Loading...
1d Minutes ~ iot - CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MAY 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino called the meeting to order at 6:55 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Mancino, Councilman Senn, Councilman Mason, Councilman Engel and Councilman Berquist STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Roger Knutson, Charles Folch, Kate Aanenson, Bob Generous and Todd Hoffman Mayor Mancino: Again I would like to take a few minutes and apologize for the City Council meeting starting late. We had our EDA meeting and it was the first time we have done it this way. Had the EDA meeting first and it didn't quite work out as we expected so we're learning as we go. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the agenda with the following additions under Council Presentations: Councilman Senn wanted an update on Highway 101, an update on Chanhassen Bowl and Dan Dahlin, and an update on Holasek Nursery. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. CONSEl\'7 AGENDA: Councilman Berquist: All the RALF funds that we're spending to acquire land in the 212 corridor, MnDot has no plans, there's nothing legislatively that's going to allow that to happen? The question's more for informational purposes than anything else. Can that land be sold? Roger Knutson: That's a good question. Borrowing the money and there's, I believe the answer would be no by us. But with the concurrence of the Met Council and MnDot we could. I don't think we could without it but I'm not sure of the answer. I can get back to you on that. We've never tried to sell this. If s never been an issue. Councilman Berquist: I'd like to know the answer. Roger Knutson: I'll get you an answer. Mayor Mancino: Okay. So would you like to pull that and Steve, talk about that at the end of the. Is that something Roger you can get back to us next. Okay, go ahead Kate. Kate Aanenson: I'll let Bob, since he's the expert but there are conditions for purchasing with... Bob Generous: The City could.. .MnDot decides that the project would not go forward.. .notify the Met Council that they're not going to do the project at all. Kate Aanenson: That would be 212. city CollDcil Meeting - May 27, 1997 Bob Generous: 212. And then the City would be... Mayor Mancino: Okay. Kate Aanenson: So again I think it takes Met Council...other agencies saying that 212 is not going to... Councilman Berquist: There's nothing within the contract language that has a sunset. It goes on. Mayor Mancino: Indefinitely. Councilman Berquist: Forever and ever and ever. Kate Aanenson: Until they decide they're not going to... Mayor Mancino: Okay. Does that answer it for you? Councilman Berquist: Well it certainly, not as much as I'd like it answered. Mayor Mancino: Okay. So you would like l(a) pulled. Councilman Berquist: At this point, that was the only question I had on l(a). I'm not necessarily advocating. Mayor Mancino: You'd pull it. You would just like it answered. Councilman Berquist: Yep. Mayor Mancino: Okay, so we will not pull 1 (a). Councllman Berquist moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Resolution #97-32: Approve Resolution Authorizing Initiation ofRALF Acquisition within Highway 212, John Klingelhutz. b. Set Special Meeting Date to Canvass Special Park Bond Referendum Election Results, Monday, June 16, 1997,5:00 p.m. e. City Council Minutes dated May 12, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes dated May 7, 1997 Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated April 22, 1997 f. Resolution #97-33: Approval of Resolution Designating Election Judged, Rates of Pay, and Polling Locations. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None. 2 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 BOARD OF REVIEW: FINAL ACTION ON RESIDENTS APPEALS. Mayor Mancino: The Council is taking final action on residents' appeals. Anyone wishing to address the Council, please come forward now and if you could state your name and address and if you have your Pill number for your property, could you also tell us that. That would be helpful. Debra Lano: Good evening. My name is Debra Lano. I live at 2060 Oakwood Ridge in Chanhassen. My Pill number is R25.852011O. Do you need the lot and block information? Mayor Mancino: Debra, could you say that one more time. 8520. Debra Lano: 11 O. Mayor Mancino: 8520110 at 2060 Oakwood Ridge. Debra Lano: That's correct. I'm here tonight to ask that the appeal request that I wrote be considered. In the last two years our assessed value has increased by 32%. Since we moved into our home 5 years ago our assessed value has increased by 46% and in that same time frame we have made a 13% improvement in our property value by finishing our basement two years ago. The year we finished our basement our assessed value increased by 12%, which was a little higher than the level of the investment we made in our property, and this year the level of increase in the assessment is an additional 17%. Mayor Mancino: 17.4. Debra Lano: When we moved in 5 years ago. Is there a question? Councilman Senn: No, I'm sorry. Just so people can follow. I was just telling them, this is number 112. Debra Lano: Thank you. You know I know this is not a taxation hearing. It's an assessment hearing but we know that increases in assessed value translate into increases in property taxes. And when I moved into my home 5 years ago I never dreamed that my property taxes would double and in fact they have in 5 short years. And I am also in a neighborhood where we do not have water or sewer service so I just am asking that this recent assessed value be decreased because I just seem to, it seems to be unwarranted. Mayor Mancino: And you're in Timberwood here? Debra Lano: Yes we are. We were told that the increase was due to our neighborhood being reassessed possibly but I've talked with all my neighbors and no one else has had a similar increase and our home value has, the assessment has been increased every year except for the first year we moved into our home. Mayor Mancino: And how many years have you lived there? Debra Lano: Five years. Mayor Mancino: Five years, okay. Debra Lano: It just seems very aggressive to me. 3 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Any questions for Debra at this point? Councilman Berquist: There were no improvements made to the property that, you said you added some value. Debra Lano: Right, we finished our basement two years ago. Councilman Berquist: And that showed up in the assessment. Debra Lano: The prior year. Councilman Berquist: The prior year and there was no improvements made between this year and last year. Debra Lano: Right. We put $32,000.00 into our basement and since then our assessed value has increased by $85,000.00. It's quite a bit higher. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to address the City Council or they're concerned on their assessed value? Harold Dahl: Good evening. My name is Harold Dahl and I live at 6631 Horseshoe Curve. I do not have my PID number. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Can you hold on for just one second please as we. Councilman Mason: Number 97. Mayor Mancino: Number 97, okay. Thank you. Wait one minute to pull up your appeal. Okay, Mr. Dahl. Harold Dahl: Thank you. I also am contesting the assessed value of my property. I believe there's at least four indications of fair market value that have not been addressed by the Assessor adequately. My home was built as a summer cottage on Lotus Lake in 1970. It's a small footprint. About 650 square feet initially. And there was a 43 or 45 year owner of the home and that's starting in about the 40's. In the mid 50' s they improved the house. They dug a basement underneath it and they expanded the roof line to accommodate three small bedrooms upstairs and a bathroom. In 1989 the house sold in a multiple bid process for $139,000.00. Councilman Berquist: 1989? Harold Dahl: 1989. In 1990 we bought the house for $157,000.00, and that's after there were some substantial improvements. They added forced air furnace and also a central air conditioning and they recarpeted so they had about $15,000.00 worth of improvements in that one year time frame. Since we bought it in 1990, I believe I've probably put between $7,000.00 and $9,000.00 of improvements. We had a wet basement so we retiled that and I've improved some windows in the main floor. The house does not have a bathroom on the first floor. It does not have any closets on the first floor. In 1994 we refinanced the property and it was appraised at $170,000.00. In 1994 the Assessor came out and reassessed it for about $175,000.00. I thought that number was high at the time but it was close enough to our appraisal that I didn't argue it strenuously. This year they're increasing it by another $57,000.00. 4 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 I think they've slightly changed that number. But it's in excess of $50,000.00. So my house, which I bought 6 years ago for $157,000.00 is now being assessed at $240,000.00. That is tough to swallow. When I bought the house my assessed, my property taxes were $2,500.00. That was a lot. If this goes through, my property taxes will probably be $6,500.00. That's a lot more. I think there's four indications of value again that have not been considered. The multiple bid price that occurred in 1989. My purchase of the property in 1990. The appraisal and ultimately an Assessor that came out only 2 or 3 years ago. My property is on Lotus Lake. I have lakeshore. That makes it a tough sell. I've got 220 feet oflakeshore. Half of that is wetlands. I can't use it because it's a wetland. When I bought the property there was no milfoil on Lotus Lake. Now my lakeshore is choked with milfoil. So from a recreation standpoint, it's very difficult for me to use the lake. My kids can't really swim in it unless I do something about the weeds every year. So I mean I'mjust completely aggravated and frustrated with this entire process. Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Councilman Berquist: Excuse me Mr. Dahl. According to the report from the Assessor's office, the land value is pegged at $180,500.00 and the value of the home is $50, you know where it's at. Do you agree with that, with the valuation assessment of the home itself? Harold Dahl: Well I think what's happened is, that the value of the land has gone up. But what I think, if I were to sell the house today, that house itself would be gone in a nanosecond. When I bought it in 1990 I said I bought a lot with a house on it. I think today that situation is even worse. So I think, while the Assessor has put a value of$58 or whatever the number is on the house, that might be true if the house was sitting on a $30,000.00 lot. Not true if it's sitting on a lakeshore lot. Councilman Berquist: I'm trying to separate the home from the lot. Harold Dahl: I understand. Yeah, I understand. I'm trying to answer it. I don't know ifI did very effectively. Mayor Mancino: It's still a 26.8% increase in one year. Councilman Berquist: It's still a significant increase. Harold Dahl: The assessed value of the house when I bought it I think was $139,000.00. It's almost $240,000.00 now, six years later. Councilman Berquist: And you, since 1990 when you purchased it, you say $7,000.00 to $9,000.00 worth of maintenance or improvements. Harold Dahl: Right. I added new windows in the main floor. I did some sheetrocking on the main floor. And around the windows and what have you. And I drain tiled the basement. I've not added any square footage to the house. And frankly the house is probably in worse shape today because we have always intended that someday we would either tear it down or add onto it. Mayor Mancino: Excuse me, yes Mr. Senn. 5 City Council Meeting - May 27,1997 Councilman Senn: Our analysis here do not reflect where the increases occurred. I mean they tell us what the affect of current breakdown is between land and improvements. Can you give us the comparison to last year on this one? Craig: Last year's value? Councilman Senn: Well, broken down by land and by building. Craig: I don't have that information. Councilman Senn: You have it for the suggested '97 numbers here but not what it was in '96. Do you know if the increase here is being caused by land value or by building value? Craig: Probably land value.. .primarily land value. We have numerous examples of older houses like that being bought and fixed up along Horseshoe Curve there. Councilman Engel: Harold, what side of the lake are you on? Harold Dahl: Well Horseshoe is sort of the northeast portion of the lake. Mayor Mancino: It's off Pleasant View. Councilman Engel: Right up here? Harold Dahl: ...peninsula there. A little bit to your left. No. Do you want me to point it to you? Councilman Engel: Sure. Harold Dahl: I'm right here. Councilman Engel: Is that designated a wetland? Harold Dahl: Well I don't know ifit's designated a wetland but I'm just saying that it is a wetlands area. I don't know that there's a specific designation for it. Councilman Engel: You have 220 feet of frontage you said? Harold Dahl: Yes. But keep in mind that I took that into account when I bought it in 1990 and it was taken into account in the multiple bid situation that occurred the year before that. So I think what's happened is that there's, the Assessor's enamored with my property and I'm really paying the price for it, and yet we've ignored these earlier transactions ofthis same property. And in fact the Assessor was out just a few years before this and the appraisal that I had done when I refinanced it. Councilman Engel: There was a property on the very south and eastern section of the lake by the dock, which is up on the hill. I think it's about $190,000.00, it's on the market now. Are you familiar with that at all? Harold Dahl: I'm not. 6 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Engel; Okay. I'm wondering how that squares with this value. Harold Dahl: Any other questions? Councilman Berquist: I just want, you know Mark brings up a good point. If you factor out the house, it's almost a $50,000.00 increase in the land value over the course of one year. 35-38%. Craig: Well I guess that's assuming that we were, had an accurate value last year... Mayor Mancino: It's not even an acre site. Harold Dahl: No, it's not dividable. Mayor Mancino: It's .84. Craig: Sand beach... Councilman Engel: Can you fill it in and make it all sand or is there a regulation against that? Craig: There's probably a regulation on that. Harold Dahl: I think you're allowed only 50 feet of adding sand. Craig: But 1990, as far as the sale price I think is.. .lake values seem to be sky rocketing... Councilman Berquist: Alright, thank you. Mayor Mancino: Thank you very much. Is there anyone else here tonight wishing to come in front of the City Council on your assessment? Okay, seeing none, may I bring this back into Council. And that is for Council members to make comments on any of the reports that you reviewed. I know I have several that have red tags on them asking a little bit of questions from the Assessors. Steve, do you have any in particular? Councilman Berquist: Regarding specific residences or just in general? Mayor Mancino: Both. Councilman Berquist: Yeah, I do. There's a, I'm going to deviate a little bit from the pure topic at hand and yet I'm going to, I want to touch on a lot of different things. First of all I want everybody to know that I hate this as much as you do. I hate the valuation increases driving the taxes of people in this city up. And it's very frustrating when I sit with a group oflegislators and I listen to them talk about how successful the legislative session was and yet the property taxes, which have this community and most other suburban communities in an uproar, go virtually undealt with. The inequities in this tax system are very frustrating. I do want to touch on one thing for the seniors, the senior citizens that are here. In talking to the, a couple oflegislators this afternoon. Ed Oliver particularly, there's a Bill on Senate, on the Governor's desk awaiting signage that will create a property tax deferral for senior citizens. There are some restrictions in there that leave the inequities in the system as they are but at least they defer the payment of increased property taxes due to valuations until such time as you choose to sell your home. It's not something that I would have settled for but I'm not there. Nor do I want to be. I gave a lot of 7 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 thought when coming to this meeting tonight to, and I still may do it. I'm still up in the air as to what to do. I'm tempted quite honestly to make a blanket motion, and I'm not at this time but I'm tempted quite honestly to make a blanket motion to freeze all the valuations of the appeals that we have here at 1997 levels and see what happens. I don't like this anymore than anybody here that's seen valuation increases and the result in tax increases that go along with it. And when a gentleman, well. I'll leave it at that. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Engel. Councilman Engel: It's hard to sit up here as a Council and look at everybody's piece of property on paper and say whether or not the Assessor's right or wrong. I can make specific comments to areas that I'm familiar with. The ones I live in and I'm familiar with the values because I've paid for it myself. I know what my property tax is. I drive by those houses every day. I know what all the comps are. So in Lake Susan Hills it's easy for me to say I think it's close and I think you're off. Where I've shopped for properties, I've also got a pretty good idea of what the valuations are. But there are others, quite frankly, you just can't know and you have to trust your Assessor's abilities and if the sales prices of near-by homes of competitive square footage and amenities are close, you've got to accept them. I don't like them either. I think they're too high. I like them frozen like Steve says. I'd like them retroactive. I'd like them all to go backwards but we can't control that. And it is the lousy part of the job. So the only ones I'm inclined to change are the ones I'm very familiar with and those that I'm not, I'd have to go along with the Assessor. Unless someone else on the Council knows. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Mason. Councilman Mason: I'm curious. Orlin, about how many homes were assessed in Chan this year? Orlin Shafer: Probably between 30% and 35% ofthe total. Councilman Mason: So we've got what? 6,000 homes? Orlin Shafer: About 6,000 homes. Councilman Mason: So we're 2,000, give or take? Orlin Shafer: About 24. 2,500. Councilman Mason: So out of 6,000 homes about, I'll just, well okay. Say 2,400 were assessed. We've got a list of 136 here that are not happy and 2 actually came to testify. I'm not sure that qualifies.. . got to pay for services. And maybe property tax isn't the way to do it but that's the way the State says we have to do it so I guess we don't have too much choice. That's all I'll say about that. I pretty much happen to agree with Councilman Engel here. All I know is, this is a tough board to be on and I'm quite honestly not sure Council should be the group that is this Board. I think the people that do the appraisals have a thankless job and I think maybe from time to time they do make a mistake but the other side of it is, when they've appraised 2,400 homes and out of that 2,400, 136 aren't happy and 2 of them here are complaining about it, I'd say things have to be fairly close to where they should be in this community, whether we like it or not. So that's all I have to say. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Thank you. Todd, our monitors aren't working. Just so you know. Councilman Senn. 8 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Senn: Well I don't know. I started by going through all of these and I guess it piggy backs a little bit on what Mark said. I mean there's areas that all of us are familiar with and other areas we're not or whatever and all we can kind of go by is what we know. I started to form kind of three piles and I kind of had an out of line pile, a questionable pile and a pile that kind of seemed like it was okay. And then I thought geez, this is ridiculous because if we all do that we could probably all bring our cards in here and shuffle them and kind of see where they come out. You know generally speaking, I sincerely believe our property tax system is broken and badly needs fIxing. I'm not sure how we're going to effectuate that. A lot of people have been trying a lot of different ways but nobody seems to be having much success. Chanhassen residents in my mind can't keep affording the increases that we've been getting hit with effectively through valuation. We've been holding the line on city spending for the last fIve years. You know effectively with no increase in tax rates and yet values keep going up like crazy, which effectively turns around and means there's more money coming out of people's pockets anyway. You know this year I believe average was what, 8%? Wasn't it 8% was kind of the average increase in value this year? Which is up considerably from the last 2-3 years or whatever. I just don't think that Chanhassen residents can keep funding the majority ofthe spending that way, whether it be the schools or the county or whatever. I don't believe anywhere else in the County saw an 8% increase in value. Overall. Orlin Shafer: There's several communities... Councilman Senn: Outside of Chanhassen? Orlin Shafer: Yes. Councilman Senn: You know, I don't want to take away with, you know from where the Assessor is. I mean the Assessor has done their job. I mean they've done and gone and looked at the sales and comparisons and plugged in their computer programs and they've come up with what they feel the valuation should be. You know then it's kicked to us and our job is to look at that and say what we think of it and our job is that we can effectively govern up to 1% of the overall market value. Steve had mentioned an overall, or kind of blanket motion reflecting '97 levels. I think he misspoke. I think what he meant to say was '96 levels. '97 levels would be what's before us as far as the new levels go. This is the '97 Board of Review. Councilman Berquist: You're right. Councilman Senn: I would like to see us pass a motion tonight which effectively reduces, or I shouldn't say reduces. Keeps all of these appeals at their 1996 level unless there's been a recommended reduction below that. Now I'm going to tell you the method to my madness. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Senn: The method to my madness is that I hope if we do that this year, that's going to bring thousands of people out next year. And maybe if thousands of people come out and become more active in this issue, we will accomplish what I think we all want to accomplish which is property tax reform. And if we keep handling it the way we are, we're not going to accomplish it. The number one issue in this city, no matter who you talk to, and I don't think any of you as Council people will dispute this. Mayor Mancino: Not after campaigning, no. 9 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Senn: Is our taxes. And the size of our taxes. You know we just did, the survey came back. Number one issue there too. So I think that could be kind of an undisputed statement at this point. People are very frustrated with the process. I think people are very frustrated with a way to do something about it. Out of all fairness to them, we don't make it real easy on them. We set up very elongated processes. We set up you know, well we consider budgets at this time and values at this time. There's so many elements going into it. It's kind oflike they could spend half their life down here and maybe figure it all out and get involved and do something about it. The more and more I thought about this, I thought the simplest say to solve all that is to do what I'm suggesting. And that is to simply start the ball rolling and hopefully get it rolling so it won't stop and also increase the size of the ball very quickly. And I think that would happen if we took that kind of an action and I think it would get a message across. Mayor Mancino: To the State legislature. Councilman Senn: To the State legislature. To the County. To the School District. To everybody. Okay. I mean we all have a role in this, okay. Our role is to be responsible for and be accountable for our spending. It's to look at our spending and to make sure we're spending only what we need to spend. At the same time it's also our role to have a fair property tax system that doesn't drive people out of their homes, whether it be because of age or fixed incomes or disabilities, or just plain affordability. You know we have a real serious issue in this city that we keep harping on and talking about, which is called affordable housing. Mayor Mancino: And diversity of housing. Councilman Senn: And diversity of housing. And if you look at most of these under consideration tonight, most of the homes that are being suggested to increase dramatically here are all homes in the price range bordering on affordability. Okay. So either we're going to buy off on that or we're not going to buy off on it. And if we have bought off on it, as we said we had, and we're going to try to do something about it, part of keeping housing affordable is keeping it's taxes affordable. And you know again, I wish there was a lot better way to do this but, maybe I speak out a little bit of frustration because it's an issue I've been actively involved in with years, even at the State level and I'll tell you, it's very frustrating. Because there's been no effective property tax reform in this state for years that's meant much of anything. And I think it's really time that we force the issue on that and I think our basis for doing that is here tonight and again, that action in no way is meant to chide the assessor in relationship to doing their jobs. They've done their jobs. They've done what they're supposed to do as their job but it is not their job to do the next level which is to set the policy and try to do something about it or not do something about it. You know very able body technicians have done the technical stuff. We have those answers. Now I think we need to take those answers and consider the broader question and like I say, hopefully do something about it. So I'll quit rambling, sorry. Mayor Mancino: Okay, and fix something that needs to be broken. It was extremely hard for me to sit and read every one of these applications for the same reason. Seeing someone who's lived in their house for 42 years and is on social security of $18,000.00 a year and to see their valuation go up 17% and they just can't afford it. So I very much have that same frustration. And would be in support of keeping the valuations at the '96 level. I would like to send a message and let the legislature know that we're very serious about it. Especially in Chanhassen where we do want to keep our housing stock affordable for the people who want to live here. For the employees of businesses that we have here. And we want to keep our city viable and livable that way. Councilman Mason: Your Honor? 