon which has expired.
Basically it's no longer functional. We need it. The city forester uses it. The water resources coordinator will
be underneath our department. That's our van to take the Planning Commission to look at sites and the staff to
go look at. If we need to haul trees. Jill needs to get her equipment in there. We felt, when Charles and I
originally put the budget together, we put in $20,000.00 knowing in the past that for $20,000.00 he ,,vas able to
get a van. We talked about some different options but we felt that was the best utilization of, for the stafPs
resources. A van. It gives us the most options as far as utility of the vehicle.
Councilman Senn: Well for staff, you know to jump into it and go check something out, that's hardly going to
fill the van. You're going to have a very low mileage vehicle. I mean how often are we really going to totally
utilize a 12 passenger van?
Kate Aanenson: Well to haul stuff in it, sure. You mean a station wagon? Is that what.
Councilman Senu: Oh, so you're going to remove all the seats you mean to haul stuff'?
Kate Aanenson: Sure. If you wanted to, sure. That's what I'm saying. It gives you the option. If Jill has to
go get trees for Arbor Day, it gives us that opportunity, sure.
Councilman Senn: So I mean this van's not going to be finished on the interior so to speak then?
16
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Kate Aanenson: Sure it is. But we think it gives us the most variety. If we go look at a site, there's 4 or 5 of
us, 6 of us to get in to go look at a site. We walk all the property that comes in for development. We think
that's a prudent thing to do to give you the best recommendations and if we want to take the Planning
Commission, which we're trying to do, to go look at sites, we need to have a vehicle that we can all get in. I
mean our first choice would be something more like a Suburban but the cost on those is, that would be the most
prudent thing for us to use but we thought the van gave us the best utility and the best use.
Don Ashxvorth: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes Don.
Don Ashxvorth: This is not a 12 passenger. This would be like a 7 passenger. Like the one we have out here
now. I mean we're not talking about one of these super vans. I mean this is just a typical van.
Councilman Senn: Okay. But you can get that kind of a van with 4 wheel drive for ~vhat you've got in the
budget here? If you can you're going to really surprise me.
Charles Folch:
Harold Brose:
little lower.
We did last year under the State bid contract. What did they come in at about $18,000.007
$18,600.00 this year so they will be a little higher. We're hoping to get close to 20. Maybe a
Mayor Chmiel: Any other questions? Michael.
Councilman Mason: I have none.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess one of the questions that I had, Steve has asked so I don't really have any. Any
other discussion7 Is there a motion? And I would like to go with item (d) from the consent. Mark, maybe
you'd like to move that one first. Being that you pulled that.
Councilman Senn: Oh, it's authorization for advertising the bids7
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah.
Councilman Senn: So moved.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to authorize advertising for bids for 1996 Public Works
Vehicles and Equipment, File No. PW-016ddd. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel: Noxv for the authorization to approve purchase of vehicles.
Councilman Mason: I will move authorization to approve purchase of vehicles in the State and Hennepin
County bids including quote for crack sealer and portable scales.
Councilman Berquist: I'll second.
17
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Resolution #96-12: Councilman Mason moved, Councilm,'m Benluist secomled the authorization to approve
pumhase of vehicles in the State and Hermepin Count' bids including quote for crock sealer and portable scales.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE A 2.22 ACRE PARCEL INTO 4 LOTS~ 6660 POWERS
BOULEVARD~ GOLDEN GLOW ACRES~ JAMES RAVIS.
Public Present:
Name Address
Jeremy Steiner
Jim & Norma Ravis
Tom Parker
Robert & Lois Peterson
Larry Kerber
Russ Kohman
Bill Infanger
Suite 400 Norwest Bank, Hopkins
6660 Powers Boulevard
6258 Washta Road
6650 Powers Boulevard
6420 Powers Boulevard
Powers Boulevard
Powers Boulevard
Sharmin A1-Jaff: On September 25, 1995 the City Council reviewed and tabled action on this application. Staff
was directed to meet with the applicant and their immediate neighbors to look at potential alternatives to this
proposal. Tiffs meeting took place on October 26th of 1995. Mr. Ravis, some of the neighbors, Councilman
Senn and Berquist and engineering and planning staff were present at this meeting. A new development option
xvas proposed. However this option never materialized. Last Friday Mr. Ravis' attorney faxed a letter
requesting changes to conditions 11, 18, 19 and 20 from pages 14 and 15 and 16 of the staff report. I'll briefly
go through these conditions. Condition number 11 deals with extending sewer and water services to the
Infanger and the Kohman properties. Staff has reached a compromise on this. The condition has been modified
to read, the applicant shall be responsible for extending a municipal water line to the north line ct' Lot 2 and
sanitary sewer and water service to the Infanger and the Kohman's property to the east for future expansion.
Lots 2, 3, and 4 will be charged at the time of building permit issuance a hook-up charge in accordance to city
ordinances, and this is where the change comes in. It will appear in italic letters on conditions that I handed out
before the meeting. The applicant shall be reimbursed by the city based on construction costs for providing
sanitary sewer and water services to the Infanger, Kohman properties. The construction costs for the sewer and
water system shall be evenly distributed over benefitting lots which will include Lots 2, 3, 4, Golden Glow
Addition and Infanger and Kohman parcels. As far as conditions 18, 19, and 20. Those conditions pertain to
the dedication of the cul-de-sac easement over proposed Lots 1 and 2. Staff strongly believes that these
conditions should remain. Staff did amend condition 20 to delete Lot 1 from any future assessments for
upgrading the cul-de-sac. Staff is still recommending denial of this application because we believe it is
premature development, as xve have explained in the staff report. However, if the City Council chooses to
approve this subdivision, staff has prepared conditions that we believe are mutually acceptable to both the
applicant and the city and with that.
Mayor Cbmiel: Okay, thanks Sharmin. Steve, do you have any questions of Sharmin?
Councilman Berquist: Not at this time.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Michael?
18
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Mason: Not at this time.
Mayor Chmiel: Mark.
Councilman Senn: No. Not right now. Is the applicant here? Is there anything that you wish to address in
this proposal and to the comments of staff?.
Jerry Steiner: Mr. Mayor, Council members. My name is Jerry Steiner. I appeared here on September 25 on
behalf of the Ravis' and...I guess I'd like to just make two brief comments. But first off I'd like to say we've
been put in a very axvkward position trying to negotiate conditions ~vith staff because it's become apparent, in
fact staff has said in so many words that regardless of what Ravis' agree to in terms of conditions, staff is still
going to recommend denial. In fact they have. We've gone through a lengthy discussion with the neighbors, or
Mr. Ravis has. Both Mr. Ravis and myself have talked with staff at length regarding the 20 conditions in the
staff report and yet as late as 4:30 this afternoon I was told that even though we agree to all the staff
recommended conditions, staff was still going to recommend denial so ~ve've had no one to negotiate with
basically other than Council. Staff's position appears to be that if they make a soft recommendation of denial,
perhaps the Council will approve it if the Ravis' can do the conditions. It's a very axvkward position to be in.
We'd much prefer to negotiate this with staff outside of the Council meeting, kno~ving that staff ~vould
recommend approval and having a reason why... But having said that, I will say that the Ravis' are prepared to
agree to the 20 conditions we have revised in the staff report with one minor modification to condition number
20... Condition number 20 has to do with future construction of the cul-de-sacs or the street connected to the
cul-de-sac which the Ravis' are... They're prepared to dedicate that cul-de-sac. They're also prepared to accept
that if the street is extended to the north to connect to that cul-de-sac in the future, three of the lots in their plat,
Lots 2, 3 and 4 would be assessed for the cost of extending the street...and that's exactly what it says in the staff
report but we'd like to ~dd to that that none of the lots in the plat would be assessed for sewer and water if it's
extended in connection with the extension of the street to the north because the server and water improvements
will have already been put in now from the four lots that were developed. They ~von't need that improvement at
the time that the street is extended north so they shouldn't be subject to a double assessment in that. The Ravis'
can accept that there ma3, be some benefit to those three lots in having their street extended and it might be
appropriate for some of the cost of that street improvement to be assessed for those lots. But not the sewer and
water because that will, those utilities xvill already have been provided. There would be zero benefit. Now I
don't know whether I really should get into the merits of the pros and cons of why this should be approved
because I don't know where we're going with this tonight. As I told you the Ravis' are basically prepared to
agree to the staff recommended conditions so if the Council ~vill approve it on those conditions, we're prepared
to accept them. But if the Council denies approval of the plat, xve're going to continue to take the position that
the Ravis' are entitled to have the plat approved without this cul-de-sac. That's really the sticking point here.
It's quite an onerous condition to carve out a 50 foot radius cul-de-sac over 2 lots out of 4. In and of itself that
reduces the value of those lots substantially because anyone buying those lots is going to be quite concerned
about what happens if the street comes down...but the Ravis' are prepared to live ~vith that if they can get the
plan approved. We can't get that assurance at the staff level so we're here to get approval and that assurance
from the Council tonight and I'll leave it at that. I'm happy to answer any questions that the Council has. Jim
Ravis is here and I'm sure he's happy to respond as well or xve can wait until, I see some of the neighbors are
here. Perhaps xve can wait and answer any questions after they're done talking. At that point I think I could
answer any questions you want.
Mayor Chmiel: Are there any questions by Council at this time?
19
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Berquist: I have none.
Mayor Chmiel: Mark.
Councilman Senn: Sharmin, or Kate. Whichever one. What were the other opportunities like?
Kate Aanenson: When Willow Ridge came in, on the screen right there, there was an opportunity. Sewer and
water was extended from Willow Ridge. There was an opportunity to make a connection through Lot 3. As
you're aware a lot of developers prefer to keep their own development insulated. The fact that they don't like
the opportunity for stub streets. At that time that was an opportunity lost for Mr. Ravis to get access and that
may have been another way to better serve this property~ So there was an opportunity there to provide access.
Councilman Senn: So that was...and that was denied?
Kate Aanenson: No. There was a recommendation to look at that access and that recommendation was turned
down.
Councilman Senn: Denied by the city then?
Kate Aanenson: Right.
Jerry Steiner: Councihnember Senn, if I could respond to that. Mr. Ravis actually requested that the city
provide that access to his property xvhen Willow Ridge was approved in '91 and that was turned down at that
time. I believe he's communicated to the Councilmembers here that it was turned down on the basis that he had
adequate access to Powers Boulevard. He finds it ironic, more than ironic. He finds it very frustrating that at
this point in time when he comes to develop his property, he's told he can't develop it with access to Po;vers
Boulevard so he's kind of dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't. He's just trying to accommodate with
what xve're proposing tonight, the city's concerns. I should mention that by agreeing to dedicate this cul-de-sac,
he's not intending to do anything. The Ravis' aren't intending to do anything but to guarantee the street come
down from the north in the future. That's what the staff would prefer. This so called... I expect some of the
neighbors may object to the existence of that cul-de-sac, even though it's just going to be dedicated but not
improved at this time. The5, may object to the fact that it's there because I know Mr. Kerber for example
doesn't want a street, to see a street coming down to that cul-de-sac ever but again the Ravis' are kind of caught
between competing interests here, their neighbors and the city's and they're just trying to accommodate both of
them by making this dedicated, unimproved cul-de-sac available now. If it's needed in the future. If it isn't, it's
our understanding it would be abandoned...vacated by the city. If development to the north occurs in such a
way that it's not needed, the city would vacate it and expect...
Councilman Senn: Kate, folloxving up our previous discussions as well as the meetings xve had...if I'm
understanding where you change these conditions now to this point in time, effectively based on the conditions,
Ravis could proceed to develop his property. We have an easement in place which protects us in the future as it
would relate to bringing a public street in so we can take a wait and see attitude on xvhat happens to the
surrounding property.
Kate Aanenson: That's correct.
Councilman Senn: And then we'll have the easement in place to do that?
20
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Kate Aanenson: That's correct.
Councilman Senn: He'll put in the sexver and water now?
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Councilman Senn: For his units.
Kate Aanenson: And stubs to the other properties.
Councilman Senn: And stubs to the other properties and when the public, if the road comes in later, in his
property as well as all the other benefitting properties would be assessed for the street improvements.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Councilman Senn: Hoxvever his would not be assessed for the se;ver and water because the3, already have sewer
and water...
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Jerry Steiner: That's exactly what we're saying we would accept.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other questions? If not, we'll open it back for some input. Any of the neighbors
wanting to come forward and discuss. I know what we discussed last time. Anything that might be new would
be the things that would be brought up at this time. Larry.
Larry Kerber: Yes. My name's Larry Kerber. I live directly north. Yeah Sharmin, if you could keep that up
please. I live to the north of the Ravis' or I own property to the north of the Ravis' project and I guess I take
issue with staff's findings on three reasons xvhy he should not have a private driveway. One and two I ~von't
even go into. We could argue all night on it but I particularly take issue ~vith number 3 that says, his private
driveway is more harmful to the existing trees than a city street would be. Well if you go up on the north side
where her pen is laying, coming doxvn there is where their existing north street is proposed. That Option E. If
you bring a north street in, it will take out approximately 180 of my trees for a private driveway where these are
proposed takes out about 12 or 16 of his. Now I just don't see ho~v a city street is less detrimental to the trees
than that private driveway. I don't understand that at all. The second comment I have is, it seems with the
Ravis' project we also have Infanger and Kohman involved. We have a potential for 8 lots there. Why wasn't a
public street addressed for that project alone? I was a little late date to bring that up but I just think it would be
feasible if xve potentially have 8 lots there. And thirdly I'd like to ask, if you do indeed...the private driveway,
which I think he's entitled to, I ask you take out the easement for the future cul-de-sac across my property for
the reasons indicated, the tree loss, and the change in my topography. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Larry, your particular parcels that you're talking about is 6, 5, 21 and 20? Are those your, is
that correct Sharmin?
Kate Aanenson: No. It's 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. 21 and 20. And 19 I believe too..
Lan3, Kerber: What are we looking at? Option E?
21
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Larry Kerber: Yes. Yeah, under Option E we'd be looking at, affected by the Ravis property would be like 19,
20, and 21.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. 19 is also your's then?
Larry Kerber: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright.
Larry Kerber: And that's exactly where the tree area is, starting from halfway through Parcel 6 all the way
ttu-ough 21, 20 and 19 is the bulk of the trees that I'm concerned about. It also...topography on Lot 19 for the
cul-de-sac or the road to put the cul-de-sac starts. They'll need approximately a 6 to 8 foot cut through there to
put a cul-de-sac in so it'd be appropriate for homesites in the Ravis' addition. And it will leave my existing
house...plus I'll have to rearrange the existing house that faces to that road where now it faces Powers
Boulevard. It means taking out every tree in front of that to re-grade the front yard of that house to make this
road or put in a retaining wall. It just, the topography between my place and Bob Peterson's along through the
trees does not lend itself to a road through there.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thanks. Anyone else?
Russ Kohman: I'm Russ Kohman. I've got the plot of land to the south of his and if he runs a road in here, a
private road, he's going to be sitting on top of the pine trees that I've got in there and they're up what, 80 feet,
70-80 feet high and I'll lose those out and besides that, the width of the road, there's not enough room between
my lot line and his house. Just plain and simple. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Is there anyone else?
Bob Peterson: I'm Bob Peterson. Lots 9 and 10 I believe on the plat. I measured the distances between the
Kohman and the Ravis property, between Infanger and the Kohman property. There isn't enough room for a
road inbetween either one of those properties. So why, I don't understand why you're talking about the road
except that it seems that the Planning Commission and/or the City Council is pushing us that direction. If we're
pushed towards the direction with roads, let's do a better job than Plan E. It's about the worst way to lay out a
road in that area. I've been in the developing and architecture business for 30 years and I've worked ~vith lots of
plats, lots of homes. I design homes...plats and lots. I've got a pretty good idea what the public looks for in
housing. How they like to have their homes facing and not facing and that Option E that you have, I don't have
a copy of it, I think is about the worst approach to the whole area. I don't like the idea however that we even
have to talk about a road because I think the city's code is pretty clear. I believe Mr. Ravis has the right to put
in just what the code says. Four houses per a private driveway. Why do we even have to look for a road in the
future? I'm not in favor of a road there in the future myself, thank you.
Mayor Chmiet: Thanks Bob.
Bill Infanger: I'm Bill Infanger. The neighbor just south...Jim Ravis and I have had numerous discussions over
the last 2 or 3 months...alternative options...considered selling part of the property. My wife and I have decided
not to do that. We're probably going to sell the house and the property with it so I have less concerns now than
22
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
I had before and I've talked to Jim about what would be the concerns I have and most of the questions are
answered. I'm a little confused about this business about the stub. The sewer and water that's being proposed
and it's affect on me.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: It will be extended to, Dave go ahead.