10 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Yes. Councilman Mason: Roger, maybe you can help me on this. What happened, was it 3 or 4 years ago when the City tried to send a similar message? Roger Knutson: The County did not abide by the decision... Councilman Mason: And what happened because of that? Roger Knutson: ... they felt it was appropriate valuations... OrIin Shafer: I'm OrIin Shafer. I am the County Assessor. There is a statute, State Statute which prevents a Board from reducing a value in a district beyond 1 % of the aggregate value of the district. Now I would have to have some clarification on the motion but the last time this happened we had already gone through the appeal process. We had like 240 some appeals that year. There had been some reductions then at that point. The additional Y2% for the residential properties I believe is what was passed that night. That caused the district to exceed the allowable 1 %. It had nothing to do with us at the County not abiding by it or wanting it or anything else. The law kicked in and negated the complete Board of Review. The values returned to whatever the Assessor had set the values at. All those values that were reduced were negated and the value went back to whatever the Assessor had set at. I took on my own volition all those appeals and I approached my County Board and asked them to consider them at the County Board level in lieu of the fact that they had not been acted upon at local level. The Department of Revenue agreed with me. They allowed me to do that and we went ahead and made the adjustments that had been first presented at local board. Now a replay of that could happen, depending upon the clarity of your motion. Mayor Mancino: Well we may be under the 1 % of the aggregate. Councilman Senn: Yeah, I mean do you have the numbers? OrIin Shafer: I don't have that number. Are you speaking of only the properties that made the appeal? Councilman Senn: Correct. Mayor Mancino: The 132. Councilman Senn: And my calculation shows we aren't even remotely close. OrIin Shafer: To the 1 %? Councilman Senn: To the 1 %. Orlin Shafer: Not the properties that we reassessed over the whole city? Councilman Senn: Correct. What Odin is saying about before, or the action that was taken years ago is they did it across the board and across the entire city. Mayor Mancino: We're talking about just the 136 applicants that we received. 11 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 in and get them to address just the fiscal disparities portion of how these taxes are redistributed. Many of our people don't realize that a lot of the money taken from their taxes, doesn't stay in their community. And these big increases, a lot of it doesn't stay here. It goes into the inner city. I don't know what the ratios are. Todd, you know them better than I do but 40%? Something like that? Todd Gerhardt: For commercial and industrial. Councilman Engel: For that. What about residential? Okay. But the commercial industrial was changed and more of it stayed here, see it's all the same pool. You start saying well that's commercial industrial and that's residential. It's all tax money to the people and ifit could stay here, that could lower the property taxes. I don't know what the answer is but I know what we're doing now isn't the answer so I'm willing to make mistakes. If it is one. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Mason. Councilman Mason: Well, a couple of things. I'm not willing, I think what Orlin said struck home to me about so we're giving these 136 people, I'm not going to call it a break. We're freezing their taxes but we're not freezing anyone else's. I don't, I personally don't understand how this group can reconcile that I can't. Had these 136 people written their representatives and state senators demanding property tax reform, I really wonder what would have happened. The people at the legislature are dictating this situation. I don't like it either and lord knows growing up in the 60's, I did my things to make points, wise or other wise as well. I'm hard pressed to believe this will even get past the county level if we do it. It seems to me the issue is that the community, and then I am part of the community, needs to bring our weight and that's in the voting booth to public officials that say they're going to do something about property tax reform and haven't done it. And it hasn't happened. Our representatives haven't done it in this area, in the state senate or representatives. This or any other. There hasn't been property tax reform. And obviously if this Council thinks this is going to change that, they'll certainly vote for it but I don't see this freezing property tax levels in 1996 for these 136 people is the way to go about it. That's where I am. Mayor Mancino: You don't think it is a good communication device to use to our State legislators? Councilman Mason: I question that our state legislators could care less about whether we freeze this 1 % or not. My guess is ifit even gets past the County, the State Board's going to go so what. And similar to what happened, although it was a much larger scale 3 or 4 years ago or whatever it was. Well it's just that southwestern suburb again. You know, so what. They're crying in their beer because. Mayor Mancino: Is it worth trying? Letters don't work. Councilman Mason: Well I'm not saying letters don't work. I think talking, face to face contact with people, in my view, is a whole lot better than something as, for lack of a better term for me, as whimsical as saying well these 136 people were lucky enough to complain about their taxes. To heck with the 1,800 or 2,200 others that did. You know I'm not saying these people don't have a beef. Don't get me wrong. That's not my issue here at all. I just think if we're really serious about property tax reform, it seems to me that as a Council then we should be writing letters to Tom Workman. We should be writing letters to Arne Carlson, Phil Carruthers, Ed Oliver, whoever. You know as a Council. It would seem to me that would have more of an impact at that sort of local level than doing something like that. 13 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Mike on your term on the Council, has that been done? Has the Chanhassen City Council ever done that? Councilman Mason: Not to my knowledge. Mayor Mancino: Gone down to the legislature. C01.mCilman Mason: Not to my knowledge. Mayor Mancino: Have done any communication. Councilman Mason: Again, not to my knowledge. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Senn. Councilman Senn: How you do this is very important, as Orlin mentioned. Our job is to sit as a Board of Review and review the applications before us. One of the reasons that this got in trouble before when they did it is they didn't do that. They viewed the whole world and tried a half percent across the board decrease in Chanhassen, okay. Yes. I want to treat these 136 people differently, or however many. There's some A's and B's in here so 136 isn't probably accurate. But these are the people that have gone through the time and effort to vocally raise the issue. Vocally or written or whatever. Like I say, next year I hope it's thousands upon thousands that get the message and do the same thing. And that's all we can react to. All our job allows us to react to, and affect taxes beyond our spending controls is this. And to react to the people that apply effectively for this type of consideration of relief. And that's not slighting. I don't think in my mind, anybody else one way or the other. Or negatively affecting them because I mean I think ultimately they will all be affected positively if this thing really gets going and stuff so. Mayor Mancino: Before we go on, are there, did any of us. I know I didn't. Are any of us in this list of 1361 Did any of the Council members make application for a review of their property taxes? Councilman Senn, did you? Councilman Senn: No. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Mason? Councilman Engel? Councilman Engel: No. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Berquist. Councilman Berquist: I did not. Mayor Mancino: Or any member of your families I'm assuming did not. Okay. Councilman Berquist. I thought you had a few more thoughts on this. Councilman Berquist: I have lots of thoughts. It depends on whether or not I want to take the time to share them. In looking at this from Mike's perspective I can understand where he's coming from, however. It's not just this community that is contemplating changes like this, I would bet. I haven't spoken to anyone else. I haven't discussed. I've talked to one other person about this idea and that was 14 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 just today. But I could ask you, and you could guarantee me that there are other or there have been other Boards of Review within this metropolitan area that have had similar situations. Experienced similar frustrations and had similar thoughts to what we're contemplating doing. And I can guarantee you that should we choose to do this, not only will the citizens in Chanhassen come out in droves next year I would hope, to voice appeals, but I would suspect that the surrounding communities that read the news that comes out of this little town, the people that live in those communities may also get the idea that if Chanhassen can do it, so can all those other communities. So can Minnetonka, Shorewood, and wherever. I don't take this lightly, believe me. You've been here for 7 years now. This is your seventh one of these. Every single year after the legislative sessions are held, the representatives of our district come out and tell us about how successful or unsuccessful the legislative sessions were. Every single year that I have been here there has been talk about significant property value reform, or real estate tax reform and it has yet to happen. If not now, then when? Seven years you've been here listening to the same song and dance, and I'm not trying to put the blame on the gentlemen that appeared before us specifically. Councilman Mason: Who specifically? Councilman Berquist: Well, Tom Workman as our Representative, Ed Oliver as our Senator. I'm not trying to blame them specifically. You know we've got wonderful leaders. You put them together and they seem to, the total does not equal the sum of the parts. So that's the end of my comments. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Senn. Councilman Senn: I guess I'd like to just take a crack at a motion and see where it goes. Mayor Mancino: Okay. May Ijust say, I'd just like to add the comment that if this motion does pass, that this City Council not only will take this action but will do more in going to the State legislature, writing letters, etc. that if this motion does pass, that we back it up with being very instrumental, each one of us personally and as a group, to either, to appear in front of the State Legislature and say why we're there any what we want to see done. ...what we feel but follow it up with some, walk the talk and follow it up with getting out there and representing our community and the concerns that we have with the property taxes. But it can't stop by any just showmanship, as far as I'm concerned. Todd Gerhardt: Just from a staffs perspective. I think it was 8 or 9 years ago the City Council did an across the board reduction and passed it down to the County and the County overturned that. Orlin does have a methodology that he uses in determining values. I've got to believe the County Board would look at a 1%, ~% deduction in all the...there was no methodology...in determining that. You know it's no different than what occurred 9-10 years ago. I think Council is exactly right in using letters. Using the League of Minnesota Cities and campaigning for... probably the best method of trying to get the word out If this goes to the County. . . and other organizations to try to promote this. But you know Orlin does have a set of statutes that he's working under in determining these values... He has a sophisticated computer program that does analysis and determines values and that's why we take it on an individual basis to review this. I think that you should really give.. .your motion tonight. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Is there a motion please? May I have a motion please. Councilman Senn: I'd like to give it a try if! could. In that each application before us totals, or let's see here, numbering 1 through 136 has been individually reviewed, this Board of Review takes an action tonight to maintain the current, or not, I'm sorry. Current is a bad word. Strike it. Previous year's 15 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 estimated market value on all appeals 1 through 136, except those cases where the recommendation has been made to lower the value below the previous year's estimated market value. Mayor Mancino: Is there a second to the motion? Councilman Engel: Second. Mayor Mancino: Any further discussion of the motion? Councilman Berquist: Give me a moment to contemplate. I want to see, I just want to check the language. Paraphrase Mark? Paraphrase, well I quote almost verbatim. Maintain the previous year's estimated market values on the appeals I through 136, except in those cases where a recommendation has been made by the Carver County Assessor to affect a lower valuation. Councilman Senn: Than the previous year. Councilman Berquist: Affect a lower valuation than the previous year's. Mayor Mancino: May I have a second to this new motion? Councilman Senn: No, it's the same. Mayor Mancino: It's the same motion? Just paraphrasing? Councilman Senn: Yeah. Mayor Mancino: Roger, is there anything legally that we need to do? Can you just paraphrase? Roger Knutson: Mark's motion... Councilman Berquist: Did I change it language wise? Roger Knutson: No. I... same language. Mayor Mancino: Okay. And there has been a second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded that the Board of Review maintain the previous year's estimated market values for the appeals numbered 1 through 136, except in those cases where the Carver County Assessor has recommended a lower estimated market value than the previous year's value. All voted in favor, except Mayor Mancino and Councilman Mason who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2. Mayor Mancino: The motion carried. Those in the ayes, the motion is the affirmative. Councilman Senn: I think we should also strongly encourage these 136 people, as well as anybody else who wants to, to make sure that they follow this process through now to the County Board, along with it. Mayor Mancino: When will this go in front of the County Board Orlin? I'm sorry, when will this go in front of the County Board, for these appeals? Will they go further to the County Board now? 16 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Odin Shafer: These appeals could go before the Board. They have to apply to get on an agenda I believe by June 12th. The Board meetings June 16th so it's the Thursday before that Monday at 4:00 in the afternoon. Mayor Mancino: And will the applicants be appraised of the, will you let them know when it goes in front of the County Board? Each applicant? Odin Shafer: Yes. We send a letter out now following this meeting and we tell them what the action the Council will be, or was and we also inform them that if they want to then they can proceed to the County level if they so desire. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Orlin Shafer: I would like a note of clarification. We had some new construction involved in this. Would that be exempt from that motion? I tried to get someone's attention earlier and didn't succeed. Mayor Mancino: Oh I'm sorry. Not the way the motion was said. Councilman Senn: If! can, I would amend my motion, where there was not a previous year's market value because of new construction, that the market value be set, let's see how do we do that? At, do we have some type of a. Odin Shafer: Now you see the problem we have Mark. Councilman Senn: No, I understand Orlin. I'm not trying to belittle that. Honestly. Odin Shafer: There would be a way for us to arrive at last year's value by checking our records and seeing the difference between that and what the market value added. Councilman Senn: So there is a benchmark you could use? Orlin Shafer: There is a benchmark there and we can account for the added new construction. Councilman Engel: Based on a square footage price of the previous year on the same dwelling? Orlin Shafer: Outside the realm of the total value increase. We can calculate the new construction value by itself. That would be... Councilman Engel: That's fair. Councilman Senn: So I'm amending it with the benchmark being the 90, or the previous year's market value on similar properties. Mayor Mancino: May I have a second please for that motion? Councilman Senn: That's an amendment. Mayor Mancino: The amendment to the original motion. May I have a second please? 17 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Berquist: Is it clarified? OrIin Shafer: Yes. Councilman Berquist: I'll second with a question. How many properties are new construction on this list? Mayor Mancino: Not very many. I want to say 2 or 3. Councilman Senn: Yeah, there weren't very many. Councilman Engel: One lady was here first. Debra Lano. Debra Lano: Mine's not new construction. Mayor Mancino: Two years ago... Councilman Engel: There won't be many. Councilman Berquist: Do we need to define what makes up new construction? One tax year to the next. Orlin Shafer: No. You have no choice. They had a building permit. Councilman Berquist: Okay. Mayor Mancino: Okay, may I have a second to the motion? Councilman Senn: You already did. Councilman Berquist: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to amend the Board of Review motion to include where there was not a previous year's market value because of new construction, that the market value be established by the Carver County Assessor based on a benchmark from the previous year's values. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Odin Shafer: After comments then, you'll have to close the Board of Review. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Berquist: The only thing, I'm assuming that a lot of the people that are in the audience are here for exactly this purpose and insofar as we have made the commitment to do what we've done and follow it up with whatever we can do to affect the process at the State Legislature, I would also encourage you to do the same. Letter writing, phone calling. Anything you can do to royal the water will be appreciated and not be wasted. I didn't vote yes for this to be out flapping in the wind all by myself or with the rest of the individuals that voted yes for this. I'm hoping that everybody here that cares about property taxes and the inequities in the system, does something to try and affect change. Thank you. 18 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Thank you and the Board of Review is closed now. Thank you. PUBLIC HEARING: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING. VACATION REQUEST FOR BUTTERCUP ROAD. FILE 96-6. Charles Felch: Thank you Mayor, members ofthe Council. This public hearing appeared before you this past November. At that time the item was tabled to... One specifically was... Since that time we have obtained the necessary easements for Coulter Boulevard which will provide the alternative public access to the property. There is no public interest in maintaining the paper street, if you will, of Buttercup Road which is also... Therefore staff would recommend that the City Council vacate a portion of Buttercup Road, also known as McGlynn Road, legally described on the boundary survey prepared by Demars Gabriel dated June 17, 1996 and revised on October 1, 1996. Mayor Mancino: Thank you Charles. Is there anyone here wishing to address the City Council on this issue? Public hearing. Okay, thank you very much. Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you very much. Councilmembers, any questions for Charles? Any comments? Charles, Ijust have one. Where is, according to what I'm looking at, where is Buttercup Road? There is no Buttercup Road. There's a McGlynn Road. There's a Coulter Road. Charles Folch: Actually...the original plat called, labeled the entire horseshoe if you will as Buttercup and with the replat of the outlot, it changed to McGlynn Road. So basically what you're seeing vacated is that cross hatch area on the end of the horseshoe, but the original plat labeled the entire horseshoe as Buttercup. Mayor Mancino: Okay, great. Thank you. May I have a motion please? Councilman Senn: Move approval. Councilman Mason: Second. Resolution #97-34: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded that the City Council vacate a portion of Buttercup Road, also known as McGlynn Road, legally described on the boundary survey prepared by Demars Gabriel dated June 17, 1996 and revised on October 1, 1996. All voted in favor, except Councilman Berquist who was not present to vote, and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER ESTABLISHMENT OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.6 AND TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT 6-1. Todd Gerhardt: Staff would recommend approval. Mayor Mancino: You don't get off that easy. 19 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Engel: Second. Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Engel seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Mayor Mancino: Thank you very much. Moving it back to Council. Councilman Senn. Councilman Senn: All in favor.. . you got to take the vote? Mayor Mancino: Pardon? Councilman Senn: You've got to vote on closing the public hearing. Mayor Mancino: No you don't. Roger told me. Councilman Senn: Well Roger, tell us all then. Todd, question for you. On the, and I think maybe the developer just helped answer it I think but in your language on page 6, supplement 1. I wasn't really sure that that simply applied to special assessments and administrative costs, and what I'm hearing is it doesn't, correct. Todd Gerhardt: As the plan was developed.. .those properties that would be assessed. The developer is requesting to be treated similar to what I would call the National Weather Service site. Development where that individual paid for all of the public improvements up front and did not receive city. .. project and that they paid for all the improvements. ... is asking that those properties, that they building the public improvements, that they would receive assistance in writing down their cost for public improvements. .. Councilman Senn: But in reality that goes beyond their normal TIF policy of paying for special assessments, correct? Todd Gerhardt: The National Weather Service...halfyears worth oftaxes...land write down. There's one significant specials against the site because the developer paid for the road, paid for the lateral sewer and water, paid for the..., paid for the lighting, and the only way to reimburse them for those costs was do a land write down. So what the Gateway West people are asking for is for those areas where they're having to build the public improvements, what I would call the east/west road, the cul-de-sac road... those improvements, they're asking for... that they would have... Councilman Senn: You cite the Weather Service. Where else have we ever done that? Todd Gerhardt: The other one would be the Hennepin County District... Mayor Mancino: So it seems like we have a combination of areas where we have and haven't. Different business parks. So it's not always what we do but we have done it, is the impression I'm getting. I don't want to put words in your mouth, I'm sorry Todd. Todd Gerhardt: Well every situation is different. The Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, that one was solely specials...modified that to include land write downs because...had written down most of the specials.. . 21 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Senn: But effectively draw a map from an economic standpoint. Okay, so if we take some of the earlier comments at least some of us made concerning land write downs, and including it, this is going to effectively economically cause the same thing. I mean you're not going to call it land write down. Now you're simply going to put it into what the developer would normally pay for and write it down that way. Right. Okay. Todd Gerhardt: The key thing here is first, write down any specials that are spread against the property. So that would be the first part of the equation. The second part of the equation, if there is any left over increment, and I would solely put it back to those properties where they've built public improvements on just those property versus the one that abuts the road that the City has provided... Mayor Mancino: So we're bonding for the north/south road? Todd Gerhardt: Correct. Mayor Mancino: And how does that become a public improvements when that is actually, is for that development? Todd Gerhardt: When they petition Charles and he accepts the... Mayor Mancino: But how is that, how does that, the north/south become a city road? I mean nobody's going to go through an industrial development particularly. I mean it's going to be used by the tenants in it I would assume. Charles Folch: It could fit the bill either way, as a private access or it could fit the bill.. .multiple property owners on the site... I guess that's one of the things that we'll be, at least in terms in cost.. . will be broken out in the feasibility report which will be presented to the Council for consideration. Which items are elements of the project.. .really should fit with the bill here as part of the project. Which ones should the developer. . . Mayor Mancino: Okay. Thank you Charles. Go ahead. Councilman Senn: Second question. Where, we had talked about making sure that this was effectively... office manufacturing and not to fund retail commercial or office commercial purely. Where is that limitation in the agreement? Todd Gerhardt: Under Minnesota Statute 469.. .not provide assistance to commercial properties. But I will talk to Ron Davies, the attorney that drafted this to ensure that there's language in here that relates only to industrial property. . . Councilman Senn: Okay, that's fine. And no retail commercial. Todd Gerhardt: No retail. Councilman Senn: Alright. Okay, that answers my questions. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Mason, any questions or comments? Councilman Mason: No. 22 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Councilman Engel. Councilman Engel: None. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Berquist. Councilman Berquist: The only question I had, Todd you make note that if we wanted to table this action for further discussion, you'd recommend we approve the resolution. What flexibility do we lose if we approve it carte blanche? Todd Gerhardt: The issue that you lose is fiscal disparities. .. the State has done away with Option A now and you have solely Option B. And that would provide more increment going with Option A versus B to the district. Councilman Berquist: Well if the State's done away with it, how do we lose the flexibility? Todd Gerhardt: That Statute was approved this session... Councilman Berquist: With Option B? Mayor Mancino: With Option A. Councilman Senn: That's the only change coming through law? Todd Gerhardt: No, there's a variety of other ones but that was the one... Councilman Senn: Any, what are the other ones? Todd Gerhardt: I haven't got a detailed. I can provide that to you at the next Council meeting. That was the one that Ijust got an update on. The other ones, there's a lot of them that got thrown out. I can provide you with an update. .. Councilman Senn: Ifwe act on this tonight not knowing those and there's something there we want to deal with, we can then amend this? Todd Gerhardt: Yes. You can always modify the plan...in downtown has been modified 15 times. You just have to go through the... procedures that you did tonight. Calling for the public hearing. Going to the Planning Commission. Sending notice to the City Council, or to Carver County and the School Board and holding a public hearing and then putting together another plan... Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. I have no questions. May I have a motion please? Councilman Senn: I guess just a comment and maybe a question too. .. . concern at the time because I guess I'm not sure I buy off on the concept that simply changing the definitions at this point to effectively allow for the same thing, which is land write down which we said we didn't want to allow for. And that's effectively that's all that's being suggested is that we change one piece of verbiage to allow it to go for other expenses which affect land cost. That the developer effectively would be accomplishing under normal circumstances. 23 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: No, I would like to keep it as it is onjust special assessments. Any other comments? Councilman Berquist: There was discussion during some of the meetings, as I recall, regarding the excessive specials that were going to be the same costs associated in developing the infrastructure on this project. And I'm trying, I don't have my notes but I'm trying to remember. Mayor Mancino: And those would be covered. Councilman Berquist: That's right and I'm trying to remember the underlying premise upon which we talked about the land write down. Mayor Mancino: Mr. Richter, would you like to come up. Fred Richter: Maybe it's a redundancy but I think the underlying premise here is, originally we were going to take the north/south road, the east/west road, the cul-de-sac, all the utilities and road improvements and were going to be assessments. The latest meeting we had with the City was they wanted to assess the north/south road. The utilities coming in from the east, and then the subsequent east/west road, cul-de-sac and it still hasn't been resolved as to how we service the Wrase property as possibly, most likely done by the developer. SO the net is, some land has special assessments which give that property service. The other land does not have services and when we deal with one sale today and another sale tomorrow, it's not a level playing field. It's not even consistent within our development. So what we're trying to establish is that all these lots will have the same consistent TIF offered to them. In other words, the utility costs, which are normally the special assessments, are done differently on our Phase I and then as we get into, and I can get a drawing up here and show you our lots. What are those numbers? Councilman Berquist: Excuse me Fred. May I ask a question? The next result isn't the change in dollars as much as it's a change in allocation against the different parcels. Fred Richter: Yeah. It's timing. It's change in dollars to the different parcels and it would be, this tenant or owner that's on this parcel, this road is done with our own cost, whether it be a cul-de-sac before TH 41 opens up, or whether it be built in conjunction with TH 41 like this. This cul-de-sac here. So these things are.. . differently to TIF versus really just the two industrial, or now three industrial parcels on the north/ south road. That was the underlying premise where we didn't want it to talk, to have it, the verbiage be just assessments but to be actual improvement costs or things that are normally assessed. Mayor Mancino: Capital costs. Councilman Senn. Councilman Senn: But if you put in a road, I mean you can distribute that cost against your land prices however you want to do it. Fred Richter: That's true but with our different phasing options. Councilman Senn: Well again, you can distribute it however you want. There's no need to really to plug it into the TIF. 24 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Fred Richter: But it does structure this lot differently than this one. But originally when we were presenting this project, we were under the assumption, and I think when I say assumption, it had been discussed between staff, Council and ourselves, that all these roads were assessed. All the improvements and. Mayor Mancino: But that is not in our 5 year capital improvement plan, is it? For our bonding limits, etc., Charles? Charles Folch: It was not, it wasn't specifically slated in a particular year in the 5 year plan. It was...would be a final extension of that Bluff Creek trunk utility area. What we'd do is probably would be coming through based on. . . Mayor Mancino: For the whole development or are we talking about the main artery of the north/south? Charles Folch: Well we were mainly looking at it from the trunk utility standpoint and the extensions of the collector road, Coulter Boulevard. At that time we had no idea what potential.. . but mainly the collector road and the trunk utilities that serve the site... Mayor Mancino: Okay. Fred Richter: I think the only other factor is going back to the original logic of why TIF is initiated in the first place. That is to take this office/industrial land and have it be competitive with the metropolitan area in it's pricing structure so the build out can happen in a reasonable amount of time and TIF is, I think we discussed in the work sessions with the Council, is basically a win/win. The faster the development happens, the more tax increment flows into the city to pay for the improvements that are outlined on the staff report. So I think we should keep the big picture in mind. This is just a minor detail. I think all we're asking for is that we do indeed have the benefited TIF for all the lots to write down the improvements, the grading, the utilities and so on. So I think I just want to point that out. I don't know if there's other questions. Mayor Mancino: Any other questions for Mr. Richter? No? Thank you. Any other questions from Council members? Any discussion? May I have a motion please. Councilman Senn: I'd move approval of, I don't know, what do we call it? Mayor Mancino: Establishment of. Councilman Senn: Do we call it establishment of the district Todd or anything beyond that? Councilman Engel: District 6-1. Todd Gerhardt: Approval of the resolution adopting a Development District Program for.. . special assessment write down and public improvement costs. If you want to pick up the. . . Councilman Senn: Okay, so approving resolution creating Development District No.6 and Tax Increment No.6-I, including use of the funds specifically for special assessments and administrative costs and an added caveat that TIF funds only be used in relationship to industrial projects not exceeding 30% of office space and will not be used for any commercial retail within the district. 25 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Is there a second to the motion? Councilman Mason: Does that? Mayor Mancino: Is there a second to the motion? Question on the motion? Councilman Berquist: Question on the motion. Councilman Engel: Yes. Mayor Mancino: Okay, Councilman Berquist. Councilman Berquist: Does the use of the TIF have to be defined with tonight's motion? Submittal of the Development District program is predicated on, partially predicated on the use of the TIF. Todd Gerhardt: Mark's motion follows State Statute... Councilman Berquist: But he's also tying it only to the specials. Mayor Mancino: Yes. Councilman Senn: Which Charles will bring a list back to us later, I'm assuming on what would be or not, or what he's recommending would or wouldn't be included as part of special assessments is what I heard. Todd Gerhardt: And you would not include, your motion did not include project improvement costs except outside of what we would assess. Councilman Senn: Not unless Charles is willing to accept them as a special assessment. Councilman Berquist: The question is, does the motion, so now you understand what he motioned. Does that part of the motion need to be included in the program for submittal to the State? Todd Gerhardt: That was why I said if you wanted to deal with it with further discussion, you could determine what you're going to use your special assessment. .. program for. Right now. . . is to approve the plan and... Mayor Mancino: And Charles can come back and make a recommendation to it. I'm assuming, and we can modify the plan if we need to at that time. Charles Folch: Yes, there is one other point of consideration. When we bring that report to you, it's likely there will be some capital public improvement costs that if we don't assess you may want to consider using some TIF. .. You might want to leave that open for public improvement costs that are non-assessed. Councilman Senn: Can you give us an example of that Charles? Charles Fo1ch: Items such as the water storage facility going on that site is not something that can be directly assessed. It's more of an area assessment and you may want to. .. 26 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Todd Gerhardt: If! can just add to Charles' comment. You are basically approving estimated project costs to recover those type of expenditures as I listed those as a part of the public improvement... Water storage facility, road construction, administrative.. .and then below that, note that some of the above funds will be spent directly to the cost of the listed improvements. Other funds will be spent... Councilman Berquist: Where was that? Oh, was that the memo? Mayor Mancino: That is on page 8 underneath the Q which is estimated of cost improvements. Right there. That paragraph. So we would not change Mark's motion. Leave it standing? Councilman Engel: Why don't we just make a different motion. Councilman Senn: Sounds like it works for now or it doesn't? Councilman Mason: Well I'm hearing that it doesn't. Councilman Berquist: I sense the language is restrictive. Fred Richter: I heard it was limited strictly to special assessment costs, and would deviate from the other public improvement costs that were not assessed. Councilman Senn: So if we say special assessments and municipal public improvements, that would cover what you need to cover? Okay. Councilman Engel: Does that mean you have to amend that motion? Councilman Senn: Well nobody seconded it yet so. Mayor Mancino: So would you state the motion again please. Councilman Senn: Adopt a resolution establishing Development District No.6 and Tax Increment District No. 6-1 with the stipulation of use on the tax increment funds to be for special assessments and municipal public improvements, and that the caveat be added so as to make sure it conforms to the State Statute and cannot be used for any office, or office industrial projects exceeding 30% office or any retail commercial. Mayor Mancino: Is there a second to the motion? Councilman Berquist: I still sense a restriction within the mechanism that I, I mean I'm not bright enough to know exactly where but I sense a restriction that I cannot approve. I may approve it later on but I'd like to discuss it at some other time. Am I. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Mason? Councilman Mason: Well if no one made a second on that motion, that motion dies for lack of a second. Then you float the motion that approves this and tables any other action for further discussion, which is what has been recommended for about the last 15-20 minutes. 27 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Well then go ahead and make the motion. Councilman Mason: Well, I'll move approval of Development District No.6 and Tax Increment District 6-1. Councilman Berquist: As within the resolution. Councilman Mason: As stated in the resolution with discussion to follow. Isn't that what you're looking for Todd? Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. I mean the big question that I hear going on is, are you willing to reimburse the developer their cost of building the road that won't get assessments. Mayor Mancino: But we do not know from Charles yet whether the developer will be building those roads or not. or whether they're a part of special assessments. Charles Fo1ch: Correct... Mayor Mancino: And we don't have that right now so that's why. Councilman Mason: This needs to be done before the 1 sl of June so. Councilman Engel: We've got to approve it. Mayor Mancino: So let's go ahead and have it come back. Councilman Senn: So question. What you need is the resolution? Mayor Mancino: Yes. Just the resolution to adopt the development district program. Councilman Engel: And the TIF district. Councilman Senn: And creating the Tax Increment District, both. Councilman Engel: By June 1 st. So now or never. Councilman Mason: And I made that motion. Councilman Engel: Second. Todd Gerhardt: And when it comes down...road scenario, we will implement that as part of your program for the special assessment reduction and then we'll bring back. . . for your approval at that time if you decide if you want to pay for... Mayor Mancino: And that's what Councilman Senn was saying at the beginning but go ahead. We have a motion and we have a second. 28 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Resolution #97-35: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve the attached resolution adopting a Development District Program for Development District No.6 and Tax Increment District No.6-I. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CONSTRUCTION OF A COMMERCIAL KITCHEN TO PROVIDE CONGREGATE DINING FOR SENIOR CITIZENS. Public Present: Name Address Lorraine Anderson Jean Mancina Irene Tippie Rose Kirschbaum George Banker Ruby Thielke Lorrayne Banker Mel & Jacki Kurvers John Kilpatrick Sherol Howard Jane Kubitz Bobbie Headla Selda Heinlein Bernice Billison Dorothy McIntyre Marion Stultz Hilbert Smith Agnes Nessa Charles & Mark Carl Paul D. McCormack Wesley Searles Helen Bielski Ruth Satre Gloria Giltner Betty Paulsen Sylvester Chastek Albin H. Olson 820 Santa Vera Drive 820 Santa Vera Drive 820 Santa Vera Drive 820 Santa Vera Drive 820 Santa Vera Drive 6991 Pima Lane 820 Santa Vera Drive 7240 Kurvers Point Road 7021 Pima Lane 820 Santa Vera Drive 7492 Saratoga Drive 6870 Minnewashta Parkway 420 Chan View 7281 Pontiac Circle 820 Santa Vera Drive 820 Santa Vera Drive 9243 Lake Riley Blvd. 820 Santa Vera Drive 820 Santa Vera Drive 820 Santa Vera Drive 820 Santa Vera Drive 7209 Frontier Drive 820 Santa Vera Drive 820 Santa Vera Drive 820 Santa Vera Drive 820 Santa Vera Drive 820 Santa Vera Drive Kate Aanenson: This item first appeared on the Council agenda on May 12th and was tabled for a subsequent work session on May 19th. As you're aware, the Community Development Block Grant allocated $100,000.00 for completion of the congregate dining. There were some cost overruns. Some of those involved heating and ventilating that exceeded really the space that the congregate dining needed. It really completes the rest of that finished area downstairs area to be finished at a future date. So what we had done.. . completed through the City Hall expansion. So what we're looking at is the shortfall of the $26,000.00.. .number breakdowns as Councilman Senn had requested some additional information and that was discussed at. .. What we are recommending at this point, or what Don was recommending at this point is to have authorization of the additional $26,000.00 out of the City Hall 29 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 expansion reallocated to go forward with the congregate dining project. Todd Christopherson is here if you have questions for him. There are some seniors here too but I'd be happy to answer any questions. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you very much. Any questions for Kate at this point? Councilman Berquist: Any idea what Barbara Portwood would have to say about fund transfer from that money that we have on deposit in St. Paul to guarantee the senior revenue stream on the senior center, senior housing? Kate Aanenson: No. I guess I didn't make a tie in with... Mayor Mancino: Okay. Any other questions for Kate? Councilman Senn: It's right on here. Mayor Mancino: Oh, I contacted Barbara. I didn't read this either. Councilman Berquist: Have you heard from Donald? Mayor Mancino: Mr. Ashworth. Todd Gerhardt: No. Mayor Mancino: Well we just have a question from the note that's on this report. The update. I contacted Barbara Portwood regarding Councilman Berquist's question. Kate Aanenson: I think I left the work session and wasn't aware there was a follow-up. Councilman Senn: Well it says here he talked to her and he would provide the answer tonight. Mayor Mancino: On Tuesday night. Todd Gerhardt: I can try to see ifhe's home. He's flying in... Mayor Mancino: Okay. If you could do that, that might help us. I don't even know what the question was. Is there anyone here tonight wishing to address the Council on this issue? On congregate dining. Would you like to come forward and. Sherol Howard: Thank you. My name is Sherol Howard. I live at Centennial Hill, 820 Santa Vera Drive. I'm here to represent the Senior Commission. Emphasis today is placed on keeping seniors in their homes. There are many tools that the Commission has implemented to aid seniors such as the Senior Information Line, which is a telephone line they can call if they have questions about services, housing, legalities, health problems and we fmd options for them that they can pursue. We offer CHORE program. It's a service that seniors can call and have help in and around the home such as mowing the lawn, repairing appliances. SAIL is Senior Aid for Independent Living. It works to educate and coordinate seniors with County Services. Their mission is to aid seniors to lead independent lives. We also support the Carver County Senior Expo. We have speakers come into the Senior Center and discuss problems such as usage of drugs, nutrition, so on, and we have a newsletter which goes out to all our seniors explaining these programs. In this vein, quality oflife is only possibly if you're in good health 30 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 and good health requires proper nutrition. You were all too young to know that when you no longer have a family to feed, planning and cooking nutritious meals becomes less important. What we are recommending is offering one properly balanced, nutritious meal per day. This will only be possible if you approve our plan for congregate dining. I can't discuss the financial aspect of this situation. My days from the nickel candy bar and the 3 cent stamp so everything... but I can assure you that in the long run this will save money because it will cost less than keeping people in nursing homes or hospitals. Approximately a year ago we completed a survey of seniors in the community to see if they would use this program if it were made available to them. Results showed a definite need for congregate dining. This month, I gave you the slips, we did a small survey of seniors attending programs in the Senior Center and it reaffirmed this need. I would very much like to urge you to approve this program. Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Sherol, I have a couple questions. When you say it would provide one meal a day, and is that dinner or lunch? Shero! Howard: At noon. It's a hot meal and it is, we would use CAP Agency out of Shako pee and as a subsidized program. The Seniors would pay, either $2.00 or it could have gone to $2.50 and the rest is subsidized. I think they are rated at about a $4.50 value which takes in all the costs. They are brought to the Senior Center and heated or cooked there. And I understand it is all arranged time wise. None of our afternoon programs begin until 1 :00 and we only would have to take a half hour off a wood carving program in the morning to accommodate this program to allow the hour and a half that's needed. We also have volunteers set. We would rely on our volunteers to set up the tables and collect the money and soon. Mayor Mancino: Okay. What about seniors that can't come out? They're at their home and can't get out for. Sherol Howard: This we hope to work into. We decided to take one thing at a time and that need is really vital because there is the possibility that our seniors, some of them go to South Shore for their meals. Chaska has congregate dining. Minnetonka has it. Mayor Mancino: Okay. So most of the communities around have it? Sherol Howard: Yes. But there is Meals on Wheels delivered to parts of our area but there is no provision for Meals on Wheels for a large portion of Chanhassen. Anything south of Highway 5 is not serviced by Meals on Wheels. And this we hope to do after we get the congregate dining.. . we figure we'll start with congregate dining and then try to offer Meals on Wheels. Mayor Mancino: And again the Meals on Wheels, the set up would be off this congregate dining area. I mean you would preheat it. Get it all ready and then take it out for Meals on Wheels. Sherol Howard: And we already have some volunteers for this. Mayor Mancino: Alright, good. Any other questions at this time? Councilmembers. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to address the Council on this issue? Please give us your comments and thoughts. Okay. Seeing none. John Kilpatrick: Nancy, would you repeat that question please? 31 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Oh, I just wondered if anyone else would like to come up and give us your comments or thoughts. Please do so. John Kilpatrick: John Kilpatrick on Pima Lane. We've been residents here four years now and we want to thank you first for your senior center and the delightful young lady that heads it up for us. And also Sherol, you should stop and see Sherol and her wood carving class. Congregate dining is very popular in Shorewood, as you may know and also Minnetonka. A lot of my friends in Chanhassen attend Shorewood on a weekly or daily basis for a hot meal. I do hope that you'll see clear to help us along with this idea. See it materialize. Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Comments and seeing no one else, we'll move ahead and bring this back into Council. Councilman Senn: Nancy, could I ask a couple questions of staff first? Mayor Mancino: Sure. Councilman Senn: Kate, just trying to understand the final numbers. The total cost on this is what, $144,343.00 now, as per the revised bid? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Councilman Senn: Okay. And the amount of CDBG money that we got to do this was $1 OO,OOO.OO? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Mancino: From previous years. Kate Aanenson: Well two years. Councilman Senn: From two years CDBG. Okay. So basically we have $44,343.00 that's not being covered by CDBG. Okay. And what is the, what is the ongoing let's call them operating expenses that we will be. Kate Aanenson: We put that in a budget for this year, and again Sherol indicated what we try to do is reduce our administrative costs and that's why...prepared off site. All we're doing is...so really all we need is one prep person. At a maximum we looked at... Mayor Mancino: And that can't be done by volunteers? Kate Aanenson: Some of that can be. ... the set-up and the prep, you need to have somebody that knows, is trained and liable. We did put that in this year's budget. Again we looked at. . . We are paying, like we are now... Councilman Senn: So what was that number for this operation? Kate Aanenson: I believe we came out to, maybe it came out to like $12.00-$15.00 an hour and we... That was put in, actually got put in... 32 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Sounds like a couple hundred a week? Councilman Senn: And how long does that type of approach work for? Kate Aanenson: Well that's going to have to be something ongoing. Councilman Senn: But I mean, at what point does it have to expand to being done on site and? Kate Aanenson: Well I don't think we want that being on site. I don't think that's probably the.. . food may be used or whatever. Just bring it in and have seniors here to pick the menu. Work with the large group and it really... Councilman Senn: But I mean the kitchen equipment we're putting in has capabilities far beyond what you're suggesting just to warm up. Kate Aanenson: No. You have to have that type of equipment to reheat it to meet standards. Councilman Senn: Which is also equipment we need to prepare it there, right? Kate Aanenson: Yeah, but for congregate dining you have to, it's served in bulk. You have to separate it and put it into serving containers and there's different containers for the Meals on Wheels that's actually placed...but it has to be reheated to reconstitute some of that. But it's not building in excess. We're building it to meet. Mayor Mancino: To do the program. To have the program. Kate Aanenson: And we believe.. .program's going to expand. I mean as we get older and more people... that's what we're trying to meet that demand. And we recognize that it's putting demand on the senior space right now so after time we're going to have to address that issue too. That's something that Todd brought up as part of his budget report too. .. . demands on that space down there. That's an issue we're going to face, like Public Works space. All these segments.. . Councilman Senn: Okay, one last one. Of the $44,343.00 not covered by CDBG, where's that coming from then? Kate Aanenson: From what I'm understanding what Don's been stating in his report is that he believes that the heating and ventilating will. . . pick up the cost and exceed what we need for the congregate dining...off this total square footage... Just like the elevator goes beyond. There's a large area. That that should be picked up by part of the City Hall expansion. That's where we allocated... And what he's saying is, you know 26 or.. . allocated. Councilman Senn: But there's really 44 being allocated to it is what you're saying? From City Hall? Mayor Mancino: And we did get a report last Monday night that we had $66,000.00, we were under budget for City Hall expansion. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, I think there was a couple things... 33 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Mason: If! may here, in the City Manager's report, in interest earnings alone the City Hall expansion...$65,000.00. That's in money we've made because of money we haven't spent. Mayor Mancino: In addition to the 66. Councilman Mason: Yeah. Mayor Mancino: But there was also, I mean let's not forget there was also a list of things that we still need to do. The retaining wall for $13,000.00. Councilman Mason: ...but it certainly appears as though the money's there for this. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Mason. Councilman Mason: Well, let's do it. Let's move ahead. I mean I'm certainly all for it. According to City Manager's report, the money's there. Mayor Mancino: Okay, Councilman Engel. Councilman Engel: No.. .let's do it. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Berquist. Councilman Berquist: Well I am certainly in favor of it as well. However I want to know, I had asked the question. Kate Aanenson: I understand.. .I wasn't at the work session. Unfortunately I don't have the answer to the question. I think that's still an option to pursue. Councilman Berquist: Well I would look at it as an option to pursue, not only for this but also to fund whatever costs we have associated that you guys were just discussing. We have to leave that there for, until the bonds are retired so that's 20 years. About 18 grand a year at 5%. Mayor Mancino: Can you go ahead and make a decision tonight without that information? Councilman Berquist: Absolutely. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Senn: We didn't get that answer? Mayor Mancino: No. We weren't able to. Councilman Senn: I have a quick question for Todd, now that he's back if! could. Todd, in relationship to the interest earnings that Don had, I talked about earlier. I mean we don't keep a separate bank account on the City Hall expansion fund I mean as part of our bank account that we have interest earnings off of, okay. When you talk about the interest earnings being 60 some thousand, I mean there's also a big chunk of interest earnings designated in the budget as basically being interest earnings off of 34 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 that money. Now are we talking about the same chunks of money or are we talking about new money that's not in the budget? Todd Gerhardt: ... this project had money in the account.. . Councilman Senn: I'm saying the City's budget. I mean it takes into account the interest or anticipated interest earnings for the year. Todd Gerhardt: It's up and above that. Councilman Senn: So it's over and above that. Mayor Mancino: I know that Pam does go through the different funds and understands where the interest is coming from. Per fund. Todd Gerhardt: ...ifthat's the question... Mayor Mancino: Well let's have a motion. I too am in favor. Councilman Mason: To award low bid as stated in the staff report with City Council authorizing the additional $26,000.00 to be allocated out of City Hall expansion funds for the congregate dining project. Councilman Berquist: I'll second with an amendment. The amendment would be that the $26,000.00 to be reallocated out of the City Hall expansion fund or to be interest earned on the $350,000.00 that is sitting in the bank account. That $350,000.00 being our guarantee of cash flow for the Centennial Hill project. If we're able to access that interest, I would rather fund it out of a fund that is already tied to the seniors as opposed to City Hall expansion fund. Does that make sense? Councilman Mason: Yeah, because my understanding is it won't put this in jeopardy. Mayor Mancino: Jeopardy. Either way it will still go. Councilman Mason: I will certainly accept that amendment. Mayor Mancino: Okay, is there? Councilman Senn: Just a point of clarification. You're talking about then just the $26,000.00 and not the 441 Councilman Berquist: I'm talking about the shortage. Mayor Mancino: Which is 44. Councilman Senn: So you're accepting the 16 out of the City Hall fund already then? Councilman Berquist: 16 I'll accept out of the City Hall fund. The overage of $28,000.00 is what I want to be, is what I want to explore funding. 35 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Is there a second? Councilman Berquist: I seconded it, and amended it. Councilman Mason: I'll second the amendment. Don't we need to second. Mayor Mancino: Yeah, we need to second the amendment. Councilman Mason: Sure, I'll do that. Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve an amendment that the $26,000.00 be reallocated out of the City Hall expansion fund or to be interest earned on the $350,000.00 that is sitting in the bank account for the Centennial Hill project. All voted in favor and the amendment carried. Resolution #97-36: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded that the City Council approve awarding of the low bids as attached for the congregate dining project, and authorizing that the $26,000.00 be reallocated out of the City Hall expansion fund or be interest earned on the $350,000.00 that is sitting in the bank account for the Centennial Hill project. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Councilman Berquist: One thing I'd like to say in closing. Ms. Howard, you've come before this City Council on a number of different occasions for a lot of different stuff, and I just want to let you know that I think you're a class act. Mayor Mancino: And thank you for sitting through a long session. Longer than you thought you would have to. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE AND THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN. Roger Knutson's microphone was not working as he gave his report. Mayor Mancino: And is there something that we need to do tonight with it? I think we're just waiting for their signature and then our signature. Roger Knutson: Did you approve, I've forgotten, did you already approve it? Councilman Berquist: I think we have. Mayor Mancino: Yes. Roger Knutson: Then there's nothing else for you to do. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you very much. Any questions from Council members? Councilman Senn: No, I don't think we did. Councilman Berquist: Didn't we do it at the last meeting? 36 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Well, we had it in front of us last meeting. Kate Aanenson: Let me.. .on that. They are working on the berm. Some of the issues that we are trying to work out is that we want to make sure that the fence is in place before we do the landscaping because we don't want the landscaping to. ..to get the fence in. So there's just some little.. .we're still trying to work out with the timing and all that. Especially if we get into the hottest part of the year and put the landscaping in. Who's going to maintain that. And also with that tall of a fence, the landscaping on their side...ownership of that so that stays. So there's just a few...trying to put together. Working with the architect Getting that.. .and the timing of the fence and the landscaping. Mayor Mancino: Kate, are we going to see a final plan, landscaping plan? We haven't seen those yet. Kate Aanenson: .. .yes. We're putting that together to go out to bid and you will see that. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Well then let's have a motion to adopt this resolution. Councilman Senn: Hang on. I'm looking at Minutes from last time to see if we did or didn't. Mayor Mancino: Okay, if you would check it. You know what, now that you say it, I think that we may have waited to see what, if the Postal Service was going to come back and have any additions to this or not because we weren't sure. Roger Knutson: Just a comment. It doesn't hurt to approve it twice. Councilman Senn: One of the questions I had asked or raised, which I don't think we have an answer to yet, is with the end result of the settlement, is this or is this not going to cost the City any money? I mean now the Post Office is paying us. We're paying for the work, etc. But I thought it was just kind of like a pass through type of deal where we recovered full cost. Or is it a deal now something where we are effectively funding part of the correction? Mayor Mancino: Well we are going out to get bids and obviously we're trying to keep any costs to stay at the $32,500.00. There may be a few additional but we do not know that yet. Councilman Senn: So we don't know that. Mayor Mancino: No. We don't. Councilman Senn: We don't know if this is going to. Mayor Mancino: We have not gotten the estimates. The bids have not come back yet for landscaping. Councilman Berquist: But based on an earlier discussions. Mayor Mancino: Conceptually we are trying to stay within that budget. Councilman Senn: Well, I'd rather wait and act on it when we know but that's just fine. 37 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Well, this doesn't say anything about the budget. This is just our agreement with U.S. Postal Service. Councilman Senn: No, the agreement governs we pay... under this. Roger Knutson: But, Todd's already left so I can say this. Hoffman. If for example when the trail came in you decided you didn't want to pay for it, this doesn't obligate you to do it. Mayor Mancino: Or we can say when the bids come in on the landscaping, if we decide to do less landscaping, how much money will we save, etc. We already know that. Councilman Senn: That will be a separate decision brought before us? Mayor Mancino: Certainly. I mean the berm's up there. We have negotiated that, right? But no. We do not have all the costs yet. We're getting those. With the intent to stay within the budget. Councilman Berquist: Well within the budget. Mayor Mancino: So, may I have a motion please? Councilman Berquist: Move approval. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Agreement between the U.S. Postal Service and the City of Chanhassen as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A SIGN WITH TIME AND TEMPERA TURE DISPLAY AND HEIGHT VARIANCE. 900 WEST 7STH STREET. TCF NATIONAL BANK. Mayor Mancino: Is there anyone from TCF here? Do you want to check out in the. Kate Aanenson: I don't think there is outside. I think if you want to.. .or table... Mayor Mancino: Well, they've been obviously notified tonight. Kate Aanenson: I can go through it for you but Ijust wanted to make sure. ..ifthere was somebody here or not. Mayor Mancino: Why don't we check. Do a second check would you Todd. Kate Aanenson: It's up to you. I can proceed. Mayor Mancino: Yeah, let's go ahead if they've been notified. Kate Aanenson: There's two requests. There's a variance for the height and area, and then also a conditional use. Our new sign ordinance doesn't allow for time and temp but it has to be covered under a conditional use. While this may seem nominal, as far as the amount ofthe request, it's Century Bank 38 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 which was previously at this location, did meet the requirement. Well they were under. They were allowed the 64 square feet... The height of this sign exceeds the height requirement, and also because the time and temp is providing the area, it exceeds the area requirement. Staffhad recommended denial of those two requests. The area and the height and the applicant. . . time and temperature as being set. The size that they need in order to actually get the sight lines. They were unwilling to deviate from that proposal. We are recommending approval of the request for the conditional use on the time and temp. On May 7th the Planning Commission reviewed and denied, also denied the variance and did recommend approval for the conditional use. Our recommendation on the motion found on page 7 states that we recommend you adopt the following motion. Denying the variance for the area and the height based on the fact that they haven't demonstrated a hardship. And would recommend approval of the conditional use for time and temperature. I'd be happy to answer questions that you may have. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Any questions for staff at this point? Is there anyone here tonight wishing to address the City Council on this issue? Okay, seeing none, comments. I'll give my comments first and that is I agree with the recommendation of the Planning Commission that the sign can just be scaled down appropriately. The reasons that they can't be reduced is obviously for corporate marketing and communications guidelines and they can just kind of redo those. So I do not agree with the variance but absolutely do agree with the second part of it, which was the conditional use permit for time and temperature signs. Comments. Councilman Mason: Well, I kind of wish the weather ball would come back. But short of that I'll accept time and temperature. Mayor Mancino: Good for you. Councilman Berquist, your comments. Councilman Berquist: No need for comments. I agree 100%. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Engel. Councilman Engel: Nothing more to add. Councilman Mason: No comments. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Mason will sign with the temperature. Councilman Senn. Councilman Senn: Why don't we just put him out there as part of the sign. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Senn, any comments? May I have a motion please. Councilman Mason: I move the City Council denies request for an 8 inch variance for the monument sign but that we do approve the request for a conditional use permit for time and temperature as stated in the staff report. Councilman Berquist: Second. Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded that the City Council denies the request for an 8 inch variance for the construction of an 8' 8" monument sign based upon the findings presented in the staff report and the following: 39 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 1. The applicant has not demonstrated a hardship that would warrant the granting of a variance. 2. The applicant has a reasonable and equitable opportunity to utilize the existing brick base for a ground low profile sign. The City Council also approve the request for a conditional use permit for the time and temperature display within a monument ground low profIle sign. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. GATEWAY PARTNERS. STEINER DEVELOPMENT. IDGHWAYS 5 AND 41: A.. PRELIMINARY PUD APPROVAL FOR A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF OFFICEIINDUSTRIAL USES. SUPPORT COMMERCIAL USES. AND PARK AND OPEN SPACE. B. REZONING FROM AGRICUL TURAL ESTATE (A-2) TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD). C. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR 12 LOTS. 2 OUTLOTS AND ASSOCIATED RIGHT-OF-WAY. D. WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT TO FILL AND MITIGATE WETLANDS: AND E. INTERIM USE PERMIT TO PERMIT SITE GRADING. Bob Generous: Thank you Madam Mayor, Council members. As you stated, there are five approvals... to approve the Gateway Business Park. This is a planned unit development that will be primarily office industrial in nature with some support commercial. The first portion of this approval is a preliminary PUD and rezoning for a mixed commercial, office, industrial and open space development. This project received a conceptual PUD approval on.. .ofthis year. With the PUD now we create the parameters for the eventual development of the site. It includes such things as the...If you'd like to go through the design standards... design standards which begin on page 6 of the staff report... The permitted uses are industrial office. .. light industrial use... In addition there are some support uses that are commercial in nature such as conference or convention center, indoor recreation health club, daycare, hotel, motel uses that could be permitted anywhere within the development. The one issue that we have with the institutional use is, originally staff proposed a cap for, a minimum cap of 250,000 square feet for an institutional use. Now the applicant has... Under the institutional uses we're looking at educational uses primarily but it would not prohibit a church to go into the development. However, at the 70,000 square foot level you have a development approximately the size of St. Hubert's.. .if we were to permit an institutional type use to go in that, it could create a spillover effect.. .and also through the use of services that the City has in place... In addition, we've broken out... Finally we've made a list of ancillary uses that could go, either.. .larger office industrial users such as a showroom, a telecommunications tower or a restaurant. Or as within the commercial area, such as a fast food and integral to a convenience store or a car wash in conjunction with a convenience store. Finally we put a list of strictly prohibited uses for this development. We've also developed the setbacks for the entire site. From the perimeter and also the right-of-way... We have development standards tabulation box which provides a breakdown of the total square footages of the building area that would be approved for the development. There is some potential that from the square footage you could be shifted from one lot to the other but. .. In addition.. . Lot 5 on Block 4, which is the comer site and trying to provide some standards that assure that this site would be developed at a higher caliber and intensity of use. . . . under development standards d(4) on page 10, we're looking for a... minimum of 40% of the building area be used for the office use and that the design of the development be set as a multi-story building. 40 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: So Bob, you're saying 60% could be manufacturing on this comer? Bob Generous: Warehouse... Mayor Mancino: Okay. Bob Generous: The building materials and designs were taken from other commercial industrial developments we have had and from some standards that we developed within the Village. .. We have reviewed from our original proposal the site plan... north/south street and Coulter Drive.. . more a boulevard type planting which is more spacing with more.. .For the signage we have worked out the standards for everything but the main entrance off of Highway 5 in the north/south corridor. On page 13, condition 8, we're requiring that the developer come in for special.. . for Planning Commission and City Council approval of any design that they have for that so that would be a separate item at some time in the future. .. .two outlots that will be dedicated for open space and park use.. .and additional right-of-way for Highway 5 and Highway 41. There is one issue on the grading plan.. .Lot 12 on the grading plan you see that currently their proposal has the proposed contours going into the tree area and the developer has agree and I've prepared a condition for the interim use permit that that area be preserved until final plat time... The intention is that some of the trees that are on the eastern edge of that parcel can be preserved to use those retaining walls or to revisions of the site plan so we'd be able to save additional tree canopy in the forested area outside of the area... The applicant basically will provide all the quality improvements for stormwater... The northern most cul-de-sac may not be built if one larger user should come to that site. There's a possibility that could all be left as one lot. One issue that has been contentious and is still being worked out is the amount of land to be dedicated for right-of-way. The applicant has agreed to the 10% and I believe staff is negotiating with them that we would purchase in excess of that dedication requirement. .. for parkland. We believe it's pretty close to the. . . Councilman Senn: You said, I'm confused I think. You just said two different things. In one sentence you referenced right-of-way and the next sentence you referenced park. Bob Generous: The right-of-way's up... They're going to dedicate the roadway that's shown on the plat. The parkland is.. . trying to work out the exact boundaries... We believe we're pretty close... Mayor Mancino: Well it is the 10 acres, or the 10% plus the 2.2 that is down here, correct? Plus the 2.2 because that was talked about. Bob Generous: Yes. It's 12 acres was the minimum that there's a dedication requirement. . . in excess of that. . . Kate Aanenson: We've agreed on right now some mutually acceptable language we believe we're all... Councilman Berquist: So there's agreement on that point? Bob Generous: Yes. Kate Aanenson: Until we get the final plat, it's not completely tied down but right now there seems to be concurrence of what... Councilman Senn: But what the base is established on is what is shown here and if we would take more than that, we would pay for it? 41 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Kate Aanenson: Yeah, we are taking more than 10% which will require some compensation. That's what we've... Councilman Senn: So what you're saying is what's shown here includes compensation? Bob Generous: Correct. Wetland alteration permit is to permit the site grading. There are... that lead to the upland areas of the project that they will be... One of the conditions of that will be...potential of some of the dedication requirements... And finally there's an interim use permit request to permit grading to initiate the first phase of grading prior to final plat approval. They would have to provide security for this. .. I did provide to the Council was a proposed additional condition number 16 to the interim use permit recommendation that grading into the tree line on the eastern portion of Lot 1, Block 2 shall not be permitted until final development plans and site plan approval. All grading must remain outside of the tree canopy... Staff is recommending approval of the preliminary PUD, the rezoning from A2 to PUD, the preliminary plat for 12 lots, 2 outlots and associated right-of-way, the Wetland Alteration Permit and the Interim Use Permit as amended with condition number 16. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have. Mayor Mancino: Any questions? I have a couple. I just want to make sure what you said. The interim grading permit will not allow any grading in this area? Bob Generous: Correct. Mayor Mancino: Regardless of what happens at this point? Kate Aanenson: Well they want to do the rough grading. What we're saying is we want them to stay outside the canopy until we have a final development plan and we can work out exactly which trees can we save and... Mayor Mancino: Okay. So there will be an erosion control fence right up there until we get to it. Okay. My other question is, Bob on Lot 5, Block 4. Let's get back to that. And I'm sure I'll have other questions. Permitted uses on page 7. Permitted uses may be allowed upon any lot within the development. I never saw, never envisioned Lot 5, Block 4 allowing light industrial or warehousing. We talked about it being a corporate center, headquarters, office research, institutional, etc. but we wanted it to be prime. I mean how is light warehouse, industrial is any other thing we're doing on the rest of this development. I mean this was supposed to be a special lot. So what I'm seeing here is permitted uses on any lot. Certainly not in our vision of what Lot 5, Block 4 was as we've always said. Kate Aanenson: Well we think we qualified that and it's spelled out on page 10, number 4. Lot 5, Block 4. We put in there it is anticipated to be a corporate headquarters, office research, manufacturing type users. While the majority of the developed is based on 30%, Lot 5 must be 40% office and include a multi-story. So we're saying ifit has a research component or manufacturing, ifit has a multi-story tenant, that...on Highway 5 and 41. Mayor Mancino: Okay. That doesn't do it for me. I mean manufacturing being 60% is just, is just again way too much. It can be like a lot of our office parks and again this is your primo lot. Your primo intersection. I have, that just, I have a very, I have a concern with that. And to me it certainly doesn't have to be multi-story. It could be but Bob, what was your thinking on making sure it was multi? 42 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Bob Generous: Well it's more the grandeur of the entrance way and bringing the building... Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Berquist: I've got a, that was one of my questions as well and in my mind, I have something in my mind's eye of what that corner will look like and hopefully it will be, come to fruition and manufacturing with a 40% office user is not it. The multi-story caveat, you know we're talking about multi-story and yet item 3 right above it is building height shall be limited to 3 stories or 40 feet. Is it our intent to limit that structure to 3 stories or 40 feet? Kate Aanenson: That's what the Highway 5 corridor is set up right now. Councilman Berquist: Is it? Kate Aanenson: Yes. Mayor Mancino: And is throughout our city. Kate Aanenson: Right. Councilman Berquist: I'm sorry, say that again. Bob Generous: We could go beyond that if you wanted to revise specific standards for Lot 5 to go higher. Councilman Berquist: That would be worth discussing. Can we make that corner more restrictive and given the... time, change the conditions? Kate Aanenson: Sure. It's a PUD. Councilman Berquist: Should we ever decide, heaven forbid. Mayor Mancino: The only way when we were on Highway 5 corridor task force, the only way that we thought of going higher is that, especially in elevations and land topography, where the land is down. Goes down that you know maybe 4 or 5 stories would work. We didn't want to be a tower out in the middle ofChanhassen in the upper area. So it's based on elevation. Not so much on stories. And we tried to go through all the land on Highway 5 and then we thought, oh this is crazy. Let's just wait and if it comes in in PUD, we can look at it and decide. But the other thing that we can do on these lots that are on Highway 5, that is Lot 4, Lot 5, Block 3, Lot 1 and 4, we can ask for the developer, the applicant to the design standards that are in there, April '97, are very general and we can ask for more specific design standards for those buildings on Highway 5 in addition to the permitted uses that we want to see as a PUD. Councilman Berquist: Okay. So at this point with preliminary plat approval, we could make that lot, could define that lot a little differently. Mayor Mancino: Ifit came in for site review, we could open that up at the PUD, yes. Yes. Councilman Berquist: So restrictions is something we need to do at this time? 43 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Kate Aanenson: Well, this is the preliminary...part of the final plat you're adopting the pun standards but I think being they're... Mayor Mancino: But it depends what comes in. Now they're going to have to come through a site reVIew. Kate Aanenson: Each project will come through a site plan review. Mayor Mancino: Yes. And at that time if Gateway Partners comes in with a site review for a five story building. Kate Aanenson: You can ask for a variance to amend the pun. Councilman Berquist: Okay. Kate Aanenson: But this, yes. This is the framework that you'll be measuring each of those projects against. That will be establishing the standards but you can certainly amend it. Councilman Berquist: Well, I don't want to be in a position of someone bringing something in and saying, this is the standard the way it is now. You know changing the playing field after we're already in here. I mean the purchase option on the land is. Kate Aanenson: Right, and I think that's what we're trying to do and they're trying to do is establish what we believe for that piece of property. . .I guess looking at the office use, while it would be nice to see large office use there, I think that.. .as far tax increment and all that sort of thing so we looked at how does this relate to what's happened and that was some of the discussion we went through. What if we had a large campus type user.. .not taxable. That was part ofthe discussion that went out. What office does as a component. Certainly we understand and they understand this is a premiere corner... I think that's always been our... Mayor Mancino: Any other questions for staff at this point? Councilman Berquist: Not right now. Mayor Mancino: Is the applicant here and like to come up in front of the Council? Fred Richter: Just for clarification, I think the only, one of the things that we thought about, you know the prominence of Lot 5, Block 4 is the height. If you want more height, that's no problem. Where we thought the office and the remaining manufacturing, there is a strong likelihood, there are certain types of manufacturing, high tech, clean room, that type of stuff that has such a high construction cost that we feel that we were lucky enough to get someone like that, the exterior of that type of building and the input! output on it would really be very similar to almost a total office without the car counts and that so, that's why the door needs to be left open I think for some type of manufacturing. There are certain types of manufacturing that really result in kind of high end buildings just because of their construction costs and... Anything else? Yeah, that's the other thing going back to your earlier discussion. We need to do our homework with staff. I know there's some discussion about 30% office and anything beyond that wouldn't be allowed to have TIF. That would have to be clarified too. Because I think one ofthe issues will be on getting a high end user is making it conducive to them. Conducive for them to be there. I 44 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 think in concept that's just the background with staff and all. I don't think we really have any real conceptual differences on your questions at all. Mayor Mancino: Is there anyone here tonight wishing to address the City Council on this issue? Rob Olson: My name is Rob Olson. I live at 7700 Crimson Bay Road in Chanhassen. Crimson Bay Road is right across from the main entrance to the Landscape Arboretum so we're kind of in this general area and I find it interesting. I didn't come here to speak about this particular issue tonight. I was here for other issues that have already occurred tonight but I started looking at this issue and became very interested very quickly. Forgive me for being a little bit behind in the game. Is this hearing tonight to establish whether this project will happen or just to the extent that it will happen? Mayor Mancino: That it will happen. Rob Olson: Okay. Mayor Mancino: It's just giving overall approval of the project and then as each lot is developed, is built, it will come into us. Rob Olson: Okay. Gateway Partners has provided a very excellent work-up in their writings. It's very comprehensive. It's very expensive, etc. I don't know how, I know you're at the beginning stages of the comprehensive plan for Chanhassen and how it's going to develop over the next 5 years or whatever. I guess I'm here to ask you, and urge you to think very carefully of how you'd like the comprehensive plan to develop. This is obviously a very key component of such a plan. It's very extensive and it's very invasive to that area. If you look at that area today, it's rolling hills. It's farmland. The Landscape Arboretum in it's 900 acres or whatever, would sit directly across the street from this major league development. I cannot see a stranger bed fellow than a major industrial development and office space directly across the street from one of the major league assets we have in this state. We have an Arboretum and then we have this office industrial complex. I'm not telling you what to think. I'mjust asking you to think about that very carefully as you go through these site plans and extensive alteration to this area. Right now it's farmland. It's very pretty. It is farmland. It belongs to be farmland but obviously it's going to get developed over time. I'd just ask you think about that very carefully and think of the broader picture ofChanhassen and the comprehensive plan as you get into this. Please don't diminish Chanhassen because of things like tax bases and tax revenue and things like that. I know that's, it's easy to get into that game and into that flow but I'm just asking you to pull back a little bit and think about the extent and the impact of this decision. And finally I just want to bring up, I know it's addressed in writing in the work up tonight. I don't know what it says but traffic at Highway 5 and 41 is very extensive right now. It's very, very busy. If you were to put in this type of development with this much office space and/or industrial use, I don't know how that area can hold that much incremental traffic. This is a main area where the new 212 highway ifit ever gets built, this area would have a direct benefit of that type ofa major league highway. Without the development of212, this area of 41 and 5 will continue to suffer and only get busier as you develop further west into Victoria, Waconia, etc. I don't know where the cars for this type of development are going to go. I know they've got all the roads figured out and all the good stuff and they've got traffic studies but the bottom line is, it's busy there now and this is only going to make it busier and people are attracted to the Arboretum and you have to think again. The aesthetics of do you want more traffic in terms of people coming out to the Arboretum to enjoy a nice atmosphere out there, or traffic, etc., etc., etc. These are just some of the points I wanted to bring up. Ijust ask you, I just urge you to think about again in context of the comprehensive plan in Chanhassen, does this type of extensive development in that proposed area, next to the Arboretum, does 45 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 that fit in to what you're trying to envision for Chanhassen? Maybe it is, maybe it isn't but I just ask you to step back and just think about it a little bit. That's... Mayor Mancino: Yeah, let me respond a little bit. This was guided for office industrial in our comprehensive plan in 1991, and in the Highway 5 corridor task force that started in '92 and went for a couple years, '94 and '95, did review it again and looked at it. And in fact Peter Olin, who is the Director of the Arboretum was part ofthe Highway 5 task force and is very knowledgeable about this development. And actually TH 41 is kind of the buffer you know to the Arboretum and the University did get some land on the west side of TH 41 that was part of this property by the owners. Rob Olson: I know they were trying to purchase the land... Mayor Mancino: Yeah, they did. So that we've kept what's west ofTH 41 with the Arboretum to kind of keep that whole area intact. Okay. Instead of having some of that go office industrial or multi-family so that that was done. But at some point you can't buffer a buffer with a buffer, if you know what I mean. So there has been quite a lot of thought and consideration given to what goes to, happens to this property and there's no question for all of us, it's very hard to see the rolling hills go industrial office and, but we do need to put it somewhere and plan. We looked at adjacent properties and what was going on around it in Chaska and felt this was, as hard as it is to see it completely graded, felt this was a good place so we have done a lot of thinking about it. But I appreciate your bringing that up tonight to us. Rob Olson: Well and I know you guys have thought about it and I don't mean to diminish any previous hearings that have taken place. I just ask that you continue to keep it all in perspective and the project will happen, most likely obviously but maybe think about in terms of alterations that you'd like to see that would maybe soften it or put in more of a context of the agricultural area or maybe a more open space or whatever but keep those ideas open and as options. Mayor Mancino: Of the 150 acres that they're developing, 36 acres will, approximately 36 acres will be, or is it that much? Maybe not. Will be wetland and upland area that we're going to be keeping as park. So but there's no question that it will be industrial there and it will add to the congestion on TH 5 and to TH 41 at this point so make no, it will not be rolling farm hills but we're going to be saving quite a bit. Rob Olson: Okay, very good. Well I thank you for your time. Mayor Mancino: Anyone else wishing to address the City Council on this issue? Good. Boy you've stayed a long time tonight John. John Hennessy: I'm on a roll. 7305 Galpin Boulevard, Chanhassen and 588 West 78th Street, Chanhassen. I'd ask you to consider that any commercial development in this area, that is more restaurants, banks, hotels, I'm opposed to myself and I would ask you to consider that very strongly. That anything that's going to pull people away from downtown area that we've worked so hard to establish and everybody knows where downtown Chanhassen is. I just don't want to see the establishment of new town and old town to start diluting our customer bases. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Yeah, we're very concerned about that too. Let me tell you, and I don't know if you've seen this at all but the uses, hotel, restaurant and daycare, hopeful and what's goes on 82nd Street will hopefully be services for the people who work here so that they can eat there, etc. 46 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 John Hennessy: Right. Well I can understand a city picnic or one of these soup and sandwich places which primarily caters to a light breakfast or a lunch. I mean putting a, oh like a Chi Chi's or a Chili's or Applebee's or Friday's or something out there, that's a major draw. That's going to draw from the entertainment value and the total retail idea of downtown here. Councilman Senn: John, there's been a lot of discussion about that and I think if you stick around we'll be talking about the other uses when we come back to Council discussion because we've already talked about it a great deal. Councilman Engel: It's at the top of the list. John Hennessy: Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Yes. Is there anyone else wishing to address the Council? ... bringing it back into Council then. Mr. Senn. Councilman Senn: I guess first I'd like to talk about the use section. I think we need to change that as it relates to the comer parcel, like you suggested earlier. Previously we talked about some uses out there and the potential of detracting from downtown. One being clinic or health service type uses. One being banks. Mayor Mancino: I'm sorry, are you talking about lot. Councilman Senn: Permitted uses. If you go under permitted uses on page 7 and page 8, okay. Basically a permitted use is health services. If you look at the map, I guess maybe that's easier to work from but on Lot 1, Block 3; Lot 4, Block 4; Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. There's listed under there both bank and clinic uses which we've talked about previously and we've talked about restricting those uses. On Lots 1, Block 3 and Lot 4, Block 4 we've talked about restricting one of those parcels to restaurant development rather than allowing two. And I'd like to see that followed through on. On Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, we already talked about restricting that to one gas convenience, not two. Which is two would be allowed under the current staff report. Mayor Mancino: Mark, what's your concern with the clinic on Lots 1 and 2? Block 1. Councilman Senn: Simply the heavy emphasis we have on that downtown. I mean we have a pretty heavy emphasis in the downtown area on medical and clinical uses. Now with somewhat, you know. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Senn: I mean I suppose if we actually figured it out, we could probably almost say the majority of our downtown is health care. Mayor Mancino: Banks. Councilman Senn: Other than banks. Let's see here. The institutional use, we talked about that early on. I guess I still really have concerns on that. You know if it's institutional, in all probability it would be tax exempt. Ifit's tax exempt, there's not going to be increment and that was not taken into account in relationship to our TIF projections. And so if we're going to allow it, I think we should once again revise this and be more guarded on the amount of money we're going to make available on that because again 47 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 the increment's going to be less if that happens. You know as we've already talked about this, there's already some pretty hefty public improvements here that are going to be... paid back through that same increment. So there is exposure to it. So that would continue to be a concern of mine. Mayor Mancino: But we could say no to institutional. Kate Aanenson: Although it'd be onerous on them if they had, if they're going to do the deal, they're going to have to pick it up somewhere else. I guess the way we looked at it.. .institution that made sense, not necessarily... technical school, junior college, that may be... Councilman Senn: Well I mean there, don't get me wrong. I mean there's some benefits to us. Ifit's institutional, they can't use TIF for the special assessments and they have to pay them and everything else. Kate Aanenson: But what I'm saying is that's a decision they would have to make. Councilman Senn: Yeah, I mean that's a decision you have to make. But what we need to be guarded on again is a lot of the money coming in under this district is going to be used for municipal improvements which are purely ours. Okay. And those depend upon an increment flow. And the increment flow will be affected by tax exempt uses. So it's just something to keep in mind. I mean the increment flow would also be affected by property tax reform or commercial industrial property taxes but the affect on us on that is... because it's a pay as you go district. They only get it back if they pay it. But the increment as it relates to public improvements is a different story. Let's see here. The only other comment I have is I am not comfortable with what's being suggested that we pay for anything over 10% on the parkland with what we're doing on this property. I wouldn't support that. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Mason. Councilman Mason: I think Mark raises some very legitimate concerns about the usage. I too am concerned, well and I think everyone on Council is concerned about any perception, no matter how small, about moving businesses towards that area. I think the idea oflimiting, but even more than I'm seeing here is in order. Mayor Mancino: And how would you like to see that done? Councilman Mason: Well I think Mark's suggestion maybe of, on Block 4, Lot 4, Block 3, Lot 1. I mean as it stands right now, there could be two restaurants there. And I'm not even sure that we even want one restaurant there. I certainly see the need for the, over in the Block 1, Lot 1 or Block 1, Lot 2, some sort of you know Tom Thumb convenience store oflight lunch kind of deal. Councilman Senn: SuperAmerica. Councilman Mason: Yeah. For people that are working in the area, yeah. Something like that needs to happen but I wouldn't mind having some sort of further discussion on the idea of major restaurants at that end. I don't know that I'm comfortable with that. Mayor Mancino: Well a lot of times they go with a hotel so people don't have to drive to go to eat breakfast or. 48 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Mason: Yeah, yeah. Well, and that's true too so I guess that's a discussion I think maybe. Councilman Senn: But one would satisfy that. Councilman Mason: Right, right. Mayor Mancino: I agree with that. Councilman Senn: And most hotels that build nowadays, build.. . restaurants anyway. They look for one to locate next to them. Councilman Mason: That's, yeah. That's a good point. I wouldn't mind a little more discussion on this 10% deal either. I'm not quite sure how that all fits in here. I'm not necessarily against it but I'd like a little more discussion on it. I think the point was well taken about Block 4, Lot 5. That if it is some real high end manufacturer, I'm not sure we want to say no to that. Because there are clearly, I mean I understand where you're coming from but on the other hand, some of the high end stuff is pretty high end and it's going to look pretty nice. Mayor Mancino: So we put high end in front of manufacturing. Councilman Mason: Well I'm not quite sure. Mayor Mancino: Because there's a lot of low end manufacturers out there. Councilman Mason: But I'm also hearing what they're saying and they're pretty cognizant of our needs there and they've got to come back again with anything anyway so I think everybody probably realizes that it'd be pretty risky bringing something low end there. Mayor Mancino: All brick manufacturing. Councilman Engel. Councilman Engel: And Mark and Mike both them up and that is limiting the lots.. .one large SuperAmerica type thing. . . and the hotel again on Lot 3 and 4 of Block 1 and that is, I wouldn't mind a restaurant as part ofa hotel, if they did that. I don't know if I'm as excited about a stand alone restaurant because it begins to give just the slightest hint of decentralizing the downtown. Alright. I'm really guarded against that. I have that fear more than almost any other on that. And on Block 4, I would like more of an emphasis on a major corporate headquarters or clean production facility. There's three reasons I see a big tax base in the future. I like the image it projects for us at that end of the city. And the jobs. So there's a lot of things that that's what we focus.. .I'd like even more emphasis placed on making that a corporate headquarters. Mayor Mancino: And high end jobs. Councilman Engel: High end jobs in manufacturing. Yeah, high end. You bet. Mayor Mancino: Bob. I have a question for you. You know we've heard many concerns about the Lot 1 and 2, Block 1, Lot 4 and Lot 1, Block 3. About pulling downtown away and bringing it out you know west We're going to have this double when we look at north ofTH 5. I mean, yes because. No? There are two little nodes there that can go commercial. 49 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Kate Aanenson: 2 Y2 acres of commercial. The hotel is a permitted. Mayor Mancino: But looking at the whole area, and looking at this... what's going to go up there? I mean are we going to have more commercial up there that can go? And how do we make it different and how do we all of a sudden don't pull this one intersection. Now we're going to have this new intersection on Highway 5. Everybody's going to stop there and I mean, going down any main highway, every time you have a light there's commercial. So how are we going to get away from that here? Kate Aanenson: I guess the way we looked at it is. Mayor Mancino: Or do we want it? Kate Aanenson: Well the hotel is a permitted use in industrial. Whether or not we say we want. . . which is one of the things we put in there. That it be linked. Maybe the restaurant only go forward if the hotel goes forward. If you have a major corporate user there, you may still want it. The problem comes in if you say it can't be a separate lot. Well in order to do the financing they want a separate lot, then we've lost that. I think some of that built in flexibility. .. You want to put some of those qualifiers on it, that if a large corporate user goes in, then... that's probably acceptable. Mayor Mancino: Well I think we want to do it but I just want to be proactive about looking north ofTH 5 too. That we don't start creating this little commercial node west of the city. Kate Aanenson: No. I think the intent was always, and that's the way it's spelled out in the PUD is that the uses here are serving that center and if that's what we're trying to tie it back into. You've got a lot of, a number of employees that want to be able to.. .on the site and not take away from the downtown. Councilman Engel: Maybe when you're comparing the hotel, the daycare and the hotel feeds right into what you would need if you have a major corporate headquarters. Kate Aanenson: Right, or if you're staying at the hotel, you want. I think we can work on an intent statement. Maybe that's something we can work with Roger a little bit more to try to get a better.. . what we're trying to...that we're looking for. Councilman Engel: I think you'd be hard press to do better than a hotel and a daycare, as far as facilities that feed a big corporate headquarters and it gives us what we want as well. I don't know the restaurant.. . Audience: All predicated on the market doing exactly what we want it to do. Councilman Berquist: I'm also very concerned with the possible denigration of downtown and I think we've made that quite clear to the applicant. And I suspect that they're all very well aware that I'll be here for another year and a half and you'll be here for another 3 Y2 and you'll be here for another year. Well if we all have some time commitment to be here and approve these things and I suspect that. Mayor Mancino: Or we'll be out in the audience telling whoever's sitting here... Councilman Berquist: As we could be doing that, yes. Anyway, the point is that I think, I hope and sometimes I pray that we will have a significant amount of input as to what goes into this project. Both as. well primarily as Council people. It's getting late. I'm sorry. I wish there was a way that we could 50 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 put in something about non, tax exempts but I know we can't. I'd like to try and narrow down the uses a little bit more. I think Mark brings up a good point. I don't know as far as limiting the number of restaurants, the number of gas convenience. Tying one to the other. I think that's a wonderful idea if we're able to do it. I'm reluctant on the other hand to completely hamstring the developer in their potential land sale. As far as the paying for the additional parkland. Given the amount of land that we're requiring for dedication and right-of-way, I think the project has to be fair to both parties and the biggest reason that I would be in favor of compensating the developer for parkland in excess of what we are due is the issue of fairness. There's a tremendous number of costs here. This project has to work for both the city and the developer. Ifit doesn't work for either of us, ifboth of us come in to finish the negotiations kind of mad at each other, they're probably good negotiations, to use Ashworth's analogy. And it would appear to me that that's happening. So I think if we can nail the uses down a little bit more, we're in good shape. The only real question I had on my notes before coming to Council was the Wrase property. Anything going on? I know Mr. Wrase is in bad shape. Kate Aanenson: We had the appraisal...haven't got it back yet. Councilman Berquist: Still not back? It was supposed to be back two weeks ago. Kate Aanenson: No, one week ago. If! could just incorporate it into the overall framework as this is the first review.. .you'll see this entire document as a part of the second one. A provision has been made to... incorporate it in this development and that it will be accomplished as, because we have one more time before the final document... It's not eliminated. We're still tracking there. It's on separate tracks. Hopefully they can come together. Councilman Berquist: You're on. Mayor Mancino: Oh, are you done there? Okay. Just a couple comments. Uses. I agree with what the other Council members have said about Lots 1 and 2. Gas can be used, fast food on one of those lots. Not on both. I can't believe a bank would want to go there but that's fine. I don't have a problem with that. I also agree with on Lots 1 and 4, just one hotel, one restaurant. And again I'm very concerned with Lot 5, Block 4. I do not want to see light industrial or warehousing in that, on that lot. I can be, with some intent statement, around having manufacturing on Lot 5, Block 4, and I won't even do a percentage at this point but it's got to be really high end manufacturing. What we want, what our prime use for that would be, major corporate headquarters type of building there. No ands, ifs or buts. So a regular manufacturing or warehousing just does not fit on Lot 5. Also I want to make sure that we can see, whether they be photo renderings, etc. Different elevations from Highway 5 and from TH 41 on as you look into the development, what we're going to see when we see site plans. What's going to, you know how much the building heights will stick out. Up, etc. And from different vantage points on Highway 5. I mean you can be at the corner ofTH 41 and 5 right now looking east and see Pillsbury and all the stuff on the top of that building, you know a mile away and that's what I want to see because we have different view sheds and I don't think we're doing a great job on that. So I want to see from like Galpin and TH 5, what we're going to see as we approach east. I want to see from, coming from the Arboretum what we see. Or going west, and what we see from going east. I want to thank staff for spending so much time on going over the building footage breakdowns. And all your work, all your detail work on building materials and design. So thank you very much for that. When will we see a more detailed parkland, what's going to be parkland? What's going to happen on Lot 1 and where that line is going to be, etc. At what point will we see that? Bob Generous: Right now we have.. .just need the final numbers. 