Dave Hempel: Maybe I can address that Mr. Mayor, members of Council. As you're aware, the Infanger and
Kohman parcels does have enough size to further subdivide into another lot each so that's part of the problem
with this whole development plan, limited access. Our thought was since the Ravis' had to extend sewer and
water service to his development, he's going to run down a property line. Basically the common property line
between Infanger and Kohman. We thought it prudent to extend sewer and xvater service to those parcels as
xvell so years down the road here we would not have to tear up landscaping and the private street to access the
sewer and ~vater lines. We felt it was prudent to put in at this time and reimburse Mr. Ravis for those costs
incurred for doing that and retrieve those costs in the future through connection charges and hook-up charges
when those properties develop and hook-up to city sewer and water lines.
Bill Infanger: So they'd have somebody, if I were to sell my property and the future oxvner requested to sub
development, he could simply tie into that lot and he'd be assessed the cost for the tie in, is that correct?
Dave Hempel: Basically. One of the problems though xvith subdivision your parcel would be the street access.
Bill Infanger: Yes, I understand that, and that's an outstanding concern. I myself, at this point...subdivide. We
don't have any interest in doing so. The proposal that Mr. Kerber suggested I think ~vas mostly eliminated early
on primarily because Mr. Kohman didn't want to sell. I was willing at that point to entertain subdividing my
lot...but Russ Kohman wasn't interested so we didn't pursue that any further. That's all I have. Thanks.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Anyone else? If not, we'll bring it back to Council one more time. Steve.
Councilman Berquist: Couple of quick questions of staff and then I'll make my comments. Russ Kohman
mentions the private road, the drivexvay would be, it would negatively affect the pine trees. The question is
whether there's adequate room betxveen the houses to permit the driveway. I know we've already gone through.
this. I just want some assurance that in fact that 20 foot driveway can go through there xvithout, and the
accompanying easement can go through there without affecting the tree canopy. The xvay I understand it, those
are on his lot.
Sharmin AI-Jaff: Mr. Ravis will be putting the driveway on his land. However, there are pine trees
immediately next to the private driveway next to the property line. Will they be impacted? Staff believes yes
they would. Legally I really don't 'l'l'l'lmow what Mr. Ravis' liability is as far as making sure that the trees survive
on Mr. Kohman's property.
Councilman Berquist: So short of a civil suit, he may have no option but to watch them die?
Sharmin AI-Jaff: I don't know how.
Dave Hempel: There ma3, be construction techniques to be employed such as retaining walls that try and gives
more buffer. Save more of the root zone of the trees when he puts the private street in. There's still no
guarantees though.
23
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Berquist: Alright, well that's an issue that I have concerns with because it affects a property that's
adjoining a development. Your property, you have no interest whatsoever in participating in the development so
you should be protected. The other question that I had written doxvn was, Mr. Kerber's reference to the
easement. The cul-de-sac easement. Now the way I understand it, the easement that will be granted on the
Ravis' property will not be part of or any way be recorded as an easement on any of Kerber's property presently.
Is that correct?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: That's correct.
Councilman Berquist: Okay. So alright. Good. So having said that, perhaps the tone of those questions gives
you an idea of where I'm going with this. I've wrestled with this and I thought it was perhaps a premature
development. I have a difficult time speaking to the issues of what has, xvhat went before regarding the
developments that are directly xvest of there, because I wasn't a part of this body but I'm going to try to speak to
the issues that are pertinent now. One of the gentlemen that spoke, Mr. Steiner made reference to the fact that
staff xvas disagreeable and conceptually I think it's the stafPs responsibility to the Council to report their beliefs.
If in fact they think the development is premature, they're charged with telling us that. It's up to us whether or
not we decide if that's true. The development is consistent with the comprehensive plan regarding lot sizes.
The private street findings inasmuch as I wish to minimize the, or reduce the number of accesses to Powers
Boulevard. It is a 50 mph road. The County has no foreseeable plans in the future to upgrade it in any way,
shape or form. I'm concerned about safety. I'm concerned about congestion but that's an arbitrary' desire on my
part to minimize the access and it really has no basis within the ordinances of the city at this time. The
Infanger's property will become landlocked until such time as a public street is constructed, if ever. He's
apparently okay with that. Russ Kohman's property will in effect become landlocked. He's apparently okay
with that. We have another development issue before us this evening that testifies to the trend of mini-
developments. This one, odd as it is, meets the criteria necessary for approval and in going through the staff
report, the detailed findings on pages 9 and 10 make a very good case for approval. I agree ~vith the Planning
Commission insofar as this development may hinder the development of surrounding properties but it will not
prevent the surrounding properties from being developed in an orderly fashion. I xvould support approval of this
development going forward with a refinement of the conditions as detailed.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Mike.
Councilman Mason: My concern with this is the Kohman and Infanger property and Roger, maybe you can
help with this. Maybe not. I don't knoxv. If in fact they are landlocked, xvbat is our responsibility xvhen they
come to subdivide in the future? I know they say they're not going to now, and I'm not disputing that but times
could or couldn't change.
Roger Knutson: Unless they can provide access...turn down their subdivision approval .... responsibility to
provide access somehow...
Councihnan Mason: I have difficulty, although Steve makes so~ne compelling arguments. I have difficulty
approving a subdivision knowing that, I guess I'll ask Council this. If we're approving this subdivision, are ~ve
then essentially telling those other two that they won't be able to subdivide?
Councilman Berquist: We're simply hindering their ability to subdivide. If there's a public street that goes in to
serve that property, or xvhen there's a public street that goes in to serve that property, those two parcels are no
longer landlocked.
24
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Senn: And ~ve have an easement in place in effect to do that.
Jerry Steiner: I'd be happy to speak to that issue.
Mayor Chmiel: It's here at Council right no,v, thank you.
Councilman Mason: I'd like to hear ~vhat Mark has to say, and you too, before I say anything more.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: Like Steve, I guess it's real hard for me to speak to the past. Likewise I wasn't part of this
body in '91 but it really seems to me the more and more I look back...if the city didn't want the access onto
Powers...because that was the logical place for the access from now until whatever was foreseeable because
there was nothing else on the board period. And Ravis had extended the desire to do something at that point in
time so it seems to me at that point the decision was made by the city and now effectively my concern tums
more towards one of the private driveway. It's hardly the ideal situation as it relates to the overall development
of the area but I, at the same time think Mr. Ravis should have the right and the opportunity to utilize his land
and develop his land. Noxv that we've got the revised conditions, which effectively protect the city as it would
relate to a future public roadway, I think the real issue, now we've got, if the whole area's going to develop, we
have that option there. And that option is one that provides the overall benefit...at that time but who knows
when that's going to be...no way to sit around and figure that one out. But with those conditions in place, the
easements in place, you knoxv it seems to me all the other issues have been, I'm going to say compromised or
addressed or whatever and as long as xve have our future protected, xvhich I think ~ve have, I think Mr. Ravis
should be allowed to proceed with the project.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you. Well, in reviewing staf?s suggestions and recommendations, of course
they're giving us the two different options of this, but I think in their, deep within their own judgment, as they
indicated in their summary, that they are recommending that this be denied for the reason discussed in the staff
report. I know that there is some things that can be done for Mr. Ravis with this, and yes you're right. He does
have that opportunity to develop this but at a cost to other people that are entailed within this particular proposal
as xvell. And taking some of the other things that I see considering going across someone else's property to
provide that portion into Ravis' is questionable. At least in my opinion.
Councilman Senn: Where are xve doing...?
Mayor Chmiel: Well, what I see here going through and if we're still going with E. Is that correct?
Kate Aanenson: That's long term and a temporary access, he wouldn't be. He'd only be using his own property.
That's the long term solution.
Mayor Chmiel:
Kate Aanenson:
Mayor Chmiel:
Councilman Senn:
Okay. I ~vas looking at E as that particular option.
Right, that would be in the future. It could develop that way.
That would be the future for it to go in.
If a city street went in.
25
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: If a city street xvent in, right. Okay. Alright. Well I still see that xvhat I'm looking at right
now presently from what staff's positions are, as I mentioned previously to give you the option as to hoxv this
can be done, I still probably wouldn't go with staf£'s recommendation on this. So we have one thing to do at
this particular time is to either approve or deny this until everything really gets pulled together.
Jerry Steiner: With the Mayor's permission, there's a couple points that should be cleared up. Maybe there's
some misconceptions. When I made my remarks earlier I said I'd be happy to.
Mayor Chmiel: Why don't you come up to the microphone.
Jerry Steiner: Thank you very much Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Chmiel: I'll give you, how long will it take?
Jerry Steiner: Just a few seconds. I think we're going off entirely on a misconception here with the idea that
this is somehoxv landlocking Kohman and Infanger's property, or denying them access. We're not doing that at
all. You have to understand that the Ravis' proposed plat is entirely independent, it stands by itself. It provides
it own access. It doesn't rely on any other properties for access. The access is Powers Boulevard. Approval of
the plat won't change one thing as far as the access that Kohman and Infanger have. They have full access to
Powers Boulevard. If they're going to get access to the north in the future, that has to go across Ravis' property.
What we're proposing to do here is to actually give them that potential access for free, which they wouldn't
otherwise get so contrary to the comments that have been made that this is landlocking their property, it's
actually providing the potential for access to the north for nothing that they wouldn't have if Mr. Ravis didn't
provide it now so it's enhancing their access rather than detracting from it. So I think that's a total
misconception and it would be clearly a wrong basis for denial of this plat. The Ravis' plat stands on it's own.
Provides it's own access to Powers Boulevard and on top of that, they're providing an alternative for access to
the neighboring properties in the future if that's necessary. You've got to understand this Option E is just
something that the staff would like to see happen in the future. It's not necessarily going to happen. We're just
trying to accommodate that concern of staff. I think the Ravis' have gone a long way to accommodate those
concerns and tO' to balance that against the neighbors concerns and they've been very reasonable. I think they're
entitled to approval of this plat. The only other point I'd like to address is this thing about tree protection.
Ravis' would certainly be willing to put a provision of development contract...to protect the trees in that
driveway xvithin feasibility. Within reason. Withiu what's feasible expense wise. We'd be certainly more than
happy to negotiate that xvith staff in the development contract but the idea that we're landlocking anybody's
property is totally incorrect. We're not changing their access one bit. In fact we're providing access they don't
currently have potentially in the future if the street goes in. Thank you Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks.
Roger Knutson: If I could point out. That's one of the reasons staff has been insistent upon getting the cul-de-
sac easement. To make sure that the properties, the Kohman and the other properties, it gives them more
options to subdivide in the future. With this cul-de-sac, even though it's...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councihnan Senn: Well I'll try. I'll move approval of preliminary plat with the conditions as revised and
outlined by staff.
26
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilman Berquist: With the further caveat that you work with it on a development contract to protect the
access that Mr. Kohman possesses?
Roger Knutson: To be clear, that means, revised means the updated January 22nd report that was passed out
earlier tonight plus...
Councilman Senn: Correct.
Councilman Berquist: I'll second that.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, there's a motion on the floor with a second. Any other questions?
Councilman Mason: Currently I want to ask staff this. There are currently no plans for any city street? I mean
this, what we're looking at here, Option E is essentially what would be happening?
Kate Aanenson: We're taking the easement for a future street.
Councilman Mason: Just taking the easement, that's it?
Kate Aanenson: Correct. So if somebody else develops to the north, we can take an additional easement for
the street. And also that modification was that future assessments, if it does become a street, that ~vas a concern
of Mr. Ravis, that those lots xvould be assessed because that was...that was an issue. That they ~vould be
assessed if it does become a thru street.
Councilman Mason: Okay.
Mayor Chmiel.' Okay, any other Michael?
Councilman Mason: No.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Benluist seconded to approve the preliminary plat for Subdivision #94-22
for Golden Glow Acres for four single family lots as shown on the plans dated November 18, 1995, with the
following conditions:
1. The applicant xvill be required to plant 13 replacement trees as shown on the tree inventory.
2. Building Department conditions:
a. Revise Grading and Utility Plan to indicate lowest floor elevation, top of foundation elevation and
garage floor elevation. This should be done prior to final plat approval.
b. Revise the Grading and Utility Plan to show standard designations for dwellings. This should be
done prior to final plat approval.
c. Submit soil reports to the Inspections Division. This should be done prior to issuance of any
building permits.
27
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Fire Marshal conditions:
a. Submit street names to Public Safety for approval.
b. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants.
c. Fire hydrant location is accepted.
Full park and trail fees shall be collected per city ordinance in lieu of land acquisition and/or trail
construction.
The applicant shall provide the city with a $500.00 escrow prior to the city signing the final plat for
review aud recording of the final plat documents and guarantee boulevard restoration.
Importing and exporting material from the site will require approval of a haul route. The haul route shall
be submitted to the City for review and approval.
Lot 4 shall utilize an internal ejector pump system to service the lower level of the dwellings, if
necessary. The use of a forcemain shall be prohibited.
All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored xvith seed and disc-
mulched or xvood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with
the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. Erosion control fence shall be installed at the edge of
the construction limits and not within the wetland buffer zone.
The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary security to
guarantee installation of the public improvements and compliance xvith the final plat conditions of
approval.
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 applicant shall be responsible for extending a municipal water line to the north line of Lot 2 and
sanitaD, sewer and water services to the Infanger and Kohman properties to the east for future extension.
Lots 2, 3, and 4 xvill be charged at time of building permit issuance a hook-up charge in accordance with
city ordinance. The applicant shall be reimbursed by the city, based on construction costs, for providing
sanitary sewer and water service to the Infanger and Kohman properties. The construction costs for the
sewer and water system shall be evenly distributed over benefiting lots (Lots 2, 3 & 4, Golden Glow
Addition and the Infanger and Kohman parcels).
The applicant shall receive the necessary access permit from the Carver County Highxvay Department for
relocating the driveway access prior to the City signing the final plat.
A cross access easement agreement shall be prepared by the applicant to maintain access to Lots 1, 2, 3
and 4 via the proposed private street.
The applicant shall pa3' the City a SWMP water quantity and quality connection fees in the amount of
$2,811.60 and $1,136.00 respectfully. These fees are payable prior to the City signing the final plat.
28
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
15.
Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The
City xvill install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and will charge the applicant $20.00
per sign. The applicant shall submit a letter to the city documenting that there will be no alterations to
the wetland as a result of the project.
16.
The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10 year and 100 year storm events in
accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve.
The grading plan shall be revised to include a storm drainage swales which will convey runoff from the
private street and lawn areas to the wetlands.
17.
Detailed construction plans and specifications for the utility improvements shall be required for review
and formal approval by the City Council. Construction plans and specifications shall be in accordance
with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates.
18. On Lot 2, the wetland should be 50 feet versus the standard 30 feet from the front property line to
facilitate the possible future cul-de-sac.
19. The applicant shall dedicate a 50 foot cul-de-sac easement over Lots 1 and 2 so the southerly terminus
abuts the Kohman parcel south of Lot 1.
20.
If the public street/cul-de-sac is constructed in the future, access to Lots 2, 3, and 4 shall be limited to the
public street/cul-de-sac and the private driveway along the south side of Lot 1 shall be abandoned and
removed in conjunction with the project.
21. That the staff work on a development contract to protect the access that Mr. Kohman possesses.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT FOR OAK PONDS/OAK HILL
SITE PLAN/DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT LOCATED BETWEEN POWERS BOULEVARD~ JUST NORTH
OF WEST 78TH STREET.
Public Present:
Name Address
Drexv Clausen
Dean Johnson
Brad Johnson
7717 Nicholas Way
8984 Zachary Lane
7425 Frontier Trail
Jill Sinclair: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. I stated in the item memo included in the
Council packet, the applicant is requesting the removal of an oak tree in the Oak Ponds development. Since the
tree is a prominent feature in the development, especially from the west entrance, and was a factor in the
approval of the development, staff feels it's removal should be thoroughly explored and discussed. Staff has
made two recommendations in the report because it is possible to save the tree by constructing the retaining wall
but also there are safety concerns that will be created by the preservation of the tree. Staffs ultimate concern is
29
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
that the final result be a valuable part of the Oak Ponds development. I'd be happy to ansxver any questions
Council ma5, have.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there any questions of Jill? Steve?
Councilman Berquist: It's quite a retaining wall, is it not?
Jill Sinclair: Pardon?
Councilman Berquist: It's quite a retaining, the size of the retaining wall is somexvhat.
Jill Sinclair: On one side it would be approximately 10 feet.
Councilman Berquist: I0 foot retaining wall.
Jill Sinclair: If it isn't terraced. There may be a possibility it could be terraced.
Councilman Berquist: I know this question is addressed somewhere in here because I knoxv I've seen it but I
don't remember the answer to it. Hoxv did it, how would you miss a 29 inch tree in the layout of topography
and now it comes to the floor that it needs to be taken out.
Jill Sinclair: Right. It wasn't necessarily missed.
Councilman Berquist: Not overlooked.
Jill Sinclair: Right. It was surveyed wrong originally and then that hill wasn't fully recognized until the
grading had been completed and it was 10 feet above grade. And at that time the developer xvas directed to
build the retaining wall around it.
Councilman Berquist: At that time being.
Jill Sinclair: 1992 or so. '93.
Councilman Berquist: Okay. The only question I had.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Michael.
Councilman Mason: I don't have any questions. I suspect we'll have some discussion in a few minutes so I'll
pass.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: Just one question, a little bit along the same line as Steve's. If the retaining wall is put in,
will the tree survive?
Jill Sinclair: Yes.
30
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Senn: Really?
Jill Sinclair: Yeah. I think there's enough room to put the retaining xvall in and ~ve don't have to take much of
the bank. You won't have to cut into the bank much more than has already been done. And the tree has
survived for two full summers the way it is now. So it's kind of a drastic situation it's in. It would have shown
some signs of poor health by this time and it does appear healthy. It has a good growing rate and I haven't seen
any negative effects on it.
Councilman Senn: So the additional...coverage of the root structure you don't feel is going to cause it harm?
I'm no expert. That's why I'm asking.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess I don't have any at this particular time Jill but I think it's good to -know that
somebody's xvatching out for our trees.
Jill Sinclair: Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there anyone wishing to address this at this time? Yes.
Dean Johnson: Mr. Mayor, Council members. My name is Dean Johnson. Builder and developer of the Oak
Ponds property. I guess I'd like to give a little bit of history of what happened here. Basically we did have a
surveying problem. The surveyor who did the tree calculations and locations placed the tree farther to the north
than xvhere it eventually ended up being. It does appear too that the topography that was used in setting grades
ended up in the process of doing it, probably took some of...so the topography appeared to be a little bit higher
there and xve ended up with, by the time it got cut, more distant than we expected for the height. We had 7 or
8 feet... We thought we'd have more room. It didn't end up being that way and consequently xve ended up with
a problem. Right now I believe, I'm assuming that you people have seen the tree, and I'm taking these
dimensions off of ~vhat would be the south side of the street or ~vhere this ~vall xvould be the high portion. The
bank that is there from the back of the curb is approximately 7 feet to the back of the curb. The bank itself is
at, it cuts back into the hill approximately I foot and the previous parcel...12 feet from the edge of the bank.
We started to build this wall. We started to build this xvall out of Keystone. When we started to build the wall,
we're building this xvithout ~vhole engineering...The reason that we decided to go ahead and build the wall and
start this wall xvas because the bank is of clay and had been standing for a while .... landscaper. He's got 20
years of experience in this type of work, felt that the wall would stand ~vith less than the required geotechnical
fabric... The building department basically, because of the fact that it did not comply with all the engineering...
We then, with staff, started exploring other alternatives to the Keystone style xvall. The next alternative was a
boulder ~vall. A boulder wall could be built here but boulder walls are not engineered ~valls either. We could
build this 10 foot wall out of boulders but we would probably have no more assurety that this wall...than the
Keystone so that became a problem. We looked into a poured ~vall with a stone veneer on it or a block look to
it. That wall required cutting back into the bank much like the Keystone wall geo fabric required cutting into
the bank. We were basically back to the same square one. We would have to cut more into this bank... That's
probably when the decision was made to bring it back to the Planning Commission and Council....just one
more thing. The association, the Oak Hill Townhome Association had it's annual meeting where the developer
and myself turned it over to the association. At that meeting they took a look at this wall and what's going on
with the site and they discussed it. We talked about the height to the wall. We talked about a lot of different
issues as to maintenance. As children in the area playing on it. Safety. Aesthetics of the wall and it ~vas voted
at that meeting that they would rather not have the wall... In fact the president of that association ~vould
probably like to speak to this... At the Planning Commission, when all this xvas brought up, we xvere asked to do
31
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
some renderings of the wall to get a feel of what the wall would be like. This rendering here is actually a scale
draxving. There is, it's not quite correct in the fact that it doesn't show the side~valk. That line is along...west
and northwest side of this area,which is right around the corner here. The terrain does go up. The xvall would
be reduced on that side so is there less xvall impact along the Santa Vera side than Nicholas Way side than this
has shown but this is the direction that the residents...looking from, what would be the southwest looking to the
north .... asked to see what the wall was like and also was requested to put vegetation on top of the wall seemed
to be a big issue at that meeting. It xvas suggested to put plantings on the wall instead of a fence, because you
have a 10 foot high wall and somebody could fall over it. Children. Different things falling over it were a
concern. A thought of putting a hedge at the top of this wall instead of a fence was looked at as an alternative
for it. I happened to have this drawing with that in mind. The other thought ,,vas to show it in a softer look.
Basically taking the tree down and replacing it with trees. We didn't have any direction to really ~vhat type of
trees to put on it .... really isn't a problem to meet with, ~vorking with staff or whoever to take this corner and
reduce...landscape plan and tree sizing...so I have no problem working with anybody as to the staff or whoever,
coming up xvith a proper landscape plan that still gives this corner... This was just done to show a softer way. It
was by no means to determine how it was supposed to be done...I guess I do not have anything further to say.
If you have any questions...
Mayor Chmieh Okay. Are there an5, questions? There doesn't appear to be. Thanks. Is there someone else
that xvould like to address this?
Drew Clausen: I'm Drew Clausen and I am President of the Oak Hills Townhome Association. I wanted to just
talk to three quick issues. As Dean said, he is really here at our request. When the toxvnhome association
looked at this and had a major concern and the three issues that I just want to briefly touch on. The first one is
safety. I don't know due to a plat mistake or a topography mistake or ~vhatever, somehow this became a 10 to
11 foot cliff and for those of us, many of the people in the association who have children, this is a real concern.
This island, if you will, is a very popular play area and we wish is to be a recreational area for both our
association and the association that's going to be developed across the street. Some of you may have, or have
had 7, 8, 9, 10 year old children and there is practically nothing they don't climb, including Keystone walls or
boulder walls. And because you have literally nothing underneath, especially on the Nicholas Way side, except
curb and asphalt, we feel someone's going to get hurt. Also this tree is fairly close on the Nicholas Way side.
One of the main branches extends past whatever wall you could possibly build there and is kind of an invitation
to swing like Tarzan and probably end up on the asphalt some time. So that is our, that's where we originally...
safety concern... The second issue; and as a new Citizen of Chanhassen as well as most of us are at Oak Hills,
and definitely nexv to the process like this, I have to admire the dedication that goes into the positions that you
have. The second issue is one of common sense and in the last Planning Commission meeting there ;vas some
discussion on the fact that there is no city ordinance on walls. And one of the members made a good point that
even though there isn't, maybe there ought to be. I think he used the example of, he built a deck over 30 inches
high and his back yard there xvas a city ordinance that he had to put a rail on it. Yet we're looking to build a
10-11 foot wall and there's no rules. There's got to be some kind of common sense there. So that's what we
xvould ask the Council to consider, even though there may not be any specific regulations that the city might
have on retaining walls. Anybody that...sees this as an issue. And I guess the final brief point I want to make
is one of expediency. This is the third night I've been here since November. I kno;v Dean has put a lot of time
into this. We did have a vote of our association and I went back to check the vote. It was 36 to 11 so over 3
to I. Of the people that are most affected by this, we would appreciate the Council supporting us and making
this something that we wonld like to live with. It really isn't an issue of losing a tree. It's a large tree. It's
probably 100-125 years old. There's certainly a half doze or more oak trees on this island that are of equal age.
The issue is replacing it with something that over the next 30 to 40 years is going to be even more beautiful and
32
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
so without taking any more of the Council's time, I hope that you will see it in your infinite ~visdom to support
us on this and help make this island a safe place to play. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Drew. Is there anyone else? Okay. If not, I'll bring it back to Council. Steve.
Councilman Berquist: I've got a few questions. Drew, how many children live in that development.'?
Drexv Clausen: Children that live in the development are probably 10 to 15. Then you have some split
families. Probably in the summer, between the children that are in the development, surrounding the
development and friends, 20-25.
Councilman Berquist: Okay, thank you. It has nothing to do with the tree. It's just a point of discussion that I
had with someone else the other day when we were talking about the children population in the development.
Drexv Clausen: We're a growing community and a young community.
Councilman Berquist: Jill, how old is that? Is that 125 years old.'/
Jill Sinclair: Plus.
Councilman Berquist: Plus. There xvas mention ~vithin one of the letters that xvas forwarded to us in this
packet, the fact a child was hanging on I think if I read this correctly, it was a dead branch or a branch that had
no foliage on it. I'm assuming this xvas written, it was summer time was the time perspective.
Jill Sinclair: Yeah there is, currently there is a large dead branch that should be pruned out of the tree.
Councilman Berquist: Is there any life expectancy on oak?
Jill Sinclair: 300.
Councilman Berquist: Really? It's interesting to me. We talked about the surveyors. Those guys can find
those little teeny posts sticking out of the ground but they had a tough time locating a 29 inch tree...
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Councilman Mason: ...and I was near tears at the thought of having to take that tree out and the builder, who
I'm still on quite good terms with spit on a rather large boulder and said well Mike, dinosaurs walked on that 60
million years ago and you're not going to bat an eyelash about moving the boulder. And I'm only being slightly
facetious. Needless to say the tree came down. And I've been waiting for 3 years to tell that story. So I don't
know. I think it's, I don't like seeing big oak trees come doxvn but one thing I preach in my classroom is
common sense and it seems to make a ~vhole lot more sense, unfortunately, in this case to take the tree out and
replant accordingly.
Mayor Chmiel: Mark.
Councilman Senn: Oh, I don't know. I guess I'll just kind of ditto ~vhat Steve and Mike said. In things like
this, it just seems to me if that's kind of what the neighborhood wants. Usually the neighbors are the ones in
33
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
here saying not to take the tree doxvn so, if that's what they want. But I'd like to see some requirements put on
to really replace, the replacements to be...what it is now and I'd also like to see some stipulations put on that
require the largest possible mature trees with a guarantee to be installed so we can have them sooner rather than
later.
Mayor Chmiel: Is that it?
Councilman Senn: Yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I can't top Mike's story so I'm just going to call the question. Is there a motion?
Councilman Berquist: I will move to approve the request to remove a 29 inch oak from Oak Ponds with the
conditions as detailed in the staff report.
Mayor Chmiel: To include the additional conditions.
Councilman Berquist: To include Mark's additional conditions of warranty or guarantee, and I don't knoxv xvhat
period of time to use.
Councilman Seun: Once you get to a certain sized tree, they won't guarantee it anymore. I don't know exactly
what that it is but I'm just saying, let's have them install the largest possible tree that we can that comes with a
guarantee. Rather than sit here and find out what that is.
Mayor Chmiel: To have staff work that out. Okay, is there a second?
Councilman Senn: Second.
Councilman Benluist mox'ed, Councilman Senn secomle~l to approve the request to mroove a 29 inch oak from
Oak Ponds with the following conditions:
The applicant is to replace the required twenty-nine inches of plantings xvith species native to this area.
A replacement planting plan must be submitted for approval.
Half of the replacement plantings, 14.5 inches, are to be oaks each of xvhich must have a minimum of
1.5 inches caliper.
3. Spacing of all deciduous or evergreen plantings shall be a minimum of 25 feet.
Grading limits shall not encroach upon the driplines of surrounding trees. Tree preservation fencing shall
be installed at the grading limits. Erosion control fence, Type I, shall be installed on the downstream side
of the grading limits and maintained until the site is fully re-vegetated.
5. All disturbed areas shall be sodded.
6. The replacement trees shall be of the largest size possible with a guarantee.
34
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Ali voted in favor and the motion carded unanimously.
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF 8.9 ACRES INTO 9 LOTS AND TWO OUTLOTS
TO BE USED FOR PRIVATE STREETS~ A VARIANCE TO PERMIT 5 LOTS TO ACCESS VIA A
PRIVATE STREET AND A VARIANCE FROM THE BLUFF SETBACK OF 30 FEET TO PERM1T THE
LOCATION OF A STRUCTURE AT ~ TOP OF A BLUFF ON LOT 9~ BLOCK 1~ LOTUS GLEN, 7505
FRONTIER TRAIL~ TED DELANCEY.
Public Present:
Name Address
Ted & Kathy deLaneey
Andrew Hiscox
Fritz Coulter
Charles R. Stinson
7505 Frontier Trail
7500 Erie
7616 Frontier Trail
Deephaven
Kate Aanenson: The deLancey property is located off of Frontier Trail. It also has access off of Erie. The plat
does include approximately 9 acres. It's gross density is 1 unit per acre. The site has some rolling topography,
significantly with the bluffs in it. It also has 85% tree canopy and also a wetland that runs through the
property. Just so you're orientated. This is Erie. The access off of Erie and this is Frontier Trail. The map I
have on the overhead shows the area of bluff setback. This item went to the Planning Commission two times.
The first time the staff had some concerns about the actual delineation of the bluff setback. This is one of the
few areas where we expanded our bluff protection ordinance. That this area fell within that definition. The
concern that we had is that the side slopes, as determined by the City Attorney, did meet the definition so we
are going forward and making an amendment to the code because it does address the top and the bottom of the
slope but if you're on a side slope, it doesn't address that setback so staff was concerned about the proximity to
those slopes. The applicant is requesting a variance on Lot 9, xvhich is this lot right here. This home right
here. It is close to Mr. Hiscox's home which is located here, off of Erie. The Planning Commission
recommended that they be given a variance to move the home. The variance from the bluff setback to move the
home closer. Staff was concerned, Mr. Hiscox's home is very close to the property line.
Councilman Berquist: Could you orient that to that.'?
Kate Aanenson: This is the lot right here that's in question. That is close, as you can see, to Mr. Hiscox's
property right here. There was a condition for additional landscape buffering but staff was concerned again, this
is one of the areas that is within the bluff protection that we did not support, although the Planning Commission
did support the variance. We have addressed conditions that would apply to the variance. If you do choose to
grant it, we're concerned about pushing it towards the bluff. Protection of those trees that are on the bluff and
again it is a heavily wooded lot. Also ~ve want to make sure that there is conditions to control the runoff from
those homes. The Planning Commission did recommend 5-0 for the variance. Again, this did go t~vice to the
Planning Commission. The other issue I wanted to talk about was we modified a condition on the storm water
retention pond. That we felt that in the storm water management plan that this would be more of a regional
pond. That the city pursue the ponding to size it a little bit larger. So instead of the applicant working with the
homeowners association, that is a recreational beachlot. The city would pursue that. Again, staff didn't support
the variance. We were concerned about the degregation of that site. Pushing the home again these are just
renderings. There's no specific, those are just showing homes that could be placed on there and they're
35
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
developing a variance based on that specific home and we're not, at this state, reviexving a site specific plan so
xve're saying that we believe that someone buying that lot could develop a different home that would still fit and
still do additional landscaping and a provision to try to keep that home as far away from Mr. Hiscox's so we
believe there is some potential to still develop that lot to a larger sized home without granting the variance. So
with that the staff is recommending approval with the conditions in the staff report. Again, the conditions in the
staff report do support the variance, which Planning Commission had recommended. I'd be happy to ans~ver any
questions.
Councilman Mason: So the variance that is being asked for now is not an approved, would you repeat what you
said please Kate?
Kate Aanenson: Yes. You can ask for a variance at the time the home comes in or you can ask it with the
subdivision, Our ordinance is set up that way. They're asking for it up front. They ~vould like the possibility
of placing that home, based on what they believe that size of that home to be, okay?
Councilman Mason: Okay, so just to get me real clear here. If we were to deny a variance tonight, there would
be nothing to say they couldn't come back when they had a house plan. To come back and ask for that variance
again.
Kate Aanenson: That's my understanding.
Councilman Mason: Is that correct?
Kate Aanenson: And I guess that's what we prefer because we have a specific home plan right now that's based
on that plan.