51 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Okay. Let me say that what I see right here, and I was you know in a meeting that went over it. It seems different than what I've seen before. It's way too east and there were retaining walls talked about to keep a lot of this. Kate Aanenson: I think that's shown. Mayor Mancino: And so that, I would like to see a better visual of exactly what that is. And whether that be at the next site review plan, etc. but I'd like to see that before we go ahead and okay the parkland. Exactly where the demarcations are. And I think that's, give me another. No, I don't have any other comments. That will be it. May I have a motion? Actually we have four motions. Councilman Senn: Take these all one at a time, is that what you want to do? Mayor Mancino: Yeah. Roger Knutson: Mayor? Just to point out that item (b), the rezoning. This is the first reading of the PUD ordinance rezoning. The actual rezoning does not occur until after the second reading which will be the same time as final plat. Councilman Senn: Okay, so (b) is first reading. Roger Knutson: (b) is first reading. Mayor Mancino: Okay, so if we're on page 30. Councilman Senn: Okay, I'd move approval of the preliminary. Mayor Mancino: The first one is rezoning the property. Councilman Senn: Oh, okay. You want to do that order. Okay. Mayor Mancino: Yeah. Under recommendations on page 30. Councilman Senn: Okay. Move the City Council approve rezoning the property from Agricultural Estate ~ A2, to Planned Unit Development, PUD and this is the first reading. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the first reading of rezoning the property from Agricultural Estate, A2, to Planned Unit Development, PUD. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Councilman Senn: The second one would be the City Council grant preliminary approval of PUD #92-6 for an office/industrial business park and preliminary plat approval for 12 lots, 2 outlots and associated right-of-way subject to the following conditions. And then have all of the conditions as listed, with the following modifications. Conditions be added on permitted uses as outlined on pages 6, 7 and 8 with the following changes. On page 7, deletion of health services. On page 7, deletion of institutional. On page 7, under commercial uses, number 1. Restaurant permitted on either Lot 1, Block 3 or Lot 4, Block 4. 52 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 On page 8, change number 2 to read, convenience store with or without gas pumps. Not to exceed 12,000 square feet on Lot 1 or Lot 2, Block 1 only. And on page 8, delete number 3, banks. And the only thing I wasn't sure of was, did you want to change that language on the comer parcel? Or were you satisfied now with the fact that it's kind of covered but had to come back to us. Councilman Berquist: By striking institutional. Mayor Mancino: No. Councilman Senn: Well institution, struck that one, no. But I mean the issue of the over the comer as far as the higher end or corporate. Mayor Mancino: Yeah, I mean I need still some sort of intent statement around the manufacturing part of it. I don't want to see warehousing there. Councilman Senn: Okay, so let's add another item under uses dealing specifically with Lot 5, Block 4 with the statement of intent that the City expects to see major corporate headquarters or a higher end let's call it commercial building. How's that? Mayor Mancino: With no warehousing. Councilman Senn: With no warehousing, or with very limited warehousing, would that be fair? Mayor Mancino: That would be fine. Councilman Senn: And let's see here. And I guess before I cap off the motion, just a question for Kate or Roger. When and where do we need to deal with the 10% Issue? Does that have to be part of preliminary or not? Roger Knutson: You can reserve that issue by mentioning it now and saying it will have to be resolved, if you want to. Before final plat, or you can resolve it right now. Councilman Senn: Well we don't want, unfortunately we don't have the numbers. I think we need to know the numbers before we resolve it. Roger Knutson: A condition of approval would be resolving that issue. Councilman Senn: Okay. Alright. So I should add that as a condition of approval then. New condition of approval would be that the issue over the parkland dedication needs to be brought back before the Council with final recommendations and numbers for consideration and agreement by the Council. Roger Knutson: That would be put in the development contract so, and you have to bless that so. Councilman Senn: Okay. End of motion I think. Councilman Berquist: I'll second it. Tom Kordnowy: .. . comments? 53 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Yes. Councilman Mason: Is now the time for discussion on that motion or after the vote? Mayor Mancino: Right after he does Mike. Tom Kordnowy: Members of the Council. The exclusion of health services we think is completely unnecessary for a restriction. If I could give you an example. This property is guided industrial and now we've got the PUD for the benefit ofthe city and it's uses and environment as well as our uses and having higher intensity in some places, lower in others. We take the corner ofTH 5 and TH 41, it's very clear what the City wants there and it's very clear what we want there. Very high scale development which means higher land price to us. Prettier project. Aesthetically very pleasing. If! can cite an example, Waconia Hospital for example has come to us about locating a 50,000 square foot clinic and they will not go any further east of TH 41 than TH 41. They'll go to TH 5 and TH 41 but they're not going to go any further east. If you're looking to protect downtown Chanhassen, they're either going 2 miles south in Chaska or they're going here. How would that harm the City and how would that hurt that corner if a marvelous clinic were to be there? Now this is not a done deal. In fact it's very preliminary. Just citing an example. We think it would be good for Chanhassen, certainly good for us and you couldn't have a higher scale project than a beautiful clinic. So we think health services ought not to be excluded. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. So we'll have some discussion on that. Mike, you also had a couple of questions so the motion has been made and seconded. Discussion. Councilman Mason: I think I might need, unfortunately, need to hear the motion again. Mayor Mancino: Oh no. Councilman Mason: No offense to you. I'm not quite sure why we're saying we don't want banks there. And I'm also, okay here are my questions. I don't know why we are saying we don't want banks there. I think the example ofWaconia is certainly something we need to talk about, and I'm not quite sure why institutional. Based on all the conversation we had, I'm not quite sure why institutional got struck from permitted uses there. Mayor Mancino: Okay. The maker of the motion, do you want to respond. Councilman Senn: As far as institution goes, it was struck primarily because we have not figured on tax exempt, which is predominantly institutional use with our, in relationship to our financial recovery under the TIF and everything. So I mean if you want to take a caveat that we will allow the tax exempt in this project, but then we have the right to redo the TIF, which effectively will make less, potentially less money available to the developer, then that's the way to do it. But the other way to do it is just to make it clear up front it's not allowable. The other thing is that saves us from a number of situations I think. Because if we disallow it, it stops it from getting into situations like we ran into with the Post Office or whatever. That's not allowable under the zoning. Mayor Mancino: The post office isn't institutional anyway. Kate Aanenson: No. 54 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: The post office could still go in. So could the Weather Service because that's not institutional. Am I correct? Kate Aanenson: That's how we interpret them. Roger Knutson: Well it doesn't matter what you call the post office. They don't care. They're exempt. Councilman Berquist: Well what it does, the way I interpret it, and I hope I'm right is that it puts the control back in our hand. So they have a user. Councilman Senn: They come and talk to us. Councilman Berquist: They come and talk to us before they sign anything. Councilman Senn: But we're telling them upfront that you know, that we have a concern about that and it's got to prove itself out before we're going to change our minds on it. Whereas, I'm going back to the comment you made saying you'd rather not put us in a position of saying well, okay do it now. Having them before us with the user saying well, why aren't you approving this because it's met this list. Councilman Berquist: Absolutely. Councilman Senn: So I mean you know again. Nothing we're doing here, how would you say it, stops anything. It's a pun. But what we're doing is we're setting up a set of rules here which they have to live by. If they want to change the rules, they have to come and ask us. And that's the way a PUD works. A constant form of whatever, negotiations. Mayor Mancino: Now that was institutional. That doesn't answer the bank. Councilman Senn: Yeah, I'm sorry. Back on the bank. The bank one is effectively right now, I think we have more banks per capita than anywhere. Mayor Mancino: It's a free market system. Councilman Senn: Well I understand it's a free market system but Nancy here's the problem. I mean we're already in a turnover, now thank heavens it's been bank to bank but I mean there's a point that you get too may banks and then you get into turnover and then it's not bank to bank. You know then you're in a situation where well okay, well 10 banks can't survive in Chanhassen with 17,000 people, you know heaven help us, what can we reuse the property as. You know at that point you start losing control effectively within your PUD. You know and again, I'm going to go back to what we said in the first place is we were strongly committed to not taking uses out of downtown. What, there is... What's not there? I mean you've got everything from... Kate Aanenson: First Bank. Councilman Senn: First Bank, they're right in Byerly's they have an office. So I mean every bank's there. You know and so again, again we were limiting our commercial uses here and trying to limit it to things that were needed in relationship to you know convenience types of things. Well if they put in the type of gas convenience store, most of the convenience type banking needs can be met right there in the cash machines. That's the way most of it's being done now. 55 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Engel: Also that and hotel lobbies. Mayor Mancino: Well I need a Norwest Bank and I don't think there's one around here, is there? Okay, clinics. Last one before. Councilman Senn: Well clinics again was purely the issue of how much do you want to protect downtown? If a major clinic goes in out there, it's going to have an effect on downtown. How do you evaluate that? I don't know at this point in time. Councilman Berquist: But again, they can come to us and say this is what we've got. What do you think? Councilman Senn: Again, they can come and say it but that's going to be a conscience discussion of that. To date that hasn't been. I mean you know I think if we went and asked all of the clinical or medical uses in downtown what they feel about a major medical out there, I think we'd probably get some kind of a reaction. I don't know. This was supposed to be kind of industrial property. If we're going to do something broader with this, that's going to potentially affect some of these people, then I think we need to go through, I'm going to say a little bit more of a full discussion on those specific issues with those people involved. Mayor Mancino: Well, if people's insurance covers their going to this clinic downtown, I mean somebody's insurance may not cover, an employer's insurance may not cover... Councilman Senn: I'm assuming some are independents, yeah. Mayor Mancino: Yeah, and some of them may not cover it so they would love to have another clinic on TH 41, somebody else that they can use. Councilman Senn: It may work Nancy but I mean it may come in and be a beautiful hospital building like you said and we'd probably say yes to it on the corner. You know or whatever, but again, it's just a matter that it has to come in and has to be asked rather than assumed that it's a given. Kate Aanenson: Clinics are permitted in the industrial office. We've got other requests going up and down Highway 5 right now. There's a big demand for urgent care. Mayor Mancino: For urgent care? Do we have urgent care anywhere else in the city? Do you know? Is there a clinic that does have urgent care? Kate Aanenson: Well there's a shortage. There's one place right downtown but there's a big demand for it. Whether it goes on TH 5 and TH 41 or somewhere else, there's probably going to be one on TH 5. There may be one on Villages on the Pond but there's demand for them in other places. And I guess what we come back to, with the underlying permitted uses are predominantly what's already permitted in the lOP. We're trying to put some framework where we don't have to come back and negotiate everything so they have something to go out and shop for their users and we have some. . . what your direction is. So that's why we tried to stay with the underlying framework of permitted and conditional uses. And the ones that were deleted from that really were the, just a few ofthe commercials. Otherwise those are predominantly already permitted in the lOP. Just so you understand where we came from... 56 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: No, I understand that. Tom. Tom Kordnowy: Yes Madam Mayor. I just, after many, many discussions with staff and what we feel we can live with in marketing this property and still satisfy the city, we think the restrictions, the recommendations of the staff are well thought out. Very adequate. We feel perhaps a bit restrictive but beyond that, I personally don't view the Council's role as to say how many banks we have in Chanhassen. I mean there are more brokers in downtown Wayzata than any other, per capita, than any other place in the country. Are there too many? Are there too many banks in Chanhassen? Who's going to tell me that? If there are too many banks, they won't buy the land but we just feel that inhibition, that restriction for us to market the property, fulfill the tax increment requirement, I just don't view it as the Council's role to say we already have too many banks so we're not going to allow anymore banks. As to the comer, once again on the medical. I think it'd be a fantastic use. I don't even know if we can land it. Don't know if the timing's even right but if that were to happen, I'm hearing from the City or the councilmen universally, we don't want industrial there. We don't want warehousing there. Wouldn't that be just a perfect solution. By putting the inhibition on us to market it or to successfully develop it I think would hurt the city and hurt us. I'm hearing the goals loud and clear so allow us to fulfill the city's needs and ours. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Councilman Berquist: Tom, I just want to make one quick comment. You're right. How many banks do we need? I don't know. It doesn't matter. How many downtown's do we need? We need one. And we've got it and you know part of our charge is to, I mean that's a fundamental concern of this group is to protect that. So it goes far beyond how many banks do we need. To use that as an example. Tom Kordnowy: Point's well taken. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Engel. Councilman Engel: I don't want to hamstring him either. You know he mentions that that clinic might be a good use. I'm generally liking to limit what we've got downtown to that area but ifhe can come up with a plan that shows me a clinic...be persuaded. It's unlike what we've got downtown. I can be convinced. I don't want to hamstring him in every way, shape and form. Alright, and like Steve says, we only want one downtown but I can be convinced of a place like this so I don't want to exclude it hands down. Councilman Senn: Well we aren't excluding it. We're simply saying if you want to come and talk to us. If you take what's written up right now in the staff report, every one of these lots could contain a medical use. Councilman Engel: I just want them to know I'm not hands down against that. I can be sold on something like that. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Mason, and then let's get on with this. Councilman Engel: Yes, we're losing our effectiveness here. Councilman Mason: Well, you know, if it's okay. I'm trying to... 57 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Okay, Mr. Dahlgren go ahead. Howard Dahlgren: Thank you Madam Chair. Mayor Mancino: And then this is it. Then we're getting on with the motion. Howard Dahlgren: I'd just like to remind all of us why we're here. We're here because you asked us to be here. A year and a half ago we tried to develop this land for residential purposes but we found the conditions that were being set up onerous so that we could not develop the land. We didn't have access to Highway 5. We couldn't.. .or the things, you remember all these conversations. So the City said to us, what do you need to successfully develop this land for industrial office park. So we made a list of 11 things that we thought we needed. We're still working in the context of that list. The top of the list was access to Highway 5. And we need these other things. We need reasonable treatment in terms of uses. We need a reasonable treatment as to how much park we can give. We'll give what we're required to give but we can't give away more. Our problem here is trying to make this work. It's going to be very tough. Tomorrow we're going to meet with some of the engineers and talk over some of the assessment costs and the work that Bonestroo people are doing. We've heard that the cost may be a dollar a square foot for the assessments. If that's true, we can't do this project. So Ijust want you to remember that we're here on a cooperative basis trying to do something that you people said you want. So we've told you what we think we need to do it and these are experienced people. We've done this many time. I personally have designed dozens of industrial parks in the metropolitan area. We know what it takes to do it and what the right uses are for a good industrial office business park. And some of the businesses should be there. Remember your traffic report said there's going to be 31,000 cars coming in and out of this project every day. Those are all customers. Those people need service so the idea of having restaurants and hotels and places to get gas and convenience store, those are things that are needed for this area. Not just competing with downtown. These are going to be people who are living and working, I mean working in Chanhassen and we need these services. Should they go to Chaska for them? The downtown is actually full. You have many more uses that still have to come here to serve your people, including a medical clinic. At one time the city of Eden Prairie used to say we can't have any development, commercial on Highway 5 and County Road 4. Do you know where that is right down the road? They were going to have all that residential because they didn't want to compete with the Eden Prairie Center. That was foolish of course because now they have good uses there. We had worked on that land for years. They have excellent uses there, including a bank, service station, other uses. They workjust fine. Eden Prairie Center's doing just fine. To have some of these services out here on the west end ofChanhassen will not hurt the city. It will be good for the city. You won't have to all truck downtown with more traffic on Highway 5 to get a sandwich or a good meal. We're trying to put out things here, limited things that we think will serve this area and that's what the list is. It's not here just to make a lot of money. We're trying to put the right things in the'right place at the right time. That's what we're trying to do. But all these restrictions you're throwing at us, it looks like we're the enemy and you're trying to restrict us from doing things so we don't make some mistake. We're not here to make mistakes. We're here to develop a fme industrial park cooperative with you. We may not be able to do it once we get these numbers together that we'll learn some of them, the basic ones tomorrow. We may have to say we can't do it. We just can't afford it. I'm sorry but that just may be the fact. All I ask folks is give us a chance to work cooperatively with you to make this work. And just one more tip. You shouldn't be talking about protecting downtown all the time because actually from a zoning standpoint that's illegal. You can't do zoning to create a captive market or to protect the market, isn't that right? You can't do that. You can't restrict free enterprise through zoning. You may have other reasons but don't keep saying that we want to preserve the uses downtown because there's some problems with that. 58 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 But be that as it may, we want to put the right things out here in the right place and the use that we worked out with your staff are the ones that we think will work. And just we want a chance to do it. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Roger Knutson: You can't use zoning to regulate competition. You can use it to concentrate uses where you think they should appropriately be and to separate incompatible uses. So if you for example believe that commercial uses should exclusively be in that circle around downtown, that would be, it might not be a good idea but it wouldn't be illegal either. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Well there's no question that we want to trend lightly on this. Councilman Mason. Councilman Mason: Yeah thanks for letting me track here. I think the point's well taken about whether we're being restrictive or not. This is preliminary PUD approval. I think they're hearing what we're saying loud and clear. And my personal feeling is, because this is preliminary and whatever they want to do has to come back to us beforehand, I think my personal feeling is that those added restrictions are not necessary on it. Because I think they're hearing what we're saying loud and clear and I guess the proofs of the putting will come later down the pike. Mayor Mancino: Okay, then let us go ahead and take the, we have a motion on the floor and a second and let us go ahead and vote on that. Councilman Berquist: No more discussion? Mayor Mancino: Well, we can have more discussion but we, and then we can call a question. Councilman Senn: I can amend it if you want. Councilman Berquist: Well I may wish to withdraw my second depending upon the answer I get from the applicant. Howard, Tom, Fred. Are the restrictions that Mark outlined in his motion, in your opinion, overly restrictive in terms of your ability to market the property? Mayor Mancino: Of course they're going to say yes. Councilman Berquist: Was that a dumb question? Mayor Mancino: Ask me that question and I can answer it for them. Howard Dahlgren: Chair? Mayor Mancino: Yes. Howard Dahlgren: With the exception of one item, we don't want two convenience stores and ifthe report says that, that we do not need that. One convenience store down on the corner will serve the market and there will not be two. Other than that the uses that we worked out with the staff very carefully over a long period of time, I believe what we have, what they've done there basically is what they did, we think is very well done and we can live with that. But to restrict it further, I don't understand the motive. 59 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Berquist: Can you understand the motive regarding restricting institutional? That we can then get to decide whether or not a non-profit comes in. Howard Dahlgren: I don't think we have much trouble with that in the sense that, whether it's non-profit or tax paying, I think there is an issue there for you. But we don't have so much trouble with that one because it's something that affects you and affects us as well, because we don't get the tax increment then either. And you get some $11 million worth of tax increment. We only get about 3, assuming we get it on every piece of property. But here again it's important that we have that. Councilman Berquist: So the net result is that then you can live with the motion that removes the institutional because it still leaves it open to separate action on our part. Howard Dahlgren: As long as it's open for separate action so we can both look at it objectively, that will serve. Councilman Senn: Rather than, why don't we say institutional, in parens tax exempt. Councilman Berquist: I don't think we can do that. Mayor Mancino: Just institutional. Just institutional. Councilman Senn: Okay. Mayor Mancino: Okay, let me make a friendly amendment to the motion and that is that we look at bank and clinic in both locations, Lots 1 and 2, Lot 1, Lots 1 and 4, Block 3. Lots I and 2, still only one gas convenience fast food. So it's Lot I or 2. And hotel restaurant, just one per lot. So the only thing that I'm making any changes is in allowing bank and clinics to stay in both commercial locations on those four lots. Which you had not wanted. Councilman Senn: But you're still restricting one restaurant? Mayor Mancino: Yes. And one hotel on Lots 1 or 4, Block 3. One gas convenience fast food on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. Is there a second to the amendment? Councilman Engel: I'll second. Mayor Mancino moved, Councilman Engel seconded an amendment to the motion including bank and health services as permitted uses; a hotel restaurant be permitted on either Lot 1, Block 3 or Lot 4, Block 4; and a convenience store with or without gas pumps be permitted on Lot 1 or Lot 2, Block 1 only. All voted in favor of the amendment and the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Mancino: Okay, the amendment carries. Now the original motion. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Berquist seconded preliminary approval of PUD #92-6 for an office/industrial business park and preliminary plat approval for 12 lots, two outlots and associated right-of-way subject to the following conditions: 60 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 l. The developer will be responsible for surface water management fees pursuant to ordinance. Staff has estimated the water quality fees at $528,255 and water quantity fees of $497, 127. Water quality credits will be given for the creation of on-site water quality ponds meeting NURP standards in accordance with the SWMP. Water quantity credits will also be given for payment of assessments and/or construction of trunk storm sewer lines. Final SWMP fees will be determined upon review of the final grading, drainage and construction plans with each phase ofthe project. Surface water management fees are only applicable to the lots being platted and not outlots. 2. The developer shall supply the City with an overall phasing plan of the grading including the amount of earthwork involved in each phase. 3. The grading plan shall be revised to incorporate the following items: a) Lot 1, Block 1 shall be revised to accommodate for a drive access over the easterly 40 feet of Lot 1, Block 1 to service the Wrase property. b) The proposed storm water pond at the northeast corner of 82nd Street West and the north/south street shall be reconfigured into a more north/south configuration to minimize tree loss and preserve natural slopes adjacent to the wetlands. c) The north/south street between Coulter Boulevard and the cul-de-sac street shall be realigned 50 to 75 feet westerly to reduce wetland impacts and give slope relief along the east side of the north/south street adjacent to the wetland/park property. d) MnDOT's review comments shall be incorporated into the final grading and development plan. e) The grading plan may need to be revised to insure predeveloped runoff rates are being maintained to Wetland C. 4. Preliminary and final plat approval shall be conditioned upon the City Council ordering public improvement project No. 97-1. Without the project, preliminary plat and/or final plat shall be void. 5. The developer should be responsible for extending sanitary sewer service to the Wrase parcel which lies directly north of Lot 1, Block 1 as a part of the overall site improvements with Phase I. 6. Depending on the amount of sanitary sewer discharge from Lot 3, Block 1, Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 may not be able to develop until Lot 3 is connected to permanent sewer facilities. 7. The installation of a temporary traffic signal and/or auxiliary turn lanes at the intersection of 8200 Street West and Trunk Highway 41 is required with Phase I development. The developer shall be responsible for a share of the local cost participation of this traffic signal on a percentage basis based upon traffic generation from full development of this site in relation to the total traffic volume on 8200 Street West. The developer shall also be responsible for future costs associated with the local share ofthe traffic signal to be installed at the north/south road at Trunk Highway 5. Financial security to guarantee the installation ofthese traffic improvements will be required from the developer in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow. 8. The street right-of-way width adjacent to Lot 4, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 3 shall be expanded to 100 feet wide to accommodate future turn lanes. 61 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 9. The east/west street will be restricted to a right-in/right-out only at Trunk Highway 41. All lots shall access onto interior streets and not Trunk Highways 41 or 5. 10. All public streets and utilities constructed by the developer shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications for the developer-installed public streets and utilities constructed by the developer will be required in conjunction with final platting for staff review and City Council approval. 11. The developer shall be required to enter into a PUD AgreementlDevelopment Contract with the City and provide a financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee site improvements. 12. The developer shall be responsible for the installation or costs associated with the installation of street lights. The City's standard street light along industrial/collector-type streets are 25-foot high corten steel street lights. Location of the street lights will be determined upon review of the final construction drawings. 13. Type ill erosion control fencing will be required adjacent to wetland areas. Additional erosion control fence may be necessary at the toe of steep slope areas and adjacent to storm water ponds after the grading has been completed. 14. The storm water ponds and/or temporary detention ponds shall be constructed in the initial grading phase to minimize erosion off-site. Erosion control blankets will be required on all slopes greater than 3: 1. Revegetation of the exposed slopes shall occur immediately after grading is completed. 15. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood fiber blanket or sod after completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 16. 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 construction begins and will charge the applicant $20 per sign. 17. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for IO-year and IOO-year storm events and provide ponding calculations for stormwater quality/quantity ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post-developed stormwater calculations for lO-year and IOO-year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins, created basin, and/or creeks. Individual storm sewer calculations between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. In addition, water quality ponding design calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model. 18. 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, 62 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Army Corps of Engineers and Minnesota Department of Transportation and comply with their conditions of approval. 19. Fire hydrants shall be incorporated per the Fire Marshal's recommendations. 20. The appropriate drainage and utility easements shall 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 should also be given for access for maintenance of the ponding areas. 21. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within the right-of-way except landscaping along the frontage road in accordance with the Trunk Highway 5 Corridor Study. 22. The lowest floor or opening elevation of all buildings shall be a minimum of 2 feet above the 100-year high water level. 23. Stormwater ponds must have side slopes of 10: I for the first ten feet at the normal water level and no more than 3: I thereafter or 4: I throughout for safety purposes. 24. 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. 25. Final grades adjacent to Trunk Highways 41 and 5 will be subject to review and approval of MnDOT for compatibility with the future widening of Trunk Highway 5. 26. Increase landscape plantings to include 400 trees in addition to buffer yard plantings and individual site plan landscaping. 27. A 10' clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, US West, Cable TV, and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. 28. Submit street names to Chanhassen Fire Marshal and Chanhassen Building Official for review and approval. 29. Existing structures on the property which may be demolished require a demolition permit. Proof of septic and well systems that are abandoned are required. 30. The permitted uses outlined on pages 7 and 8 of the staff report be amended as follows: Institutional be deleted. Hotel restaurant be permitted on either Lot 1, Block 3 or Lot 4, Block 4. Convenience store with or without gas pumps be permitted on Lot 1 or Lot 2, Block 1 only. Lot 5, Block 4, the intent of the City is that there be a major corporate user, or high end industrial with limited warehousing. 31. The issue over the parkland dedication be brought back before the Council with final recommendations and numbers for consideration and agreement by the Council. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. 63 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Now we move on to number 3 which is the wetland alteration permit. If you can go ahead with that. Councilman Senn: City Council approves Wetland Alteration Permit for Gateway Business Park subject to the conditions of preliminary PUD #92-6 approval. Mayor Mancino: Second please. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded that the City Council approves Wetland Alteration Permit for Gateway Business Park subject to the conditions of preliminary PUD #92-6 approval. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Councilman Senn: City Council approves interim use permit #97 -1 for Gateway West Planned Unit Development site subject to the following conditions, 1 through 16. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded that the City Council approves Interim Use Permit #97-1 for Gateway West Planned Unit Development site subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall provide the city with a letter of credit in the amount to be determined by the City Engineer based on earthwork quantities, maintenance of erosion control measures and site restoration. 2. The applicant shall pay the city a grading permit fee as required by the Uniform Building Code and pay for all city staff and attorney time used to monitor and inspect the grading operation. The inspection fees shall be computed at a rate of $30 per hour per person. 3. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permit requirements of the watershed district. 4. The applicant shall work with City staff in revising the proposed grading plan to an acceptable stormwater management plan in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan. Since the stormwater management plan for the subdivision has not been fully approved, the applicant's engineer shall provide an interim storm drainage and erosion control plan including but not limited to construction of temporary sediment basins in accordance with the City Best Management Practice Handbook in an effort to minimize erosion off the site. 5. Upon completion of the site grading, the applicant's engineer shall supply the City with a letter certifying that the grading has been completed in compliance with the proposed plan. 6. All site restoration and erosion control measures shall be in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. The applicant's engineer is encouraged to pursue acquisition of this handbook and to employ these said practices. A stockpile must be provided for the topsoil which will be respread on the site as soon as the excavation and site grading is completed. 64 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Topsoil and disc-mulched seeding shall be implemented immediately following the completion of the graded areas unless the City's Best Management Practice Handbook dictates otherwise. 7. Noise levels stemming from the operation are not to exceed Minnesota PCA or EPA regulations. If the City determined that there is a problem warranting testing, such tests shall be paid for by the applicant. 8. Hours of operation are limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and no work on national holidays or Sundays. Hours of operation on Saturdays are limited to 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. If complaints from residents are logged with city staff regarding Saturday operation, the hours shall be reviewed by the City Council. 9. The applicant shall construct and maintain gravel construction entrances during the grading operation. 10. All erosion control measures shall be installed prior to commencement of grading operations and be maintained until all disturbed areas have been fully restored. The applicant shall also be responsible for removal of all erosion control measures upon completion of site grading. The city engineer will determine the appropriate time and authorize the applicant to remove the erosion control measures. 11. The applicant shall notify the city engineer of all drainage tiles encountered during site grading. The city engineer shall determine the appropriate abandonment or rerouting of all existing draintile systems. 12. Additional Type I erosion control fence shall be used along the north perimeter of the site. Erosion control fence surrounding the wetlands shall be the City's Type III version. 13. This grading permit approval is conditioned upon the City authorizing public improvement project No. 97-1 to extend trunk utility service to the site. 14. The grading permit shall be conditioned on approval of the preliminary plat for the Gateway West Business Park PUD by the City Council. 15. The developer will be responsible for monitoring the effects from the construction activities and mitigating any such effects. 16. Grading into the tree line on the eastern portion of Lot 1, Block 2, shall not be permitted until a final development plan! site plan is approved for the Lot. All grading must remain outside of the tree canopy for this area." All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Councilman Senn: And let's see here, we have one left then. Roger Knutson: Preliminary plat. Kate Aanenson: a and b are combined on your agenda. That's why. 65 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Senn: I thought the only thing we had left to do was the interim use permit for permit site grading. Councilman Engel: We did that. You just read it. We just stamped it. Councilman Senn: Okay, that's the interim use permit. Kate Aanenson: A and B. We called it preliminary, it's the first reading. Same thing. WALNUT GROVE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF GALPIN BOULEVARD AND HIGHWAY 5: A. REQUEST FOR LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT FROM RESIDENTIAL-LOW DENSITY TO RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM DENSITY FOR THE NORTHERN 30+ ACRES OF THE PARCE: PUD REZONING FOR APPROXIMATELY 50 ACRES OF PROPERTY FROM A2. AGRICULTURAL ESTATE TO PUD-R. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL MIXED DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT: SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR 44 BUNGALOW HOMES AND 168 VILLA TOWNHOMES: PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT REQUEST OF 249 LOTS. 2 OUTLOTS AND ASSOCIATED RIGHT-OF-WAY. B. DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT FOR SITE GRADING. Bob Generous: Thank you Madam Mayor, Council members. ... four requests as part of this approval. The first one is a land use amendment. That's.. .lift the density up slightly to the northeast to preserve the open space around the Bluff Creek corridor and... The overall density of the development is actually less than would be permitted if they had.. . under their separate existing land use.. .permit this development to go forward and... Mayor Mancino: What's the overall density again? Bob Generous: The overall? It's 4.96 units...and 5.74... Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Bob Generous: The planned unit development and they're requesting preliminary and a first and second reading of the rezoning to permit the mixed density residential development that's before you know as Walnut Grove. It creates diversity of housing types within one development. The traditional single family detached housing on the north end that's transitioning from existing development to the north. The bungalow homes in the middle that.. .increase the density in the project. And then the townhomes on the south end of the development... The bungalow units.. . elevation with four exterior packages. The bungalow home is a new product for Rottlund and what it does is presents more of a residential feel to the front elevation. Instead of having just a garage door, now they have a porch area entryway and a... There also are opportunities to provide side loaded garages on the bungalow units and we are making it a condition of the approval that they provide additional. .. With that staff is recommending approval of the preliminary and final plat. The actual subdivision of this development. The construction plans that are being approved. .. based on a site grading of the development. They still need to come back with the... With that staff is recommending approval subject to the conditions of the staff report. .. I'd be happy to answer any questions. 66 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any questions for staff at this point? Is the applicant here and would you like to address the Council. Is this a Reverend or? Rick Murray: Madam Mayor, Council members. My name's Rick Murray. I think the last time you saw this project I think it was called Highlands. We had a conflict with one of our competitors to the north so we changed it. So we're Walnut Grove now. I think in this process the evolution that's created the PUD. There was a lot of input. There was a lot of input given from the City Council the last time we were here and I think this evening we'll keep this as brief as at all possible because the little information that you folks haven't seen that we did present to the Planning Commission a couple weeks ago, which is in direct response to some of the comments made at the last Council meeting that we were at and I think it is well worth sharing. The folks from Rottlund, Tim Whitten, will go through the new bungalow plan for your benefit, as opposed to the cottages that were described to you last time. The bungalows were a creation in response to the concern that this was a garage oriented neighborhood, and with the incorporation of the porches and the bungalows and the setback of the garages and some of the different things they can do to the garages now, which Tim will go into, I think you'll find very pleasing. Highway 5 views and the changing of the architecture and the orientation of the buildings were a big concern last time we were here. We have addressed that. We've added some additional landscaping. Down at the corridor. We've got some cross sections here this evening, and Rick maybe you can join me to show. This pertains to the two most southerly buildings. Down at Highway 5. There's a 12 unit building to the east and an 8 unit building to the west. And the cross sections that we did was in response to a concern raised at the Planning Commission because they wanted to know what portions of those buildings would be visible from Highway 5 corridor. Rick has come up with the cross sections. The easterly most building is protected from about the 9 or 10 foot level down from the view of the highway by a berm which will be landscaped. Westerly most building there is, because of the rise off of the frontage road, which would be future Arboretum Boulevard, it will come up to a retaining wall. That slope up to the retaining wall is to be landscaped. That's where we put most of the 12 foot evergreens that we're planting are along that slope to better break up that view of the lower portion of the unit. In addition to that, some of the things that Mr. Whitten will go into. Where the gab ling and the architectural renderings, the fronts of those two buildings, so that they would be different. Give you a different view and a different impact from the highway and I think you'll find that very pleasing. The landscaping was a big concern. It was a concern again at the Planning Commission. It's been a concern of our neighbors. We tried to address that. Again it was pointed out at the Planning Commission that once this property was rezoned, that it becomes a new zoning transition and once it's a PUD, this is all of medium density zoning and this is low density zoning. So this particular line would in fact qualify for what you call a buffer yard B in your ordinance. Now there are several buffer yard B descriptions in the ordinance. Because we have a required 50 foot setback on this property, it was a 30 foot buffer yard that we used for our calculations to determine the amount and quantity of the plantings that would go along the north boundary. We exceed those in every category. I can find them here if you like but they are exceeded. I think staff has recognized that they are exceeded. Our evergreens on this site, the standard. One of the concerns of the Council the last time we were here was that we not just do minimal plantings but that our plantings becomes more substantial and create something instantly. 75% of our evergreens on the site are 8 feet or larger. Your minimum in this city, or the minimum requirement in this city is 6 feet. So most of the evergreens we wanted larger. It gives you the most impact. The best impact initially and provides year round sheltering, or breaking of views. The Planning Commission wanted us to define where our common areas were. These common areas, we were requested to move the trail and prior to Planning Commission we were requested to move it north. In fact it has been moved south and that was the recommendation to you folks, that it either move north or south. It just didn't split the open space. The intent there was to get a larger area of open space that would be usable as opposed having a trail come right down the middle. We redesigned the 67 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 open space slightly...this graphic. There's a small mound in the middle which we are creating for a gazebo. The gazebo I believe is to be 16 feet square and it will be a gathering, centrally located space for residents to come. It's not going to be too close to the trail, but by the same token it won't be too far away from the trail. Along the trail we're also installing some shrubbery and plantings and the connection with the trees and the shrubbery and again shrubbery will be some benches placed for folks to sit as they're walking. Or starting their walk or finishing their walk, whichever they happen to be coming from. Another concern of the Planning Commission was one about parking spaces and the concern was well founded. We have an area in the villa which is labeled open space but has, it had parking spaces... Parking spaces that were to be more, have been removed. We haven't removed them from the site. We just placed them at different intervals. There's another graphic that can show you where they were placed, if you so desire to see that. I think with that, I will let Tim go through the presentation on his bungalows and the architectural changes. Then I'll come back to a couple concerns and clarifications I need in the staff report but I'll catch those when we finish up. Tim Whitten: Good evening. Thank you Rick. Madam Mayor. Members of the Council. I'm Tim Whitten with the Rottlund Company and also with me, Todd Stutz, President of our Minneapolis Division and Richard Palmiter who heads our Plan Development Department. I'm going to try to be brief. I'd like to get through this stuff as quickly as possible. I know you have most of the information in your packages. We'll talk about the bungalows first, which were really the cottages previously. And it's been a, oh I'm sorry. Oh, this is going to be tricky. I wasn't prepared for this. Okay. The bungalows are our alternative to the cottages and we were listening to all the comments from the staff and the Council and the Commission and the neighbors and were looking for a way to maybe redefine the product to fit everyone's interest but obviously the marketplace is a concern for us. Still targeted for empty nester. Still basically the same square footage, which is approximately 1,350 to about 2,000 square feet because we have a number of walkout lots and we have expansion opportunities in the lower levels of a lot of these units. But they're really targeted for the one level living where most of the living spaces are on that main floor. And also in the same price range that we had for the cottages, which is $140,000.00 to about $200,000.00. And what we've done is we really have widened the units. They used to be 32 foot wide. Now we made them 36 foot wide. It gave us an opportunity to bring the house forward. As you can see, the garages are either you know, square with the house or actually take a second position to the front of the house. We've promoted porches and entry stoops. We're even developing this product further where we're actually promoting it even more as we go through the development and try to get those porches in front of the garages. It really kind of sets the garages behind the scenes a little bit. We still have opportunities for side loads. But it's really the key differences of the 4 foot wider, try to make it look a little bit more like a single family than a townhome. Even though it's trying to be a little bit of both. And it allows us, with the design, to have the architecture to be more traditional and work more with our Village theme of kind of a New England village. We've taken that to the architectural design with the, also with the materials of adding just stone features and shakes and so forth and we've just now have developed the villas further to be able to get the same kind of a theme continuing. We still plan on 4 to 5 different plans of which we would have two elevations for each plan. And we have four color pallets of virtually with 40 units, or 44 rather on the site, with the reverses and the side load garage opportunities, every home could be different on this site so we've tried to make it as, create as much variety as possible. With that I'll kind of jump