Councilman Mason: And there is not a specific home plan for that site now.
Kate Aanenson: Right. So you're not prejudicing that in the future.
Councilman Mason: Alright, thanks.
Kate Aanenson: The other thing I just wanted to make clear. When the original plan came in we had concerns
about this driveway access and the grades. It has been modified. We do believe that that's acceptable now as
shown. And they do have the four homes off of the private drive, which we've given the criteria again. We
support that based on the topography. The ravine that runs through that. We believe that that's probably the
best way to lay it out.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: Kate, two questions. Following up a little bit on what you xvere talking about xvith Mike. Is
there a reason why or why not that home couldn't be slid more back into the lot?
Kate Aanenson: Well, they're trying to preserve views. I mean they set up the house on their site as such that
they can maximize views. That's their bailiwick. Design into the surroundings and they believe that's the best
siting. Again we're saying, it may or may not. We don't knoxv that the home's...
36
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Senn: And they're trying to protect the view of the next lot.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. Right, they've all sited with certain views.
Councilman Senn: Okay. The pond. Now tell me a little bit more about the drainage and stuff. Is everything
in this project going to.
Kate Aanenson: rll let Dave comment more specifically on that.
Councilman Senn: Is everything in the project going to drain to that pond?
Dave Hempel: Maybe I'll get up and address that. It's basically at the bottom of a ~vatershed that commences
up. There's a creek that meanders through the property. It goes all the way up to here. So this is kind of the
tail waters of it. It does combine with another existing channel that goes out to Lotus Lake and this is an
upstream property of the Forcier development. We do have a water quality project that hopefully xvill
commence this spring with that development and also the upstream water from approximately 60 acres. This
tributary is not being treated at this time. We have the capabilities to treat this and also additional runoff with
another small tributary off of Frontier that comes down to one centralized or one regional type pond. And
we've hired the consultant Bonestroo and Associates to study this area and determine the best area for that so we
have one regional pond instead of a pond here, another pond here, another pond downstream. They've
determined on a preliminary review of this site, the very location of the natural creekbed that exists out there
today. With some minor modifications to that, to do like a two stage pond, to also enhance a wetland area
south by the mouth of the river as well. So the combination of those benefits, we felt that that's where we
should concentrate our water quality efforts to save the downstream area. The one problem with that is at this
time we have not made contact with that homeowners association of that beachlot. To feel them out to see if
they'd be open to such a ponding area. We're hoping that they will be because we're not taking any more land.
They still would utilize their beachlot area. It's just to concentrate the existing creek channel that's there today.
We believe that we can persuade them to grant the necessary easements to work with us to do a water quality
project that enhances the lake... With that, then this ponding area as you see here before you, could actually go
away. We just xvould maintain the existing creekbed that xvas there. We'd preserve the vegetation. The
applicant would retain the surface water management fees to the city in lieu of constructing the pond so it would
be a wirdwin situation I believe for everybody.
Councilman Senn: But that creek will go to the new one you're talking about.
Dave Hempel: That's correct. It does that right now. It connects right down in this vicinity here.
Councilman Senn: Okay. And so you're saying, basically your number one preference that you hope to work to
is a regional pond. If that doesn't work, then you're going to revert back to this?
Dave Hempel: That's correct.
Councilman Senn: Either way, one or the other will happen simultaneously with the project.
Dave Hempel: Right....we'll have a water quality pond in the area.
Councilman Senn: Okay, thank you.
37
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Berquist: Me next?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, go ahead.
Councilman Berquist: Is Mr. Stinson the architect on the project or are you a consultant to the developer at this
time.'/
Charles Stinson: I'm both.
Councilman Berquist: So you will have responsibility for designing the homes? That's an agreement you have
with the owner of the property now?
Charles Stinson: That's correct. All of them.
Councilman Berquist: The reason I ask that is because the homes that we've been involved with that he has
done, he's very topography sensitive. Just to reiterate the question that Mike had asked. We can approve this
without the variance and when and if the home that's proposed needs a variance, it can be approved at that
point.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Councilman Berquist: Oil that Lot 9, the drivexvay runs parallel to the adjoining property owner, who I believe
is Mr. Hiscox.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, he's the one, the closest one. The Planning Commission had recommended additional
vegetation along that to buffer both homesites.
Councilman Berquist: Okay, and that's.
Kate Aanenson: That's condition number 29. That was added by the Planning Commission.
Councilman Berquist: Which end, just out of curiosity, which end of his house, is it the garage end or the
bedroom end?
Andrew Hiscox: Bedroom.
Councilman Berquist: Bedroom end, wouldn't you know it. I'm going to ask you a question directly Mr.
Hiscox. The letter that you had written makes reference to, you realize that things aren't going to stay the same
forever and you're somewhat accepting of the fact that development occurs. The 15 feet is pretty close.
Andrew Hiscox: Do you want me to come up?
Councilman Berquist: Please.
Andrew Hiscox: Yeah, I think it's a little close. When you look at the rest of the, the way the thing's laid out
it's really beautiful but you know that they all have a lot of room between the property line there where there's
three existing homes. What we were asking for is not only a buffer here, of vegetation here...because I've got a
38
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
play set that's 2 feet from his property line. The neighbor's got a play set that's 2 feet from the property line.
And if there's a road in here like this, there's a little concern that the private road is not being serviced by the
city. You get a snoxvstorm like we did the last couple weeks where it's icy. Somebody comes down the road
and slides into my kid or something, I'd be a little bit upset. And it's an area were lots of kids play so there's a
lot of small children in the neighborhood...and we're a little concerned about that. So that's, I guess the first
concern. We could ask for specifically, you know give us 10 feet of evergreen or something so they have
something to hit before they hit our children or our play sets or our house. If you look at where our house is
compared to the lot line, I am very close and I believe the Planning Commission recommended the 20 foot
setback for the side setback of Lot 9, which would put the house about 32 feet I think from their existing
property. I'd like it to be...I think staff has said that there's plenty of room on this lot to build a very nice, large
home without dealing xvith the variance or potentially maybe the setbacks. I'm torn because I also have a house,
or a lot I should say, to the east of the existing home that I've got approved and I went through a lot of years of
work and went to the Council and Planning Commission but I've just come to realize that the ne~v bluff setback
has changed to where I've been approved to build my house pad and my $5,000.00 survey that I spent money
on, I can't do it anymore. So I'm kind of torn because I'd like to see Ted get the variance so I might have a
chance to get a variance and build a house I ~vant. Yet I don't want it to...my house so I'm not sure I'm
comfortable. But that's an issue. I guess the main ones were the driveway. I think it could be moved. And
how close they are to mine. Because I think the rest of the homes in the neighborhood are fine but as I said in
my letter, this seems a little bit tight.
Councilman Berquist: Okay, thank you.
Andrexv Hiscox: Okay.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anything else?
Councilman Berquist: No sir.
Mayor Chmiel: Is the applicant here and would you like to make any concerns that you have maybe with the
conditions.
Ted deLancey: My name is Ted deLancey and my wife Kathy is in the checkered this evening. We're the
applicants and the rest of the team is Charles Stinson, who has already been addressed a little bit, and the
principle of the Westxvood Professional Services, Dwight Jelle. They will make the primary technical comments
but I would like to address you if I may to give you the reasons why we want to do this and what we want to
do. First of all, xve are not commercial developers and ~ve're not in the development business and ~ve have no
desire to be in that business. We are going to stay in this Chanhassen area, as we have been. We like it, and
may I say, I really have to compliment the job that's been done in the last few years. It's really come along
fantastic. But Kathy and I are going to stay here but the impetus for this is, we have an older home which
requires some repair work and very frankly repair work that's, from what I'm told and everyone advises me, can
get very, very expensive and then we may not have what we want to have. Kathy is the reason we are here
today because she said that she'd win the lottery or Publishers Clearinghouse and then I wouldn't even need to
come up in front of you. We'd just redo the whole house and keep the 9 acres to ourselves, which we'd really
like to do. But that's been an ongoing thing for 5 or 6 years and she hasn't produced so we've had to come up
with another alternative. The idea being that we would develop the property that we do not use and then we
build a home on where we now have our home today. Now, obviously ~ve have to comply and we want to
comply with what the city requires. A few years ago I spent several hours in jail in this fund raising thing up in
39
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
the fire house and the charge against me at the time was that, you're not developing your property. Well, it's
come time and Don can come back and attest to that. So that is the impetus of what ~ve're trying to do. So
basically what I've said is that we ~vould like to trade the property for a new home. Have a zero cost base with
the exception of the taxes, which of course would be substantial. And in the process...if I may go back. My
family owned this property originally. They bought it in 1939. My father was the original Paul Bunyon
disciple as far as protecting the property and the trees and the land. And he bought that property by pointing
out, I xvant that tree. I want that tree so we came up with a very difficult property line. I think subsequently
xve ended up with 9 acres. I bought it from them since 1963 so we've had it over 55 years. From '39 that they
did. It has always been in my judgment a unique piece of property and I would hate to see it develop just in
the very hap-hazard fashion and because of that we've done a lot of looking at how other homes are developed
over a period of time and xve've found Chuck Stinson to be a very good architect, but that is not the reason we
chose him to develop the property and to do the plan. A few years ago we went to a Parade of Home... There
was a home there that he had done which xvas just nestled gently into the landscape. It was a beautiful job and
right next door to it with the same topography where somebody came in and clear cut with a bulldozer and just
put up a very nice, beautiful home. But they just absolutely ruined the property. At that point I said to myself
and to Kath, we have got to contact this man and see what he can do with this property and that is what has led
us to this point. Excuse me, [ get dr3,. So that was one of the parameters. If we can get what we want and if
we can put it all together, then we'll go ahead and do the job that we have outlined here, xvhich we think would
be actually enhancing the property if we're protective enough of the property. That's why we went with 1 acre
lots, which is a totally differently thing than most of the areas do. So at this point what I'd like to do is turn it
over to Charles Stinson because he's the man who can most accurately describe xvhat we've been doing. Chuck.
Charles Stinsou: Hello. My name is Charles Stinson. I'm an architect and land planner in this case. I'd like to
move this back a little bit so I can point at it. Does that still work? Going back again. Ted and Kathy called
me I guess it xvas 3 or 4 years ago and asked if I did land planning. I said, yes I did. I haven't done that much
of it because I'm not interested in doing high density land planning but I'd be interested in meeting xvith them.
The approach that I have to doing land planning is a little bit different because I really think of the architecture
at the same time. So it's the continuity between the land, the architecture, and the site planning and later I
determine where the roads should go, etc. So we spent a lot of time. I mean to make this work, and the unique
thing of having a owner who wants to develop a property, there's an emotional value besides just the dollar
value. There was a dollar but the dollar value wasn't to make money. It was just to break even to make things
work so the plans that Ted and Kathy had done by someone else had 23 lots in there and they said, we just hate
what it does to the property. What do you think? And so I spent almost a year just thinking about it before we
really did any draxvings and hiking out to the property. We got...we got the builder Streeter and Associates,
who I do a lot of work with, and the realtor, Eric Myhran of Edina Realty so I mean there's a lot of going back
and forth to make this all come together. Plus we got together with the city over the course of these years and
we wanted to try to make it work for everybody. Understand that the area, the drainage, etc. So in doing the
property there was, I don't know if everybody has hiked the property or is familiar with it but as the road comes
down, there's a ravine that comes through this property. This is the high piece of the property and it all rolls
down towards the pond. Beautiful mature trees but there, hiking it there seemed to be certain lines of vision
that we wanted to keep. And because the drainage and as we developed working with the city, we knew we
had to do something for this ponding and we had a problem with this property so moving it down here seemed
to be, worked good for both development areas. So as we came to here, by having the access of these two
houses over the wetland, we can look towards the pond. We could look this way or back into the woods in this
area. Ted and Kathy decided their house wanted, they wanted to have it on the same location as the existing
residence. So that worked good for all the neighbors here, plus the curb appeal coming by and left the pond
and that kind of open rolling meadow open to everybody so for the curb appeal, it's about the same as it is now.
40
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
In coming across here, locating a house in this area, it could look this ~vay and that way. This house is coming
back here looks down this way. Coming in from the top, it ended up being you know the four sites, slightly,
you know xvorking within here but laying out each house so the line of vision was totally open. So thinking
about each of the private areas so they wouldn't be infringing on the other ones. Now on the earlier plans that
we had with the city, actually I've located this house about here. About halfway do~vn the hill, which is more
conducive xvith the way I usually do homes. I try to get them in the woods so there's a real continuity between
the woods and the house. As it evolved it ended up this. This was going to be a bluff line setback area, or a
bluff line... And that occurred here and here. And the reason we're asking for the variance here is you have to
get past this property line to get it away from that house. If we move it back here, we actually have much less
area to do it and it would be closer to the neighboring house. As far as the distance here, we vary from
probably 10 feet here, 15 feet here, probably 20 or more feet axvay from the property line. One of the big
things as far as doing the approval of the site now, or doing the variance later is xve feel strongly that the
variance is contingent on it. The approval and the variance have to be one because it just affects the project too
much. Any questions?
Mayor Chmiel: Does Council have any questions?
Councilman Mason: Why do you say that?
Charles Stinson: Well, part of it is, some of the original ones we had more, they had more sites on it. Going
down to 9, it's just becoming too valuable a piece. If we move it out of the woods we're just, it devalues the
piece of property. That's part of it and it just gets it too close to that property and it kind of loses the continuity
of this development.
Mayor Chmiel: Your entrance road coming up to those upper four, you're saying that by the first house it's
probably about a 20 foot setback. And as you progress, the second house there's probably about a 10 or.
Charles Stinson: Yeah, that's from the road actually.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes, to the property line.
Charles Stinson: The houses are over 100 feet axvay. And actually it was our recommendation to move it to
20 feet away from here as opposed to the city ordinance. If ~ve can, I'd like it to be more than 20 feet. But it
would be at least 20 feet away.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilman Senn: Since that's a private driveway, why don't you move it further away?
Charles Stinson: Actually we're down to.
Councilman Senn: I'm saying all the way across. Why don't you move it down a little bit.
Charles Stinson: All of them.'? I guess just yard space. It could come down. I guess there wouldn't be a
problem with keeping it 20 feet away. What I didn't want is for this to be a one long shot coming down here
with the idea of having it kind of meandering back and forth. And then this made the planting areas that I had
41
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
here were to avoid the neighbors getting any headlights going to their back yards. But I guess there really
wouldfft be a problem xvith putting it 20 feet away.
Councilman Senn: Kate you referenced earlier the issue of being able to put up a good size housing pad on that
site in a different manner. Has that been, I'm just triangulating in here between you know property lines, bluff
lines, setback lines. Effectively does that cause a variance then in the bluff line?
Kate Aanenson: Well, there's a couple of competing things happening here. I mean that's one of the larger lots.
What would happen is, it's impeded by the fact that it's got the significant slope on it. Right. So what they're
trying to do is make utilization of the large pad. Again we're saying, we're not sure exactly that that's, I mean
it's a pretty wide home. Is that exactly what it's going to be? We're compromising, you know pushing down,
again this was one of the first areas we've come in that wasn't on the original bluff which we intended on the
south side and again they're faced with one of the largest lots but they've got very little utilization of and they're
trying to maximize that so what you were doing was putting that square peg in a round hole and somebody's
going to be happy. Either Mr. Hiscox, but I think we can mitigate that. You know that part of the driveway
doesn't have to be as wide as they show it because it's only those portions that are common that have the 4 foot
so actually the private drive would stop at the point where there's a commou terminus. So this is 10 feet wide.
So that may reduce some impact. Additional landscaping. Certainly we made the comment that I think if we're
on the record saying that it should be a minimum setback, then they work within that. If they can't, then they
come back for a variance.
Charles Stinson: Yeah, the other thing, what we're trying to do here is, xve're not pushing the house, the blunt
back of the house, the entire setback. What we're doing is the architecture is articulating back and forth. It's
almost like points that are reaching back into the hillside. So it's like that may be to the setback. That comer
and that corner. It's to our advantage and the owner's to move it as far away from the property line or whoever
that xve can, but the idea of getting something and trying to avoid houses being just big hunks of material sitting
out in nature. We're trying to get them to integrate and reach with the nature.
Kate Aanenson: And that's kind of where the competing interest is. If we give them an elevation of foot line, I
mean then we've kind of set this demarkation of this whole length. But what he's saying is he may only need a
finger to go in. I guess that's why we would rather see a house plan and say well yeah, that's palatable. We
can live with that because it's just a small component going in. We're not taking significant trees. I mean it's
kind of hard at this point to say we're going to give you this blanket variance when we've basically drawn the
line across the whole back of that lot and maybe it's palatable, maybe it's not. I just think it's kind of
premature.
Councilman Senn: Well I mean on the face of it, I mean it's real tough without the floorplan you're talking
about. I mean the other issue...we often times get into these pulls and tugs here and I mean, the variance that
may or may not...variance give, may not even necessarily be the variance toxvards the neighbor which we
generally xvill treat more favorably. And if there being another type of variance we'd consider as a result of it.
It's real hard to do without getting into an actual building plan.
Charles Stinson: Well I guess, I don't know if you're familiar with the architecture that we do. There's going
into Bearpath a house immediately on the left. There's a prairie style. Another one in the back that's some of
the closest homes. But it's, what we're trying to do is something that really works with the site and it just
clearly won't work up here. I mean just putting it in, there's some bushes and it's.
42
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Senn: Don't get me xvrong. No, I don't think anybody's saying put it up there. I mean if that's
what you're thinking. I don't think there's anybody out here talking that's talking about pushing that up so I
don't know why you even keep referencing that. What xve're talking about is some type of a building plan that
may deal more sensitively, specifically with that corner of that area and if a variance is to be given, maybe the
variance is given in another direction other than towards the neighbors.
Charles Stinson: But the reality of doing it at that time is, you know to market it and promote it to someone
that we want to work ~vith, they're not going to want to wait through the whole process to see if their house can
work here and hire me to go through the whole half of the project to do that. Right now, I mean this isn't the
first development I've done. There's one over on Oakland Road in Minnetonka and the one at, it's kind of out
of the way but it's in Willmar, Minnesota on...Lake that we just went through this and I laid it out, The
geometry may change but the essence of each site, as I think of it now, is what ends up being up there. The
geometry may change but that's about it.
Mayor Chmiel: The foot pads that you're showing are the homes that are there. Are those true to what you're
thinking about or is that strictly hypothetical?
Charles Stinson: No this, well the immediate one is the deLancey's and that's true to their house. The other
ones, with the orientation to where the sun's coming and where the views are and where I'm trying to get the
garage will be, will change a little bit but we don't have plans for the other sites. But they're well thought out.
Mayor Chmiel: Conceivably somebody may want something, a smaller home on that particular lot as xvell.
Charles Stinson: That's correct.
Kate Aanenson: Or larger.
Mayor Chmiel: That's right. I'm trying to move it back away from that particular line as well and my original
question was the distances involved between the road to the property line. If that can be maintained and at 20
feet, I think that would be an advantage to each of those lots, specifically for those who are going to be doing
the maintenance of those drives and the driveway coming in. And especially when you get snowfalls. Less to
clear. Shorter periods of time. But okay. Are there any other questions?
Charles Stinson: Can I make one comment? We're not asking to go into the bluff line.
Mayor Chmiel: No, we realize that.
Charles Stinson: It's just into the.
Kate Aanenson: The setback from the bluff.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. Yeah, Ted.
Ted deLancey: May I make one further comment?
Mayor Chnfiel: Yeah. Could you please come back up here so we can get this on our tape.
43
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Ted deLancey: I wanted to make just one additional comment. I don't know where you're closing, if it's going
to the vote but I made this same comment to the Planning Commission and I xvanted to make it to you but I
don't want it to sound like an oversell. I did appreciate the effort. I made the comments that the Planning
Commission did alloxv us the variance by 5 votes but this has nothing to do with the variance but I do want to
thank you people xvho do give your time xvithout compensation and many, many hours and I do feel that we
people who live in the community at some time should express our appreciation for that and because this is one
of the rare times I ever get before the Council, I wanted to just say thanks.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. We appreciate it. We do get paid to do this but.
Councilman Mason: Not enough.
Ted deLancey: It's minuscule I'm sure.
Mayor Chmiel: I think we broke it down to the amount per hour and I think it's somexvhere between 5 and 7
cents. But anyway, that's not the reason we're here. Is there anyone else xvishing to address this?
Andrew Hiscox: Here I am again. I wish this was one of the rare times I could get before the Council. I
seems like I've been here a lot in the last few years but I've got a couple issues that haven't come up yet. I just
wanted to make those quickly and again, as I said before at the Planning Commission meetings, etc, I think this
is a beautiful neighborhood. I have a vested interest in protecting where I live and the real issues get to, what it
really comes down to is I think you should give the guy a variance because it moves it a~vay from my house
and that's good for me. In terms of what it does for setting precedence, etc, that's another issue. But there's
again a bunch of families live along here. Some of the comments you made like can we move the road back a
little bit. I certainly wouldn't want to drive... But one of the comments that was made earlier was a little bit
concerning and that is the holding pond and I guess I need to get more clarification on that. The gentleman
xvho was here was pointing back this way, which I think is towards the lake and it sounded like he was saying
you were going to not do the holding pond. You thought you could just do something with the...
Kate Aanenson: The existing ravine right before it goes into the lake, which tends to full up in the spring. In
that area.
Andrew Hiscox: That's, my property's right there.
Kate Aanenson: Right adjacent to it?
Andrew Hiscox: Yeah.
Kate Aanenson: What we're looking at right now, the preliminau' study said it wouldn't take any additional
property. It'd just be an enhancement of the existing.
Andrew Hiscox: Does that mean dig it out deeper or something or what would...
Kate Aanenson: I can't really comment much further than that. I know Bonestroo looked at it and I don't know
if you know any more on that.
44
City Council Meeting o January 22, 1996
Charles Folch: Yeah, basically in their preliminary analysis they felt that a better location for that pond would
be to incorporate it within the creek channel itself. Again as Mr. Hempel spoke earlier, at this point it's all
preliminary and ~ve haven't even gotten to the point yet where we felt comfortable contacting all the residents
with a plan that we could show, or a preliminary plan that we could show them. That was, at this point that
would be the first preference. Location to construct a pond and if for some reason we couldn't work out all the
details and things by getting it located there, then I guess we would probably intend on going back to Plan B
xvhich is try to locate a pond somewhere on the west end of this property, as was originally thought.
Andrew Hiscox: Okay. When you say the existing pond...widen something. Are you saying...that's what I'm
trying to get at.
Charles Folch: Correct. You'd deepen it. You'd expand the channel in the area and basically create kind of an
open area. It's almost considered a flood flow situation but you're creating an open area if you will within the
channel. You're slowing down the velocity. You're creating more storage within the channel and you get the
same effect from a nutrient and a sediment removal pond.
Kate Aanenson: Just not to digress too far on this issue. Certainly we have to secure an easement from the
homeowners association. As a part of that process we would share with you all the details. What that pond
would look like, etc, etc, and at that time you have the opportunity to comment on xvhether or not you'd be
xvilling to consider giving an easement or not. Right now it's very preliminary. Certainly we work with the
association to even secure that so.
Andrew Hiscox: The reason, I have property on both sides of the creek or the drainage easement or sanitary
sewer or xvhatever you want to call it, and that does flood quite a bit and I think doing something about it is
great but it also is one of the nicest beaches on the lake. It's also one of the nicest fishing spots. Messing
around with that is a little bit concerning.
Kate Aanenson: Those issues will certainly be looked at.
Andrexv Hiscox: The last piece I guess is when we looked at this development and I'm not sure ho~v to phrase
this except to say again, I think they've done a great job here. Can we tie down a couple...Council, etc. Is it
proper to go ahead and say yes, you have to plant some pine trees and give them a 20 foot setback. Is that
something... I guess I'm asking you Kate.
Kate Aanenson: It is a condition in the plat right now.
Andrew Hiscox: That says?
Kate Aanenson: The applicant shall submit a landscape buffer plan to the eastern property line to protect the
neighbors to the east, so they will have to do that. That's a condition that's in there right now.
Andrexv Hiscox: And I guess what I asked before is, can xve define that? How do we define that a little better
to make the homeowners more comfortable? Like yes, you have to put in pine trees or something like that.
Kate Aanenson: I think we've got qualified people on staff to do that.
Mayor Chmiel: I think as it progresses that can be addressed.
45
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Andrew Hiscox: Same thing with the private drive. Is that something that xve do later?
Mayor Chmiel: That would be also, this is just strictly preliminary. All we're doing is looking at what's there.
It doesn't necessarily mean it's going to wind up just the way it is either.
Andrew Hiscox: Okay, but we do get a chance to re-address this as we get to the final plat?
Mayor Chmiel: Oh yes, yeah.
Andrew Hiscox: That's all I have.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Anyone else?
D~vight Jelle: Could I add one thing2
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
Charles Stinson: One of the conditions that xve got back after talking to Bob Generous and I in front of the
Planning Commission was the conditions of the variance. Making sure it was...to preserve the bluff. They all
were fine....back and forth. One that got added in, that I tried to contact him and he was gone, that doesn't
work is the putting gutters all the way around the house on the back side. The details that I do, there's no facia
and it's a real low slope so gutters doesn't really xvork. We've never had any erosion problems whatsoever on
any property. Half of them are...
Kate Aanenson: Just so you know where that condition came from. That's from Best Management Practices for
stormwater. I think the only thing we would do is to put some other condition there. If you're going to give a
variance, we feel adamant about that condition but we'd be willing to accept some other language to say that the
house would be designed in such a way that it meets the Best Management Practices and mitigates the concerns
that the staff would have with runoff from the roof. And that's the reason that's put in there is you have
accelerated water running off the roof. So if you can find some other mechanism.
Charles Stinson: There is, in doing this in Bloomington on top of a bluff, there's a similar situation. What we
did is as long as there's more than half going to the front and the fact that our roof profile is so low pitched, it
doesn't have the usual velocity that most homes do.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there anyone else? If not, I'll bring it back to Council. Steve.
Councilman Berquist: I'll pass for right at this moment.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mike.
Councilman Mason: I don't have any trouble at all granting the request for preliminary plat. I think I've made
it fairly clear that I have a little trouble giving carte blanche variances and whereas I understand the concern, I
also know that things like this take time and I'm also getting the sense from everyone else on the Council that if
a variance needs to be there, after we have something concrete in front of us, I would guess it would get
granted, knowing this Council. But I have a real tough time granting anything carte blanche like that but the
development looks very good. I think it will be a welcome addition to the community and I'm certainly
46
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
planning on moving forward with it but I don't feel like granting a variance. ! don't think it's in the best interest
of the city.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Mark.
Councilman Senn: I feel a lot like Michael does. I really hate kind of being told you know it's an all or
nothing situation with the variance. My personal perspective here is really...more towards the bluff to
accomplish the sensitive treatment of the neighboring property. But it seems to me that, at least I'm looking at
what I'm seeing there and I'm not seeing that we're getting what I'd like to see for the variance of the bluff...but
to be honest xvith you I don't have a problem with granting the variance in the bluff. But I look at that and it
still hugs the driveway right up against the neighboring property and I think some things could be redesigned or
redefined a little more carefully along there in terms of treatment of the neighboring properties. I mean
obviously they're trying to get the most out of the lots here, which I'm sure is their job but at the same time I
don't think it's shoxving the sensitivity to the neighboring properties. So if it's all or nothing and we xvant the
variance with it, my suggestion would be to go back and bring us in a specific design on that lot because I think
it's the only one that's going to cause us a problem. And then we'll deal with that in the overall preliminary and
I think taking into account some of the comments that Kate made in terms of staying up the drive~vay and
moving it to the north a little bit and keeping that 20 foot minimum along there and throw in the vegetation and
stuff, I think were all valid comments.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Steve.
Councilman Berquist: Kate, in the staff report you elude to the precedent being set if we approve the variance
up front. What ramifications potentially occur if in fact we do set the precedent initially? Does it do anything
for us, whether xve would grant a variance noxv or later? Has it changed our position with the precedence that
we set?
Kate Aanenson: The question I have is, I'm not sure exactly where that home sets. What would you set the
variance on? A certain elevation? A certain, I don't know if xve have enough information to.
Councilman Berquist: Well I agree ;vith that. On the other hand I also understand where the developer is
coming from insofar as that if you've got a client that's coming in and saying I ;vant to put, I want to spend a
half a million dollars on a home or whatever I'm going to spend. If I'm going to spend $100,000.00, it's
immaterial. I want to be assured, when I walk on that lot I have, I visualize where it's going to be. I don't
want to have to back up. Start drawings. Come in here saying is this okay? Is this okay? Is this okay? No
it's not alright. No it's not alright and continue to go through this process when I'm dealing with a potential
land sale.
Kate Aanenson: Right, and that goes back to my.
Councilman Berquist: Insofar as I'm axvare of what goes on with some of these, his particular projects, I'm
convinced that he is very topographically sensitive. So the question I have concerns of setting the precedent
now or later.
Kate Aanenson: I agree with you. I'm saying it probably is palatable. My problem is, what they're trying to do
it sounds like is there's a couple of fingers. Again the lot's compromised. It's pinched. In order to pull it up
the lot becomes narrow. It's more difficult tbr them to pull it up. Is the house going to be that long? And
47
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
what are the, is this the exact finger that's going to go down? If you look at the tree survey, there's a significant
trees. If this portion sxvings one way or the other, there's a lot of trees in there. So I guess if they could raise
the staff's comfort level and say this is specifically the area in which we want a variance, ~ve have enough
information in here to make that decision tonight, I'm not sure. Then I think the staff's comfort level would be
raised but just to say we want this line of demarkation across the back of the lot to give it a 30 foot setback, we
want carte blanche across the back of the lot, I don't feel comfortable doing that. But if they're willing to work
xvith the staff and say just in this area. Within this elevation. I think certainly we would be xvilling to consider
that.
Councilman Berquist: Do we have any, do we have the option of granting the variance during final plat
approval?
Kate Aanenson: I'll let Roger answer that.
Roger Knutson: One solution, I think we're struggling for solutions and I'll just throw something out. You
could table the variance and tell them, bring it back when you've got the site house plans. What that would do
for them, it xvould mean no public hearings. No more delays. It xvould come right here in one stop. If you
wanted to do it that way. Now for us to do that, they would have to waive the time constraint xvhich we
normally have to operate in approving or deny a request. If they were to waive that time constraint, then they
could, when they have their plans come and walk right in. Show them to you and...
Councilman Berquist: It's definitely a compromise. Let me just look see if I had any additional questions that
I wanted to bring up.
Mayor Chmiel: Anything else Steve?
Councilman Berquist: I don't believe so.
Kate Aanenson: Roger? Can I get clarification on Mark's question? I believe it was Mark's, or Steve's. That
asked, what if we just tabled the variance until the time of final plat and it was found at that time, if they gave
us more information at that time. Would that be another option?
Roger Knutson: Certainly. The only thing I would, as Don just mentioned. The only problem, the concern I
have with that is I don't knoxv if it would achieve what everyone wants because they might not have a house
plan. I don't know how fast they sell these or if they're all pre-sold. If they don't have a house plan at the time
they come in for the final plat, you won't have any more information.
Councilman Berquist: Well if they don't, but they would have a fairly good idea and they could at least avoid
the hassle of having the time and the full expense of the set of drawings prior to being turned down, if in fact
that were to be the case.
Roger Knutson: Certainly what you could do is maybe just a variation of what I said. They can bring it back
anytime they xvant. You table it indefinitely until they have sufficient information to satisfy your discussion
tonight. If that occurs at the time of final plat approval, they're prepared to tell you how it's going to be built
and say here's, ;ve want a variance for these building plans or whatever. Either approve it then or if that isn't
possible for them to do at that point, they could then bring it in later.
48
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Senn: If I'm understanding your first alternative is it doesn't tie it to final plat or anything else.
mean it just tables it until, it happens to give them a one shot back in. If xve tie it to final plat, we could be
right back here in the same situation xve are right now on final plat and still not have house plans and just
effectively xve've tied it to something that's really kind of meaningless as far as the deadline goes, right?
Roger Knutson: We'd have the same discussion then.
Mayor Chmiel: Exactly, yeah.
Kate Aanenson: Although, if xve did have some parameters, which they're looking for to say, in this area we
wouldn't allow to go closer because of the trees. You know we would give them a footprint ourselves that they
could live xvithin. What I'm saying is xve don't have enough information right now to do that but we could
develop that and work xvith them by the time of final plat so that is an option. No matter what the footprint is,
as long as they stay xvithin this area that we generate, so.
Roger Knutson: And what I've suggested gives them that. They're perfectly within their right to do that. If
they've got that information.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I think xve've probably had enough discussion on this. I agree with some of the things
that are said here but some of them I probably am not but as I look at sort of a carte blanche kind of thing that
we're providing as well. It just makes me feel a little uneasy to go through that same process and therefore I
guess I'm at that particular point of calling the question on this request. Is there a motion?
Councilman Senn: I'll move approval of the preliminary plat and tabling of the variance for the bluff setback...
Roger Knutson: Right. Subject to, the tabling of the variance request is subject to receive in writing their
request for their waiving of the time that...come back.
Councilman Senn: Okay, and at such time they will come directly back into Council for consideration on the
variance once they have more information basically.
Kate Aanenson: There xvas another variance. We did notify, put notice in here and that was the option to put 5
homes on a private drive, just in case. This is their preferred option but xve did provide another access for 5
variance so we still want that left in there.
Councilman Senn: Okay, and approval of that variance then for the 5.
Mayor Chmiel: So we have a motion on the floor. Is there a second?
Councilman Mason: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: Moved and seconded. Yes.
Dwight Jelle: I'd like to clarify.
49
City Council Meeting ~ January 22, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Would you come up to the mic please so we can pick this up on tape.
Dwight Jelle: My name is Dwight Jelle from Westwood Engineering. As Kate was getting to a potential
solution that we could explore and come in at final plat time. We have no intention of wanting a carte blanche,
200 foot radius house that sits all the way through the bluff setback zone. Chuck's intention is to try to get
specific geometry for a very specific user that Steven was getting to. When you start to negotiating with these
people and they don't have, quite often don't have a 2 month time period xvhere they can prepare plans, come in
with the possibility of getting turned down. What we would like to do, if there's a possibility, is to have you
approve a variance that you feel your staff is comfortable working with. I don't know if that's what you're
suggesting.
Kate Aanenson: No, the motion on the floor is you can come in at any time with the variance. They're tabling
the variance. You can come in at the time of final plat.
Councilman Mason: Or before or after.
Councilman Senn: Just come directly into Council.
Dwight Jelle: Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks.
Councilman Senn: But I think inherent, you knoxv just as a comment with the motion. I mean inherent in that I
think is you really need to pay attention to the comments that were made as far as maybe resizing that private
driveway and making sure that you stay 20 feet away from the property line and provide the vegetation that's
been talked about.
Dwight Jelle: Part of our agreement to the original setback from the neighbor...get into some of that bluff area.
If we can't get into the bluff area to get away from his house, then he can't really live with that extra setback
that tight.
Councilman Senn: I understand.
Dwight Jelle: Yeah, I think everybody on the project is willing to pull that street away to the 20 feet and try to
get the house away as far as possible.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the preliminary plat for Lotus Glen (#95-22
SUB) of 8.9 acres into 9 lots and two outlots for private streets and a variance to permit five Iots to be accessed
via one private streeh subject to the follo~ving conditions:
1. Submit street names to Fire Marshal for approval.
A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance
9-I.
Approved turn arounds must be provided for fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet. Re-submit
plan and dimensions pursuant to 1991 U.F.C. Sec. 10.204(d).
50
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
4o
°
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Additional fire hydrant xvill be required by Lot 6 and at the entrance off Frontier Trail.
Entrance signage must comply with City Code requirements. A separate sign permit must be submitted
for any signage.
Obtain demolition permits. This should be done prior to any grading on the property.
Dwellings on slopes exceeding 25% and dwellings with 102" or more of unequal fill will be required to
be designed by a structure engineer.
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.
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 t~vo weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with
the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. The applicant shall contact the Natural Resource
Conservation Service for a seed mixture that will be effective in wooded areas.
The applicant shall field verify and document the bluff areas on site. The applicant shall relocate the
buildings pads on Lot 9 up away from the bluff to meet setback requirements.
The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10 year and 100 year storm events and
provide ponding calculations for stormwater ponds in accordance with the City's SWMP for the City to
reviexv and approve prior to final plat approval. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and
post developed stormwater calculations for 100 year storm events and normal water level and high water
level calculations in existing basins, created basins, and/or creeks. Individual storm server calculations
between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being
utilized. In addition, xvater quality ponding design calculations for the 2, 10, and 100 year storm shall be
based on Walker's Pondnet model. The city will be contracting review of this work to Bonestroo.
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, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Department, Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Army Corps of Engineers and
Minnesota Department of Transportation and comply with their conditions of approval.
The appropriate drainage and utility easements should be dedicated on the final plat for all utilities and
ponding areas lying outside the right~of-way. The easement width shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide.
Consideration shall also be given for access for maintenance of the utilities and ponding areas.
The applicant shall have a wetland delineation report prepared for the site. Wetland buffer areas shall be
surveyed and staked in accordance with the city's wetland ordinance. The city will install wetland buffer
edge signs before accepting the utilities and will charge the applicant $20.00 per sign.
51
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
The lowest floor elevation of all buildings adjacent to wetlands and storm ponds shall be a minimum of 2
feet above the 100 year high water level.
Existing wells and/or septic systems on site xvill have to be properly abandoned in accordance to city and
Minnesota Department of Health codes/regulations.
The proposed single family residential development of 8.7 developable acres is responsible for a water
quality connection charge of $6,960.00 and a water quantity fee of $17,226.00. These fees are payable to
the city prior to the city filing the final plat. Credits will be given to these fees based on the applicant
providing for the city's SWMP requirements and xvill be deducted from the totals after final plat review.
The applicant shall report to the city engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction
and shall re-locate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer.
The public utility system shall be constructed in accordance with the city utility standards. The private
streets shall be constructed in accordance with current city ordinances. Detailed construction plans and
specifications shall be submitted for reviexv and formal approval by the City Council in conjunction ~vith
final plat approval. The plans shall be designed in accordance with the latest edition of the city's standard
specifications and detail plates. Final plat approval is contingent upon approval of the construction plans
by the Chanhassen City Council.
The applicant shall dedicate on the final plat the necessary right-of-xvay to achieve a 30 foot xvide strip of
land lying east of the existing centerline of Frontier Trail.
Individual grading, drainage, tree preservation, and erosion control plans will be required for each lot at
the time of building permit application for the city to reviexv and approve.
A fifteen foot tree removal limit shall be established around all building pads. Tree protection fencing
shall be installed prior to excavation and grading. Tree removal limits shall be shoxvn on all building
permit surveys.
Applicant must use a trench box for the installation of the ~vater line in order to minimize impact on
canopy coverage.
Applicant must submit revised canopy coverage and removal calculations as well as a revised survey
showing the appropriate coverage and removal area.
Park and trail fees are required per city ordinance in lieu of parkland dedication.
The bluff area shall be shown on all building permit applications for this subdivision.
The applicant shall prepare and dedicate cross-access easements and prepare maintenance agreements for
the private streets.
The applicant shall submit a landscape buffer plan for the eastern part of the property line to protect the
neighbors to the east.
52
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
30.
The applicant shall establish a no cut zone on each lot, subject to approval by the city in which no
vegetation shall be removed, no grading will be permitted, no material may be stored, and no equipment
may enter.
31.
Bluff areas shall be protected by the use of double fencing consisting of silt fencing for erosion control
and tree protection fencing. In addition, where excavation or construction is close to the bluff or in a
critical area, a barrier of staked hay bales shall also be installed.
32. The applicant shall provide an on-site forester to assist with and direct the tree preservation for the
development.
33.
The houses shall be equipped with gutters and the do~vn spouts shall be directed toward the private street
and away from the bluff, or some other design to meet the Best Practices Management Handbook's
standards for roof runoff.
All voted in favor and the motion carded unanimously.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to table the variance to the bluff setback requirement
until [he applicant can come back with a specific house pad location and specific variance request All voted in
favor and the motion carded unanimously.
REQUEST FOR A SIGN VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20-267 REQUIRING INDIVIDUAL DIMENSIONAl,
LETrERS AND TO ALLOW A SECOND WALL MOUNTED SIGNI 7901 GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD~
GARY BROWN.
John Rask: Thank you Mr. Mayor. Mr. Brown is requesting a sign variance to allow a second wall mounted
sign and a variance from Section 20-1267 requiring individual dimensional letters for xvall signs. On January
3rd the Planning Commission held a public hearing to reviexv the proposed variance. The Commission
concurred with the findings presented in the staff report and recommended denial of the variance. On
September of last year the City Council reviewed the site plan and the conditional use for the car wash. At that
time it was indicated that separate sign permits would be required for any signage on the building. The report
and the letter that xvent to the applicant indicated that signage shall comply with the city sign ordinance and that
signage would be permitted on street frontage only. In this case it was West 79th Street. The existing signs on
the building are in violation of the city code. As mentioned before, the sign must use individual dimensional
letters and the wall signs permitted on street frontage only. A sign consisting of individual letters could be put
on the north elevation of the building. Based on ordinance requirements, a 75 square foot sign could be
permitted. Staff is recommending denial of the variance and that the existing signs be removed and if the
applicant wishes to have a sign on the building, that one which conforms to the ordinance be erected. I'd be
happy to answer any questions at this time.
Mayor Chmiel: Are there any questions of John?
Councilman Berquist: There are two signs. The signs that xve're talking about are the ones that are indicated on
the drawings that were indicated with the staff report above the entrance and exit doors, correct?
John Rask: Correct.
53
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Berquist: And the only item of incompatibility with the ordinance is the fact that those should be
on a pedestal. Not that they should be at eye level?
John Rask: Well, you're alloxved to have a display message as a part of the signage can contain the display
message, entrance, exit. Open 24 hours. So that could remain. The real problem is the one on the south
elevation which faces Highway 5. As the ordinance only allows signage for street frontage.
Councilman Berquist: And as often as I drive by there, frankly I don't read the signs I guess because they're
even, I knoxv it's there. It's not something that's intrusive to me. Is there any other signage on the car wash
property denoting the fact that it's a car wash area?
John Rask: Just with the existing one there is.
Councilman Berquist: With the other.
John Rask: Yes. It says car wash. It'd be on the west elevation of the existing one and then there's some
directional signage on the building itself.
Councilman Berquist: No further questions.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is the applicant here this evening, and I've seen him.
Councilman Senn: A question?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes, go ahead.
Councilman Senn: Right noxv there's signage on both sides, correct?
John Rask: Correct.
Councihnan Senn: Oh, okay. But I thought, okay so what you're saying is the signage that's on the north side
is fine. It meets the ordinance requirement?
John Rask: No. It needs that wall mounted signs have to use individual dimensional letters. We don't allow
painted signs anymore. That was a change that was made xvith the sign ordinance revisions last January.
Kate Aanenson: But they could have a sign on that face.
Councilman Senn: They could have a sign on the north facia but the ordinance, at least as it is now, without a
variance, they couldn't have one on the south?
John Rask: Correct.
Councilman Senn: Okay. And that's simply by the interpretation of street frontage, which you're saying is
79th?
John Rask: Correct.
54
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Gary, would you like to come forward and plead your case.
Gary Broxvn: Yes sir. I am Gary Brown. First of all I got a little grief here xvith the, January 3rd was the
Planning Commission meeting, correct? I didn't get invited to the party. I got my notice in the mail on January
4th. So I guess I got shot down at that one. I can understand that's all to the Supreme Court here and see what
we get. I xvas negligent. I didn't know that I had to get a permit to put a sign on the building. I thought a
permit for the sign was for a free standing sign. I may be negligent there but I do have to address the fact here
that I can have a sign on the front of the building but I can't have a sign on the back of the building. Therefore,
xvhen the people try coming in in the wrong direction, and they're going to go in in the summer time, they're
going to go in the back instead of the front and the front guy's coming in one way and the back guy's coming in
the other way, we're going to have a hell of a wreck, you know. And another thing I'd like to bring up is, it
might not be a lot of money to you guys but I paid $30,000.00 in permits to the city of Chanhassen to put this
thing up and I'm not supposed to let people knoxv what the hell ! built? No,v, so fire away.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Do you have any questions of Gary at this time? Anybody?
Councilman Berquist: You paid $30,000.00 in permits and you put up, those signs are painted wood signs on
the front and rear of the building.
Gary Brown: Yeah, I xvanted them to show off. I mean I can put those little bitty squares up there like we put
on the other building and nobody can see but I've got to advertise this place guys.
Councilman Berquist: I'm not disputing the fact that you've got to advertise. I agree 100% ~vith that. I haven't.
Gary Broxvn: ...red and white signs. Amoco Oil's got big red and white signs. Holiday's got signs in the front
of the building, on the back of the building, on the side of the building, why can't I have one of these?
Councilman Berquist: Well I can't really address that. I guess I'm just surprised. I'm a little bit embarrassed
first of all that I haven't looked at the signs to know whether in fact they are what they say or what they're
constructed of but the fact that you spent as much money as you did on the car ~vash and yet we've got painted
plywood signs is a little bit disconcerting. That's item one. Item two, the advertising I think is permitted on the
north side in a different form. Is that correct? He can have a sign advertising the fact that he's got a car wash
on the north side of the building and yet in a different form. Not building mounted, as it currently stands. So
he can rectify that situation. And the south situation then becomes the issue.
Kate Aanenson: He can also rectify the other issue you brought up about the enter and exit. That's something
he can certainly put on there too. At the appropriate level to make sure people are cued right.
Councilman Senn: Well and that doesn't require a variance one way or the.other. You can just approve that.
Kate Aanenson: Sure. Yeah.
Councilman Berquist: So the real bone of contention here becomes the fact that he is unable to put a sign up
that promotes a state of the art car wash on the most traveled road within the city: And that is because he has,
tell me why he can't put one? How does the ordinance read? To limit his ability to put one on that north side?
John Rask: Yeah, signage on street frontage only. In this case it's West 79th Street.
55
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Berquist: Okay.
Gar5' Brown: Aren't you allowed to have one sign for each road?
John Rask: Correct. For the building, sure.
Gar5, Broxvn: Highway 5 isn't a road?
John Rask: You don't have direct frontage on it. The property has to abut the roadway.
Gar5, Brown: Who runs the property between there?
John Rask: That's a separate building.
Mayor Chmiel: Mike.
Councilman Mason: Well, I remember when all of this sign ordinance stuff went by. As I recall there were a
number of business people in the city of Chanhassen that were involved in it and gave it their full and complete
blessing. I think these problems can be pretty easily rectified and stay within the ordinances. I'm not going to
deny the issue about advertising on Highway 5. That may be an issue for a later, well maybe that's an issue
now too but I remember all the work that went into the sign ordinance and I know all the varied members of the
community that were involved in it and I'm comfortable xvith what they came up with.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Mark.
Councilman Senn: t guess I would be comfortable if the signage were switched to the type of signage which is
required by the ordinance. As to the issue north versus south, I'd also be comfortable xvith the signage facing
Highway 5. As an alternative to the signage facing north on a variance but the problem is, isn't your entrance
to the north? On the north side.
Gar}' Brown: Correct.
Councilman Senn: So to take that time away, then you've got your advertising toxvards Highxvay 5 but you've
got no identity for a car wash at the entry point other than you could still have the word entry.
Gar5, Brown: Correct.
Councilman Senn: If you had a choice of one or the other, which one would you like?
Gary Brown: I'm going to stick to my ground and fight this one out. I've got to have it on both ends.
Councilman Senn: Well Gar5, the ordinance doesn't allow you to have it on the south end. If you're given a
variance for the south end, can you live without the north end? Is it that important on the north end?
Gar5, Brown: No.
Councilman Senn: Okay.
56
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Gary Brown: You know, let's remember back also when ! got my first blueprints done and I went through the
whole show up here and I came in and everybody liked it and then all of a sudden, oh you've got to have a
pitched roof on that building, you know. So I bellied up for a eouple grand and changed all that and did that
and I didn't put any stink up about that. Even though every building within, how far ever you want to look
down there's got a flat roof on it. I've got a peaked roof, you know. So I gave and took on that, you know so I
expect you guys to give and take on some of this stuff too.
Mayor Chmiel: The only trouble is often times you give the variance and then you have to live with...
Gary Brown: If you read in the sign ordinance, it says if bears hardship. No~v I don't know if it's your hardship
or mine but another thing is in there that, are the signs detrimental to the public. ! mean are they disturbing
someone. Are they ruining someone's air. You know. No, they're not. That's what I read in there. I don't see
any of my neighbors here saying this is good, bad or indifferent. I guess they were all invited as ~vell.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah they were. Although I was trying to defray some of your costs too Gary. I spent $6.00
so that's $29,994.00 that I paid toxvard this thing.
Gary Broxvn: I'm not asking for...
Councilman Berquist: I may be grasping at straws. And I understand xvhat you're saying. Believe me, I do. Is
there any method by xvhich you could put, erect a sign on the do it yourself property that would orient, that
would meet the ordinances and orient towards Highway 5 that would serve your purposes? As I think about it,
probably not.
Gary Broxvn: I can put a billboard up next to Highway 5.
Councilman Senn: You know what I tried to do is liken it to other places ~vhere, I don't know if you'd say
much more or much worse can occur slightly by the fact that there's a parcel that fronts both on TH 5 and on
the side street and they have signs on both sides. So I mean that's not the part that's offending me, and stuff. It
doesn't offend me to have the signage I guess toxvards TH 5 and towards the north if that doesn't create any real
big problems for us. You know as far as the types of materials on the plan, I think that's kind of like a
negotiable. Let's get it straighten around and get rid of the plywood signs. But the more I think about it, it's
the kind of thing well if you just put it, if 5's more important and you put it there and that's a variance and that's
the trade-off because you don't have it on the north, but that's what makes sense because the entrance is there,
then I go thinking down the street and down the road and I king of start lighting up because there's a lot bigger
lots, a person's that's allowable simply because the lots do front both ways. It kind of seems like well, what's
hurting. Why not do it.
Councilman Berquist: Well and my point is that all the time and all the effort that's put into putting an
ordinance together and all the people, the man hours that were involved and they tried to do a good job and
then we go ahead and read it and say yeah, it sounds good and we implement it. Then in less than 6 months
we're in a situation ~vhere we have to almost abandoned what we had said we would adhere to. That's the part
that is hard for me. It's like saying well your work didn't mean diddly.
Councilman Senn: Well I mean again, you have to remember ordinances are guides. You know I mean I can
say that tongue in cheek because I voted against that ordinance but.
57
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Mike, you were going to say something.
Councilman Mason: Well, Steve I hear what you're saying but I guess in defense of the work that's been done,
I think certainly with the committees I've been on and what not, you look for everything foreseeable and as soon
as you get something laid in stone, three months later something comes up that you didn't anticipate. So I think
if we should decide, and I think at this point it's a very big if, leave something on the south side. I don't think
that negates work that's been done. I mean it is a variance and it's not, you know a variance isn't etched in
stone.
Councilman Berquist: And Gary's point that the affect on anyone in the surrounding area is very valid.
Councilman Mason: It's a point well taken.
Councilman Berquist: I mean we've got a gas station, a gas station, an oil change and a car wash.
Councilman Senn: Well you know I think a business ought to be able to identify itself is what it comes down
to. You knoxv in terms of the type of use. Outside of an office building though, I don't think every tenant
should be able to be listed that's in the office building, okay. But again, no matter how you look at that, you're
going to differ on opinions but I think you have to go back to the basics that the business really ought to, at
least in my mind, have clear identification as to xvhat they're from a retail standpoint because I mean if you're
going to be in retail, it' you don't have that, it seems to me that you're starting from somewhere below ground
zero.
Councilman Mason: Yeah, in thinking about this I think I can live xvith a car wash sign on the south side, but I
think the signage itself has to change. I think the reason that the plywood and the painted, I have some.
Councilman Senn: I mean I keep yelling at Gerhardt about the signage next door.
Mayor Chmiel: I think we've sort of discussed this back and forth. I think it's time that we come to a
conclusion with a vote. I would entertain a motion.
Councilman Senn: How about a motion to the variance to allow the signage on the south, and north because I
assume once you do the south side it makes the north a variance too, does it not?
Kate Aanenson: You can speak to whichever. If you want to just give one side or both.
Councilman Senn: Okay. But that the signage materials be sxvitched to conform to the ordinances as reviewed
and approved by staff.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a second?
Councilman Berquist: So we're limiting it to the one to the south side.
Councilman Senn: No, the variance is on the south side. He's allowed...north side.
Mayor Chmiel: The variance is for the south side as well as the north.
58
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Senn: Yeah, north he can do without...
Councilman Berquist: Okay, so the fact that there's t~vo signs no~v will stay and the only thing that will change
would be the material by which the signs are constructed.
Councilman Senn: Well, they've got to conform to the ordinance. I mean if there's sizing problems or anything
else like that, I'm saying staff can figure that out.
Councilman Berquist: What can of xvorms do we open?
Kate Aanenson: Can the staff comment on that?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
Kate Aanenson: We've got three more coming.
Gary Brown: You know I didn't take...letters and stuff up there but if you see the way I built that, I have those
lights that shine down as well as on the building. If I'm going to put, I think it called for back lit signage,
correct John?
John Rask: Yeah, generally if the signage is to illuminated, it is supposed to be back lit. If the lighting's, I
mean obviously a lot of buildings have lighting that's designed more to highlight the building or provide safety.
I don't see that as being an issue here. I think that's, you have to illuminate the entrance.
Councilman Berquist: Can Kate comment?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Kate.
Kate Aanenson: I guess the staff would like some direction because we've got three more variances of the exact
same issue coming forward. It sounds like we may need to go back and look at the sign ordinances. We're
going against the grain here.
Councilman Berquist: What are the specifics?
Kate Aanenson: These same issues.
John Rask: Applebee's, Tires Plus.
Kate Aanenson: We spent all that time on Byerly's on this exact issue.
Councilman Senn: But see that's where I disagree with you. We gave it away with Byerly's. We gave them a
monument down, right on the corner of the road. We gave them another one up by their entrance. We gave
them signage up on the building. Come on, from a retail standpoint, everyone in the world 'knows where they're
at. From any direction you come from, and now you're saying, and see that's where I have a hard time. I say
gee we give them every advantage in the xvorld, every view, every sign we've given them then we come down
here to this little place and just because this guy doesn't front on both roads, we're saying no you can't have
signage which identifies you know you to the traffic. That's where I feel that there's something wrong.
59
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah but that basically is a rule...being on either side and that gives him that automatically. By
not having it, you just don't get it.
Councilman Senn: We did a variance to Byerly's.
Mayor Chmiel: Not as far as their signage.
Councilman Senn: By allowing the monument down on the corner. I thought we did that through a variance.
We took action on it.
Kate Aanenson: The), wanted the fine food and dining. We spent a lot of time on that.
Councilman Senn: Oh, up on the building. I'm talking about the extra one we approved down at the comer of
Powers and.
Kate Aanenson: That was in substitution for something else.
John Rask: The center signs for Kinko's and...
Councilman Senn: It was for all the tenants in the project.
Kate Aanenson: But the3, didn't give them extra wall signs.
Councilman Senn: No, but that was an extra sign I thought we gave them.
Councilman Berquist: Real quickly, specifically what are the three that are coming before us. Real quickly.
Kate Aanenson: ...that we're not bogging this one down with future ones but.
Roger Knutson: No, I think everyone should be aware of it.
Kate Aanenson: Right. I just xvant to make sure that's clear. That this goes on it's own merits but we have
Tires Plus, Cheers that are coming in for variances. Saying they want additional signage on facia's. And xvhat's
the other one?
John Rask: Applebee's.
Hate Aanenson: Applebee's. They all want additional signage. So I'm just saying, if we're in conflict then,
staf?s spending a lot of time on these and we just maybe should change the code or something. That's why I'm
just asking.
Councilman Senn: Same situation Kate where it's, they want it south?
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, additional facia's, sure.
60
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
John Rask: Because of the alignment of TH 5 and West 79th, hoxv it bends through there. The west elevation's
actually has great visibility from TH 5. The way Applebee's will be oriented on the lot, it ~vill pick up good
exposure if it can get a west, a design on their western elevation.
Mayor Chmiel: You see it from both directions.
John Rask: Yeah, north and xvest.
Kate Aanenson: Sure, it's the same issue. I mean do you ~vant maximize your visibility so, I'm just saying
that's something we talked about in the sign ordinance. If you want to go back and revisit it...
Mayor Chmiel: How many more could come back in besides that?
Kate Aanenson: A lot I guess. Every business, Perkin's. Sure. Target.
Councilman Mason: Well, Councilman Berquist I believe you made the comment a little while ago, what can of
worms are we going to open.
Councilman Berquist: And we just found out.
Councilman Mason: And we just did and I ~vould have to say that certainly changes my feelings on this. And
I'm, yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, being that there wasn't a second.
Councilman Senn: I'll withdraw it anyway.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there another motion?
Councilman Berquist: I really want there to be some other solution.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, I do too.
Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to see it as well but there's no way you can do it other than the fact you change the
ordinance. Go all the way back through it.
Councilman Senn: There's nothing in the ordinance...?
John Rask.' No, believe me. That's the first thing I looked at.
Kate Aanenson: We always try to find a way to resolve this without having to go through this process.
Gary Brown: Do you suppose the ordinance is maybe too tough?
Kate Aanenson: Well I think the group, the Chamber that put it together had this specific...
61
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, the entirety of the Chamber or the people from the community, people who are in
business here who designed all of that.
Gary Brown: ...I asked to put a sign up ou the highway in 1990. It was put up 7 xveeks ago.
Councilman Senn: And it's probably in violation now, right?
Gary Brown: i'm just saying .... start calling that ridiculous. I've only been in business for 25 years, you know.
A new guy comes in, he gets a sign right away. That's neither here nor there. I don't care...
Kate Aanenson: We needed a sign permit. We told him he needed a sign permit. It was put up in violation.
That was the one issue right there. I mean we told it as part of the site plan review that we needed a sign
permit so.
Councilman Senn: And this is a separate parcel from your other buildings on there?
Gar3, Brown: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, he changed those parcels. It was all one parcel at one time, right?
Gary Brown: Yeah, at one time.
Councilman Senn: You wouldn't want to put it back together would you.'?
Gary Brown: Thinking about it.
Councilman Senn: That's a solution.
Mayor Chmiel: That'd be the only solution.
Councilman Senn: If you put it back together, we could solve the problem pretty easily.
Councilman Berquist: I mean that's a very viable solution.
Councilman Senn: Yeah. I guess the more I think about it here, I guess I'd like to make another motion. To
table this so we can look at the.
Gary Brown: I think that's...I think you should go down and look at it. Look at it. In the dark. This is a good
time of the year to look at it. It's always dark. But look at it in the dark and you guys tell me if it offends you.
Councilman Senn: No part of it is Gary, we've got...
Mayor Chmiel: ...by what we have to go by on the books, unfortunately.
Councilman Senn: Well and that doesn't mean we shouldn't change what's on the books. I don't know but now
that xve have something that's come up that doesn't meet it, maybe we should just take a few minutes to go back
and look at it and see if we've done something xve shouldn't have done. I don't know. I'm just saying maybe
62
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
xve should table it and look at that and you should give some thought to re-combining the parcels. Maybe one
xvay or another we can figure something out.
Gary Brown: I think that's a good idea.
Councilman Berquist: Make a motion to table.
Councilman Senn: Table, I did.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there a second?
Councilman Berquist: I'll second it.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to table Variance Request #95-12 from Section 20-
1267 requiring individual dimensional letters, and Section 20-13-3(3) to allow a second wall mounted sign on
the sou~h elevation. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE FOR LANDSCAPE NURSERIES AND GARDEN CENTERS IN THE A2~
AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT.
John Rask: Thank you Mr. Mayor. Mr. Don Halla of Halla Nursery requested a text amendment to allow a
landscape nursery as a permitted use in the A2 district. The Planning Commission held several public hearings
to discuss this ordinance amendment. On January 3rd of '96 the Planning Commission denied Mr. Halla's
request but did approve an ordinance amendment which would allow retail nurseries as an interim use in the A2
district. Again this is an amendment to the entire zoning district so it would apply to all those properties which
are currently zoned A2. As I had mentioned, Mr. Halla originally brought this ordinance amendment forward
requesting a permitted use. Or requesting to make retail nurseries or garden centers a permitted use in this
district. The commission did approve it as an interim use. Mr. Halla had indicated after the Planning
Commission meeting that he was not interested in bringing it forward in that manner and that he was not
interested in obtaining an interim use permit. Staff feels that the ordinance is .justified and we feel that it may
help us deal with some of the other nurseries we have as well as provide them with some opportunity to do a
limited amount of retail sales if they meet their conditions set forth in an interim use permit. Currently the
zoning ordinance prohibits retail nurseries and garden centers in the A2 district. Wholesale nurseries are
currently alloxved as an interim use in the district. Staff recognizes that we do have these pre-existing situations
out there where we do have nurseries doing a limited amount of retail. That this would be a way for us to
legitimize them. If they're interested in expanding, they would come through an interim use permit where we
could look at each site on a site specific basis. Attach conditions where we feel appropriate to mitigate some of
the negative impacts on adjoining properties. Staff is of the opinion that retail sales as an interim use would be
consistent xvith other uses in the district and the comprehensive plan. Our concerns with allowing retail
nurseries or garden centers as a permitted use...who are doing some retail and how do we treat them. Right now
they're non-conforming uses. This would kind of remove the cloud that's currently over the property ~vith a
non-conforming status. But on the other hand if they give a termination date, which would be set upon
application for an interim use. There was conditions added that xvould apply to all interim use permits for
wholesale and retail nurseries. A number of these were in the ordinance currently. They currently apply to
wholesale nurseries. What we did was modify them slightly to apply to retail and wholesale. So with that brief
overview, I'd be happy to answer any questions that you have.
63
City Council Meeting - Janum3, 22, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Any questions of John?
Councilman Berquist: What specific conditions got modified and which were taken, were there?
John Rask: Number 1 is the same, xvhich currently applies. Number 2 currently applies. No changes there.
Number 3. Currently that read wholesale nursery, stockyards and buildings had to be 500 feet I believe from
the existing residence. In order to provide some leeway there, we said a minimum of 50 feet or 300 feet if
there's an existing resident there, whichever is greater. Currently I think it was 100 feet setback from a roadway
to a building. We changed that to 50. Currently all other structures in the A2 district have a 50 foot setback.
We lessened the requirements on the buffering and the berming. Currently it says all storage areas and
contractors buildings have to be completely screened from view from roadways and adjacent properties. We
changed that to read that buffering may be accomplished using berms, fencing, landscaping, natural topography
or increased setbacks. And then we just left in there that the City Council may require 100% screening if they
feel appropriate. If there's adjacent residential close by. Higher density residential that may be impacted, you
could certainly require complete screening. Hours of operation I believe xvere left alone, except for the, again
xve put in that City Council may further restrict the hours of operation if it's adjacent to property guided
residential or if property identified in the comp plan as residential. No outside speaker system was in there. I
think light sources shall be shielded was added. And then the termination date xvas certainly in there. But
again one thing we added that the renewal of the application, let's see. Part of the permit expiring, the applicant
may request an extension to the interim use permit by submitting a new application. So if we say the interim '
use permit's going to terminate when the property's brought within the MUSA. At that point if we ~vanted the
applicant wish to revisit that, he could certainly come forward with an application and we could again take a
look at, does this make sense.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah. For example, if you bring in the MUSA, it still may be 10 years before you get sewer
to that area or something so that may not uecessarily be an appropriate trip date. So we wanted to give some
flexibility.
John Rask: And then we just, the last one we added some criteria for signage as our sign ordinance doesn't deal
with signage in the A2 district. We just basically allow for entry monument signs so.
Councilman Berquist: Okay, thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Are there any other questions? If not, okay. Is there anything you'd like to say this evening?
If xve could sort of limit it with time because technically we should shut Council down but we're going to keep
going.
Mark Halla: Certainly we can reschedule for another time if that's more convenient.
Mayor Chmiel: No, we'll proceed.
Mark Halla: Alright. Good evening. I'm Mark Halla. I reside at 770 Creekwood in Chanhassen. Several
months ago we asked staff if they had a problem with us adding a couple of greenhouses. They said yes
because we're a non-conforming use and by adding a greenhouse we'd be intensifying that use. We disagreed
with that answer. We proposed an amendment to the city code that would eliminate staff's concern and solve
the disagreement entirely. The suggestion we made was to amend the 1989 City Code change to, and I'll quote,
"alloxv retail nurseries and garden centers, in existence as of the date of 1989 code change, as a permitted use."
64
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
In my opinion this change would only affect our property and possibly two others. As he noted, the Planning
Commission found against us. You're our only chance left for us becoming an accepted use without setting a
termination date for our business. As I said before, I have no intention of becoming an interim use. My family
has a 54 year old, third generation business. We don't intend to allow the city to set a date for us to become
extinct. That just isn't practical. We've come to the city in hopes of resolving this issue amicably. We had no
idea that by asking the commission to put up some greenhouses...enact legislation to eliminate us. Please
reconsider Planning Commission's recommendation on this issue. Businesses are an integral part of any
community, and a business such as our's is definitely an asset to the community, not a liability. We currently
have existing grandfather rights which cannot be taken away. There's absolutely no incentive for us to apply for
an interim use permit to eventually terminate those rights. We don't quite understand why the Arboretum...and
our establishment is not. They sell many of the same items that we do, and even more. They sell food...gift
items. They have more traffic. More permanent buildings and are much more permanent than us. There's one
big difference though. We raise and sell trees, shrubs...and perennials. They...agricultural use, do not. And
xvhat about other horticultural businesses that are local. They continue to add greenhouses to sell retail. Why is
it okay for them and not for us? We also don't understand how adding greenhouses is intensifying our use. We
already have the plants and we already sell them retail. We just xvant to cover them so we have protection from
the weather. Is that so wrong? Perhaps my greatest question for Council is why doesn't staff consider our
garden center and our nursery an agricultural use. They have said that because we sell retail that it exempts us
from being agricultural. If that's true, then the Arboretum must be also. The Arboretum sells retail from a
million dollar building. Raises and sells no trees, shrubs or evergreens, except those donated by nurseries such
as our's. They have admission fees similar to Valleyfair and the research is conducted by a completely separate
association. The information that I just gave you was provided to us by the Research Director at the Minnesota
Nursery and Landscape Association's annual meeting just 10 days ago. This says the Arboretum is agricultural.
Our business is agricultural. We are licensed by the State of Minnesota Agricultural Department. We're
inspected by the Agricultural Inspector. We are considered agricultural by State and Federal labor laws, and the
IRS. We have a game farm license. The majority of our employees graduated from schools in agricultural and
over 80% of our budget is spent growing, making and selling trees, shrubs, evergreens and perennials. We are
agricultural. Just because we sell retail, don't consider us non-agricultural. If you make a carte blanche decision
that retail and agricultural do not go together, you'll have to stop the Arboretum from selling retail. The farm
huts from selling retail. The apple stands from selling retail and other local horticultural businesses from selling
retail, and a host of others. The simplest solution, and there's two of them, is to number one, simply consider us
agricultural and therefore direct staff to find us an accepted and permitted use. And number two, to amend the
1989 code change by allowing retail nursery and garden centers in existence at the time of the 1989 code
change, as a permitted use. Again I ask you to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation and
support to reconsider the recommendation and support your local businesses rather than eliminate them. Thank
you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Does anybody have any questions? No. Not at this time.
Roger Knutson: Mr. Mayor, just to point out, this is the first reading of this ordinance.
Mayor Chmiel: That's, yeah. That's correct.
Don Halla: Good evening Mr. Mayor, members of City Council. I'm Don Halla, Halla Nurseries. I believe our
landscape nursery and garden center should be a permitted use in the A2 zoning. We requested a zoning text
amend~nent after we recently asked permission to build another greenhouse. The building department said that
we did not need a permit since the greenhouse would be an agricultural building on agricultural property. This
65
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
is agricultural property. This is the code. It is in accordance with your code. However, the planning
department said no because we were intensifying our business, which they felt is a non permitted use. The
planning department says their zoning doesn't allow us to exist. We all realize our grandfather status does allow
us to exist. Halla Nursery has been a retail nursery in Chanhassen since 1963. In 1973 a permit was issued for
a building. A structure which was to house our landscape department, garden center and sales office. Since that
time we have alxvays carried dry goods, plants, tools, animal feeds, bird accessories, and other items related to
the development and care of landscapes and plants and animal habitat. Prior to 1994 we stocked and sold these
items in our office building, greenhouses and a display and storage building. In 1990 the city changed their
ordinance without notifying us. In 1993 we built two buildings, mainly for equipment storage and planting of
bare root stock. No permit was required. We did call and ask. In early spring of 1994 we built another
building to condense the products which we were displaying and selling from our office building, greenhouses,
display and storage buildings. Again, after inquiring ;vith the same building department ;ve learned or were told
by them that no permit was requested. Or was required. Not until the summer of 1994 were we notified that
the change in the ordinance affected the legal status of our business. We were not notified when we inquired
previously about building permits. Why not? Probably because the nursery business is regarded by State and
Federal governments as an agricultural business. Just as farming, greenhouses and floraculture are. We feel that
when the city changed it's ordinance and zoning for A2 land in 1990, an error was made by not including
landscape nurseries and garden centers as an A2 permitted use. There are several other nurseries in the
community, though grandfathered in, in non-compliance with the A2 ordinance. The ordinance should have
taken into consideration these families and businesses before it was adopted. The restrictions should be the
same for everyone. A2 is agriculture. This includes Arboretum, nurseries, garden centers, farms, floraculture,
and greenhouses, all of which may or may not include retail sales. Zoning is silent as to retail sales. Halla
Nursery is a licensed landscape nursery, game and poultry farm. We have been all of these for many years.
Homes are permitted...agriculture business. My son and his wife live on the nursery property. The city staff
has stated that there ;vould be a certain A2 zoned areas which are suitable for garden center nurseries by Section
20-1 of the ordinance defining, nursery means an enterprise which conducts the retail and wholesale sale of
plants grown on site, as well as accessory items directly related to... Arboretum which means a collection of
plants, is permitted in A2 zoning. Is this not what a nursery is? Our Minnesota Landscape Arboretum is
located on A2 land. It has a retail store which sells jewelry, trinkets, books, clothes, planters, cards, quilts,
housing items and Christmas gifts, to name a few. And also has a restaurant. They call their store a variety
store in a conversation that I had xvith them in October. They do not sell plants, or plant supplies, except at
their fundraisers where nurseries like us donate product for the sale to help fund the continued growth of this
valuable asset. Nurseries are likewise a service to the community. They grow plants of many types and kinds
which are sold to beautify our homes and businesses. Nurseries must make a profit to survive. Unlike the
Landscape Arboretum, they don't have the luxury of grants, volunteers, and fundraisers to continue their
existence. Nevertheless, we are a valuable asset to the community. Our nursery has 100 acres of land, though
we do not necessarily need all 100 acres for our operation. Recently xve have been approved for a subdivision
which would leave at least 12 acres for the nursery business with the remaining land for 2 1/2 acre average
residential development. Charles Cudd is the builder. A fine home builder now building in Bearpath and Big
Woods in Eden Prairie has been working with us to create a development that makes the nursery like an
Arboretum. A plus for the neighbors to enjoy. That want to live in the country atmosphere among the
peacocks and flowers. We are looking forward to being an attractive asset to this new subdivision, just as we
feel we are to Chanhassen. Over the years we have donated trees and plants to the parks and churches and
other non-profit organizations. We raise over 20,000 perennials and annuals each year and we also grow
thousands of shade trees, shrubs and ornamentals. These plants are grown to be part of beautification of the
world in which ~ve live and in particular Chanhassen. We hope as the community grows that we ~vill remain an
integral part of it. We are a third generation family business. We do not feel that our business, which has
66
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
existed here since 1962 is an interim use. Because we have needs for another greenhouse and because city staff
has complained to us that our nurser3, does not comply with A2 zoning, we are requesting the ordinance
amendment, In October, or excuse me. An October 25th memo from Planning. The planning staff listed
certain conditions that would apply to retail and wholesale nurseries if added as an appropriate use in certain
locations. We commend the staff on their thoughtfulness and desire to develop the community in an organized
and precise manner. However, we feel some of their recommendations may be too harsh and not practical for
businesses which have existed prior to zoning changes. As a family business, most farmers, nurserymen, and
greenhouse operations, along with the Arboretum, ~vould like to feel that they would have the chance to close or
liquidate their business on their own, if they chose to. And this should be determined by economic conditions.
Not by something that the city sets up and says, boom. You have to close your business. Is it fair for the city
to tell owners that he must, owners of land that he must sell his property and cease making a living? That is
what an interim or conditional permit does. Most nurserymen or farmers are good stewards of the land. They
love xvorking xvith plants and animals and enjoy the beauty of outdoor ~vork and living. It is hard work. Most
work 60 to 80 hours a week to earn a living during the 7 to 8 months in ~vhich the crop's grown. Their work
benefits all of us through food production, beautification in keeping our earth healthy and alive. Society needs
to help and encourage all agriculture or we won't have a society. We need extra greenhouse space to help
accomplish this. We want to cooperate with and facilitate Chanhassen in it's gro~vth into the next century and
beyond. All we have asked for is the permission to put up one or two extra greenhouses at this point in time.
The building department says there is no problem with that. It meets their recommendations as far as State
codes...planning has a different point of view. That's why we're here today. I really am not looking for a
change in the ordinance as much as I'm looking for permission to put up greenhouses to handle things the way
we need to so that xve can start plants in March instead of having to wait until May to do so, so we have a
sellable product at the time...thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. I think that this is going to be a rather lengthy discussion. My suggestion or
recommendation would be to table this and have this come back before the Council. We have a couple more
items that we have to accomplish and does that affect any time frame on this at all? That wotlld be my
recommendation. Or if you feel strong enough to move ahead with a decision on this right now.
Councilman Senn: No, I agree with you on the tabling. But I'd like at the same time, I'd really like staff to put
together some additional information. I think the Halla's raise some very good points as it relates to it's
comparisons and stuff. You know I'm kind of listening through this and I don't know, I had a lot of trouble
with this one before tonight in kind of trying to think through it but now that I've kind of listened and through
some of the additional information, I really lean towards the permitted use but with all the conditions that staff
put on making that part of a permitted use. But I'm just saying that's xvhere I'm leaning. At the same time I'd
like to give staff a chance to respond to a number of the issues that the Halla's raised. I'm just saying, I think
they've got some pretty good points.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there a motion to do that?
Councilman Senn: I'd move to table.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilman Berquist: Second.
Mayor Clnniel: Moved and seconded. An)' other discussion?
67
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to table the amendment to the city code for landscape
nurseries and garden centers as permitted use in the A2, Agricultural Estate District. All voted in favor and the
motion canied.
APPROVAL OF PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR OUTLOT A~ BETTY O~SHAUGHNESSY.
Todd Gerhardt: Attached for City Council's consideration is a purchase agreement with Audubon '92 General
Partnership for the acquisition of Outlot A. The parcel under consideration is located west of the Chanhassen
Business Center. Staff, over the last few years, has been working with the partnership in trying to come up with
a fair market value in acquiring this parcel and the approach that we used was to take the upland, which is
approximately 5.5 acres times $33,174.09 to come up with the purchase price of $182,457.52, plus the
outstanding assessments of $72,000.00. Based on that staff would recommend that the City Council approve the
purchase agreement in purchasing and using the upland portion as the purchase price, but you would be
acquiring the entire 14.3 acres of what is the low lying area or the wetland area. In attachment #2 shows those
areas of upland. Staff is prepared to answer an), questions that you may have regarding the purchase agreement
and Betty O'Shaughnessy is here representing the partnership.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Steve. Do you have any?
Councilman Berquist: I do. I do have. $33,174.09.
Todd Gerhardt: Roughly.
Councilman Berquist: Approximately. Aside from that, I'm sure there's a very logical explanation as to how
you arrived at that. This is within the EDA?
Todd Gerhardt: Correct.
Councilman Berquist: You make mention of the revenues from the sources detailed within the report but you
never specifically state what those revenues are. I don't think, for the Paulstarr, Power Systems, Control
Products and David Obee parcels. And are we not also receiving revenue from the Weather Service, or is that
not part of the EDA?
Todd Gerhardt: It is part of the EDA but we are not collecting increment off of that facility. That was in
before the establishment of the district so that goes back to the County.
Councilman Berquist: Okay. Then the next part of that question concerns the anticipated revenues as the park
matures, and any other necessary expenditures these, those funds have been committed for or anticipated
concepts that they may require to fund besides this land purchase. I know that.
Todd Gerhardt: The other commitments that xve have, our Rec Center. Our road improvements with the
County so taking those into account I gave, there's a good estimate of about a million dollars worth of available
increment from the district and about $750,000.00 of it would go over towards those projects.
Councilman Berquist: Is that stated someplace in here that I missed?
Todd Gerhardt: No. I just put that together when I was upstairs.
68
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Berquist: Okay, so we've got one million in anticipated revenues once the district's mature.
Todd Gerhardt: Correct. Not taking into account any future groxvth.
Councilman Berquist: Of those four properties.
Todd Gerhardt: Right.
Councilman Berquist: Okay. So xve've got the road, we've got the Rec Center, we've got the parkland and what
else is in the hopper? What else could be in the hopper?
Todd Gerhardt: Todd is looking at improvements to the underpass, underneath the railroad tracks. Right now
you've got no fencing along xvith the underpass of the railroad tracks. You have probably 50 year old exposed
concrete. He xvould like to come in with some type of beautification plan of dressing that area up so that could
be a possibility.
Councilman Berquist: Alright, thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Mike.
Councilman Mason: No.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: No.
Mayor Chmiel: No, I don't have an3, either. Is there a motion to approve the purchase agreement with the
Audubon '92 General Partnership?
Councilman Mason: Move approval.
Councilman Senn: Second.
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the purchase agreement with Audubon 92
General Partnership for the acquisition of Outlot A (14.3 acres), Chanhassen Business Park for a purchase price
of $182,457.52 and that the city assume payment of special assessments up to the amount of $72,000.00. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
REQUEST TO ESTABLISH ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND APPOINT MEMBERS.
Kate Aanenson: If you'd like to table this, we're certainly willing to do that.
Mayor Chmiel: Why don't we do that.
Councilman Mason: So moved.
Mayor Ch~niel: Is there a second?
69
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Councilman Senn: Second.
Don Ashworth: Jill's been here all evening. Is there a possibility?
Kate Aanenson: Well she wants to make sure that you give her the appropriate time.
Don Ashworth: I'm thinking though maybe for our Wednesday meeting. There was a...
Jill Sinclair: That would be fine, if that would work out.
Councilman Senn: Either that or the Monday one because the Monday one's trash, ~vhich has a relationship.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, that might work good for the Monday one.
Councilman Senn: If you have a Wednesday class...
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn secomled to table the request to establish Envlmnmental
Commission and appoint members to a City Council woflr session. All voted in favor and the motion carded.
APPROVAL OF BILLS.
Councilman Senn: I don't know, xve can do two things. It's getting late. We can just move it and I xvon't vote
on it or get into a lengthy discussion.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I'll move it.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Mayor Chmlel moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the bills as presented. All voted in favor,
except Councilman Senn who opposed, ,'md the motion carried with a vote of 4 1o 1.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
A. RECREATION SUPERVISOR POSITION~ PARK & RECREATION DIRECTOR.
Don Ashworth: This is kind of advisory to the Council.
Councilman Mason: Yeah, but xvhat happens if we refuse to accept the resignation? ...forget it then. I mean
good for her but it's too bad.
B. MLC ANNUAL LEGISLATIVE DINNER & PROGRAM~ CITY MANAGER.
Don Ashworth: I still haven't gotten any additional information on this. This is... It's Bloomington's, most of
the suburban communities that ring the east, north, south, so Woodbury, Bloomington, that whole group. Then
the southwest group came in as an associate. I don't know if the Council has an5, interest in, why don't I try to
put out some form of memorandum to you advising you as to how many may sign up. What' their...and then
make up your own mind.
70
City Council Meeting - January 22, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilman Senn: Wasn't this, just as a question though. Wasn't this part of the forum, the big deal on
affordable housing kind of got organized around the northern suburbs and stuff?.
Don Ashxvorth: This was all to fight Orfield.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Strictly against Orfield. In fact we went to that two years ago, didn't we?
Councilman Senn: Which the northern went with him though. I mean that's where ! guess.
Mayor Chmiel: The northern suburbs did, you're right. Went with Orfield. Well not all of them. Blaine was
the leader in it...
Councilman Senn: Well I guess my question is, is this going to continue to be a mixed forum as it relates to
that issue, because that's pretty important to us?
Don Ashworth: Yes. And again we are an associate. There's no question as to ~vhether or not we're a member
of the group. At issue is do you want to attend.
Councilman Senn: Well should we shoxv up and be vocal I guess...if this is going to continue to be one of the
main forums for that, then it probably is in our interest to do that. That's the only point I'm kind of trying to
come around to.
Don Ashworth: I guess a lot of it depends on xvhether or not, see I think we can get Workman's ear and
Oliver's ear, whether we go to this particular meeting or not. And if Workman and Oliver aren't going to go,
unless you xvant to sit and talk with the Mayor from Bloomington, he's a pretty nice guy.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Is there a motion to adjourn?
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:40 p.m.
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
71