over to the. Oh wait, before I finish I guess there were questions at Planning Commission regarding what the rear elevation would look like. Again as we're continuing to develop these plans, we just took the plans that we have and just kind of showed what it might look on the back side. The fact that we have walkouts. We even have some look outs or kind of halfway between a walkout and a full basement plan. We have the full basement opportunities on some of the lots. We have porch options for these people. I mean there's just numerous different kinds of 68 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 variations that could happen on the rears of these homes and these are just kind of a sampling of what it might look like from the rear. Mayor Mancino: Tim, how many of these will be walkouts? Do you have any idea? Tim Whitten: Rick could probably answer that but I think that we're in at least 2/3 of them are walkouts. I think that's kind of in a general range. Three fourths? Mayor Mancino: Okay. And is the 140 to 200 with a finished walkout for 200? Tim Whitten: Yeah, that would be the range, and again. We're typically conservative in those numbers. You know so people, we give them lots of opportunities, with the number of options that we offer, that they could move it up and it's conceivable that it could break that $200,000.00 ceiling. With that I'll try to run through the.. .because we really have a lot of variety since the last time we met. Where we have the two different product types of the villas. We have the villa townhomes, of which there are 40 of those. And there's really two different building configurations of units where we have introduced 2 car garage, interior mixed with these, what we had previously presented. So we have a building here that's shown that all 2 car garages. And I didn't do that, did I? Do I need to stop... You won't even notice. I'll just keep going. And then we've also introduced, we also have the villa townhomes that is with single car garages. So that would be a different configuration... interior units. And then these also have opportunities for walkouts. So just within that grouping we have, and then also there's 4 unit buildings and 6 unit buildings so that we have a lot of variety that's happening in the row type of villa townhomes that we have. In the villas, we have two building types of which we have a 12 unit building which have single car garages. And we have really redesigned this product where we have designed the end units to be totally different. We have addressed the ends or the side elevations of these buildings totally different than we ever have before where we're actually creating front doors on the sides as opposed to being you know all the orientation of garages and entries all being on the long portions of the units and all facing in the same direction. We've actually turned the end units to kind of face on the opposite ends of the building. And allows us to have more of a, you know kind of a traditional front entry. Almost a side load garage on the other side. It also allows us to do more things with the roof and be a little bit more playful with that. We have a stacked building type which is... Mayor Mancino: Tim, are you going to be more playful with color also than with the Mission Hills, etc.? Tim Whitten: Yes. What we're presenting right now, or I guess proposing at this stage is that within the villas there are really three color pallets. There are three colors that work. Mayor Mancino: Are they all tones of gray or are they really three different colors? Tim Whitten: Well there's one that, they still relate to each other. One's more ofa tan. One's a clay color and one's a gray color. But they all, and I don't know how to say it but they kind of, they work well together. They don't have such a broad range where one's very pink and one's something you know else... They really work very well together. And we're not quite sure exactly how it should be arranged and what's the best. When we have all these different building types now. Do we put the colors in, that's associated to each different building type? Do we do it in groups of maybe five different clusters of color groups? And something that we'd kind of like to work with staff to see if there's a good combination. But we're going to have, you know three different building types in the villa townhomes. Two different building types. I'm going to show you alternative elevations with the different colors. I mean there's even more variety happening that we've ever had in any project that we've done before. 69 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 And so we have an elevation here that has, as you can see, the theme is continuing with the shake and the stone and so forth so we're continuing as opposed to going Victorian and mixing it up with Cape Cod. We're kind of staying with the same kind of villa concept. Again this is the 8 unit building. They have 2 car garages. So we have different building masses and different configurations to create the variety. Since we presented this to the Planning Commission, there was a request that we've also heard from you Madam Mayor about variety that we have created an alternative elevation for the villas. Since the Planning Commission where we've taken, and again it's in your package in color and I apologize we didn't get a chance to put color on this. Before we've taken this 12 unit building and we put a hip roof on it and we put in some different kind of... columns for entry detail. We've moved the.. . around a little bit. We've gone from lap siding, or shakes to lap. Tried to create a little different feel to those units and on the site plan, if! can find it.. .there's been a lot of talk about the image of the site from Highway 5. Here we have...which different configurations and all 2 car garages. Here we have a 12 unit building that has a different configuration. We've now introduced an alternative elevation that's different than most ofthese...basically in these three buildings. They all have a little different look. And they could be all different colors too, if that's the appropriate thing to do. But that's something that I think you know maybe the colors, it could be a cluster. .. creating the little different groupings of color variations. As you can see that we are trying to incorporate a number of different architectural elements and materials and colors as threads of consistency to development and still trying to keep the variety. And we also have the gazebo that's... Just an image of what we're looking at for the gazebo and again it's a carry over of the same theme that's running through the development and monumentation. And just for a final note, all that I've shown you is going to be under an association. Homeowners association and all the landscaping and all the monumentation and the gazebos and everything you've seen is all going to be maintained under an association. And I'll answer any questions if you have any for me. Mayor Mancino: Great. What's your lighting look like to go with all this? Tim Whitten: Well that's a really good question. I don't know. I should have a board on that, shouldn't 1. We haven't addressed the lighting quite yet. Mayor Mancino: Any questions for Tim at this point? No questions. Thank you. Pretty exciting. Is there anyone else addressing us now? Rick Murray: We're here to answer any questions the Council may have. Mayor Mancino: Does Council have any questions at this point for the applicant? No questions? Councilman Berquist: Well, the only difference I remember significantly was that there was talk about providing the Hennessy's with access and I see that that has changed somewhat on there. And that's not really a question for Rottlund as much as it's a question for you Rick. Rick Murray: Councilman Berquist. I think the access, I'll start his over again. The Hennessy's access has switched back and forth through time. I think this represents the latest access for the Hennessy's since March, when we were here in March. There was a couple proposals that have different lines for roads but this really hasn't changed since we went to the 247 unit scenario I believe. Am I wrong John? John Hennessy: That's essentially correct. Councilman Berquist: Okay. So this provides him access and everything's fine.l 70 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Rick Murray: And the documents for the association will be drafted in such a manner to insure that he has free access to that... Councilman Berquist: Does it include lawn care as well? Mayor Mancino: Can you put that back on please Nann. Can you talk a little bit about the conservation easement that's adjacent to Bluff Creek, where we have our density transfer, and what goes on around there to get in this area, just.. . and pedestrian friendly to get people to come over here. To this area. I mean what's going to draw them there. What's going to, because it's going to be a trail in that area, correct? Rick Murray: The termination of the trail, I guess to the best of my knowledge it wasn't decided whether we were going to go kind of... Not necessarily even on, within the conservation area, unless that's changed. Okay. This particular trail is actually to get you along the new service road. Arboretum Boulevard. It ties into the trail that we would have. " this sidewalk does continue. So our system ties in like this to that system. The conservation easement won't allow.. .or the homeowners association to do anything within the affected area. With the exception of maintaining the plantings that we were building and that's another small difference... Mayor Mancino: Okay. Yeah it looked different and I was wondering if there were going to be park benches there or anything. Rick Murray: There are two ponds where on the landscape plan, because the disk that we gave them, we kept updating the disk and. .. They never changed the disk to incorporate the two ponds in the landscape plan. There will be the bypass, the underpass that goes across to the school and community center. That will come out probably to the west side... with some sort of cloverleaf system.. .get people back up to the trails and this trail. The wetland that is at the north end of this two pond system will be left intact as will moving everything this direction. And Madam Mayor, there's nothing here that would really encourage people to come there. There's going to be a great vista across and into this area, across the top of these two wetlands. But actually inviting people in, it hasn't been our intent. Mayor Mancino: I was just thinking about benches or something else going in there. Rick Murray: The benches that we were talking about were on the main traiL.. Kate Aanenson: It might be a transit...We looked at that with the Highway 5 corridor. 80 foot right-of- way, and there may be an opportunity for. .. Mayor Mancino: A little coffee stand. Drive in coffee stand. Rick Murray: You know the road's coming down so to the east the property would be... I don't know that we want that transit area right here at that intersection. Or too close to it anyway. Blocking the sight lines. But there are some opportunities there for that and we have been in touch with Southwest Metro. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Is there anyone here tonight wishing to address the City Council on this issue? On this project. Who's been sitting and sitting here. Kevin Joyce: Well I'm the Planning Commission liaison so this worked out. This dove tailed real nicely. Kevin Joyce, 2043 Brinker Street. I guess it's appropriate we're sitting at 11 :30 at night 71 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 discussing this. We've done this a couple times before but I think it's well worth it and it's been a long and windy road. I won't make it any longer or windier. Basically the developer has a sensitive parcel of land here. He had to deal with the Bluff Creek watershed. He had to deal with our past history as far as the neighborhood's concerned. Certainly John Hennessy's property had to come into consideration. Highway 5 corridor. So he had a lot of things to consider and had to come up with a lot of compromises. I know you folks got involved in this situation. We had a lot of meetings with you. Staff got involved and I really think with that cooperative effort we have a wonderful project here. I'm really very proud of it. We had the road issue, which you came up with a very imaginative way of dealing with that road that right now everyone in the neighborhood's very happy with. Another real nice concept that came out of this whole thing were the bungalows. You know that was something that I feel you kind of tailor made for this project. Something hopefully we'll see more of in Chanhassen because you know we didn't like the, what was the other? Cottages as well as these bungalows and I think the bungalows are going to work real nicely. So it might be something future plans for Chanhassen. So I know our neighborhood was particular. Maybe a little demanding, suggestive, what have you, but I think the result is something we should be proud of. I'm very happy. Applaud everybody that's been involved in it. There was only one question. Somebody asked me a question and I have to pose it is the concern about construction traffic. That isn't any problem at all, is it? That we'd have construction traffic going through the neighborhood or anything like that. Mayor Mancino: Well I think at one time people were concerned or the neighborhood was concerned about the Walnut Curve, yeah, what is going to happen with the name ofthe streets? You're going to have Walnut Curve that goes into Windmill Drive. How does that work? How does one street become a new name? ...street names don't we? Charles Folch: . ..Public Safety... Kate Aanenson: One of the other questions about construction traffic. I believe there was a condition that no construction.. . Mayor Mancino: Windmill Drive. Kevin Joyce: Yeah, we want to make sure that that doesn't happen. So I just wanted to make that statement. Thank you all very much. Appreciate it. Mayor Mancino: Thank you Kevin. Anyone else wishing to address the Council? Please, do so. John Hennessy: Hennessy. Galpin. Chan. Mayor Mancino: No, you've already spoken before tonight. You can't speak again. John Hennessy: Okay. This has made a lot of progress. Right now our concerns are down in this area here. I'd still like to see some more landscaping as we are still kind of. . . very visible from us. .. .landscaping down here. Mayor Mancino: As there is on the northern part between the low density and the medium density, okay. John Hennessy: Ifwe could get some more landscaping down in here, that would be good. I'm concerned about, I know that there is hours of construction within the documents. How this is going to be developed. It'd be nice if the earlier stages would have the work around us and perhaps the north 72 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 section completed early on to minimize whatever...minimize whatever... We have a cooler than normal and drier than normal summer, as is predicted, then this is going to be a dust bowl as they're grading all this and if s just going to come washing back over us so I don't know if they've got any plans for watering this down, if it gets to a certain level of dryness. You're going to experience that over at your home with the construction going on. Mayor Mancino: It's the noise that will get you. Excuse me. Is there anything Charles that we ask developers to do normally about that? I mean how do you keep the dust down? Councilman Senn: If you find a way, let us know. Charles Folch: Where we run into problems with the...where they're working on construction of the road development and things like that.. .mass grading. It's a fine line because the time.. . adding too much water makes a problem on the other end of the scale but I guess we just have to keep an eye on it. We don't really have any particular requirements. . . but we do for construction of the road. Mayor Mancino: Okay, that's what I wanted to know. So you mayor may not have dust. John Hennessy: I know I'm going to have significant dust. These have been farm fields for... whenever he tills them, you get them all. I mean for the 3 or 4 days that he's out there tilling and disking and all that. Mayor Mancino: Well we could have all the construction work go on in the winter months. I suppose we could ask for that. John Hennessy: It'd be tough. Also I'm.. . comments at the Planning Commission also about.. .238 units coming out of a road still seems just a little on the heavy side and I don't care what you say about Mission Hills, Galpin Boulevard is a very, very busy street. Mayor Mancino: Busier and busier. Rick, what is your, at this point, phasing in the project? I mean where are you going to start? The whole thing? Rick Murray: There is no... Mayor Mancino: Okay. And how long will that take you? To grade the whole site and give him the roads and. Rick Murray: The grading operation is about... Mayor Mancino: Are you going to start on the northern part or the southern part? Rick Murray: This will be... first and because the construction. .. this connection to this street probably will be one of the last things. That will help discourage that cut through. This road... This at least to this point... If we were fortunate to have a dry fall, then the rest of the... The restoration and seed will be done right after the grading is finished so we'll be restoring the mass graded portion of the site in early August. Mayor Mancino: You can do it that fast? 73 City Council Meeting - May 27,1997 Rick Murray: We want to start June or July. The grading operation will take about that long. ... started in the meantime, utilities have to start from this comer and come this direction and then pick up, we pick up some sewer and water...and bring it there as well. This road will be graded initially so these folks can start. .. .so we don't get in each other's way. The inconvenience here should be initial. Hopefully there's no... John Hennessy; The other concern is we'll probably need to get the utilities to me early on also. Rick Murray: That's definitely a concern we have. John Hennessy: My well is right up here where the road is. Mayor Mancino: Your well is where? Excuse me. Rick Murray: The well is just off of the right-of-way. Mayor Mancino: Not on your property? John Hennessy: No... Rick Murray; So getting him sewer and water quickly. Mayor Mancino: Is important, yes. John Hennessy: Thank you. Mayor Mancino: You're welcome. And Rick, do you have any problem with adding more buffer between the Hennessy's and the townhomes? Rick Murray: Actually what I'd like to do is we'd like to see where we're at. I don't have any problem per se doing that. The buffer yard B, we would adhere to. That is a low density and we are rezoned medium density. So no, I'd adhere to that buffer yard. I think though we might be close already. That's what we found out when we went to the north is we were already really close and we added 50 some shrubs up here... That is one ofthe concerns though that we wanted to go through. Rick Sathre: I think.. .John's property is medium zone too. That line cuts across... John Hennessy: Well I'm guided for medium density. My southerly most 25... Rick Murray: John, that's right. Your 319 feet from here down... Mayor Mancino: Well we'll just put that in a condition that you work with staff and John to figure out the buffer that would work for everyone. Okay. Thank you. Anybody else wishing to address the City Council on this project? Okay, bring it back to Council. Councilman Senn. Councilman Senn: I'd be happy to make the motion, unless somebody has something else. Mayor Mancino: Is there any other Council member who has some comments? Questions? 74 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Engel: No questions. I just think the neighbors and Rick have done a hell of a job negotiating this thing out. I'm glad they did it. Let's move forward. Use it as a model. Mayor Mancino: Yeah, I would like to say that too. That I'm very, very happy with the bungalows over the cottage homes. There's no question that it gives us a different housing product here that we like seeing. It's more neighborly. It's more neighborhoody I guess is what I want to say versus the cottage homes that I've seen. Councilman Senn: Keep them out ofChanhassen. Those hoody's. Mayor Mancino: The who? Councilman Senn: The hoody's. Mayor Mancino: The hoody's. Well but these are life cycle hoody's so I think that's good. Go ahead Mr. Senn. Yes Rick. Rick Murray: I'm sorry. There are a couple clarifications that I would like, if you could bear with me just a moment. On page 25 in your packet. I'm not exactly sure where we got the item number 1 underneath recommendations. There's a list of lots that will be side loaded bungalows. The preliminary plat that's in your packet coincides with most of them, but not all of them. The final plat that we've presented coincides with some of them but not all of them. I'm just trying to find out which ones we've got to side load. Mayor Mancino: The ones that are numbered here is what I'm assuming. Rick Murray: Okay. There's a couple that can't be from that number on either plat. Councilman Engel: They can work that out. Can't staff work this out? Councilman Senn: Have you guys talked about this? Rick Murray: There were a couple oflots that changed at the Planning Commission meeting. I'm not sure that they were reflected here. One of the things that we added was the ability to, 21 and 25 do not fit, do they? I don't think there's any way I can side load 21 or 25. Councilman Senn: Okay, and those are the two changes. Are all the others okay? Rick Murray: Those are the two no's. On the final plat, 31 should be 32. 44 should be 45. And 14, Block 3 should be 15, Block 3. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Rick Murray: On page 26. 8 and 10, both deal with this prairie grass area. We have no problem doing a native grass area on the site. As a matter of fact I think it'd be very beautiful and in a site that is located there between Hennessy's and our empty nester products. It's going to be in a location where it will be appreciated. The concern I have is the recommendations that we have for developing this call for burning it. I'd like the liberty here, two liberties. One, we will do the best efforts and get the best materials we can to do a mowed prairie, native grass section. Ifwe have to bum this, I mean I can't even 75 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 get a burning permit to bum my trees here. And when I put 25 residents around an area and the smoke that it's going to generate to even do a controlled bum, I don't think it's going to be very happy. Mayor Mancino: Why don't we let you and staff work that out because you know, most of the prairie plantings that you do or restoration, absolutely you have to bum. You can't mow it. It doesn't work. Then it's not a true prairie so why don't you work that out with staff and we'll just go ahead and we'll put that statement on. But to do a prairie, if that's what the intent. Rick Murray: And then the second part of, see I think that's the answer Madam Mayor. The second part of my request then is, if we can't establish it within the 3 or 4 year period that they say this should be established by mowing, that we can sod it or do something else. That we can do something else with it and it won't tie up my landscape bond forever and ever and ever because it hasn't gotten established. So that I'd like the liberty to work with staff on. Mayor Mancino: Okay. But I just want to direct staff and say, I'd like the prairie as. Rick Murray: I like the idea. I just. Mayor Mancino: Let's figure out how to do it. Okay. Rick Murray: On page 30, number 43. I would like that to read, as per the landscape plan. That deals with the additional berming, or buffering that we've already done on the resubmitted landscape plan. Mayor Mancino: As per the landscaping plan dated what? Bob Generous: It's the one that's in the Be. Rick Murray: And the last item is maybe one for Don. Unfortunately Don's not here but someone was nice enough to fax me a copy of this GIS. Kate Aanenson: That's the next item. Rick Murray: Which is the next item on your agenda. And I understand it's a fee for updating the city computers, although we supply you guys with a disk. That maybe not the right format. One concern I have is the County charges me the same fee for updating the computer with the same GIS. And at one point in time it was my understanding that either the County or the City was going to do this and there would be a fee for updating everyone's maps and software but just once. I got my plans checked, back from the County last week so I could submit them here. I paid the fee at the County. It was $5.00 per lot. I don't, the County possibly do things 20, or 80% cheaper than the City. Well anyway, this proposal here is $25.00 a lot and it seems to me if we're upgrading the same kinds of systems, that somebody could share and maybe the County could share. Mayor Mancino: Or maybe the County isn't really getting their true costs out of it. I don't know but. Rick Murray: Okay. But that's something that's not an ordinance yet but it's been put in the fees that they would like me to pay with my plat. Mayor Mancino: Bob, did you give us the landscape plans dated when? 76 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Bob Generous' answer was not picked up by the microphone. Mayor Mancino: So it's 5-12-97. Okay. The revised landscape plan. Councilman Senn: Okay, how about City Council approves the land use plan amendment #96-2 LUP amending the northerly 30.14 acres from residential low density to residential medium density to permit the proposed development known as Walnut Grove. Mayor Mancino: Second please. Councilman Engel: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded that the City Council approve the Land Use Map Amendment #96-2 LUP, amending the northerly 30.14 acres from Residential-Low Density to Residential-Medium Density to permit the proposed development known as Walnut Grove. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Councilman Senn: City Council grants preliminary and final approval for PUD #96-4 for a mixed density residential development rezoning approximately 50 acres from Agricultural Estate District, A2 to Planned Unit Development Resident, PUD-R. Roger Knutson: And waiving second reading? Councilman Senn: Second reading. Roger Knutson: Waiving second reading. Councilman Senn: Waiving second reading. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded that the City Council grants preliminary and final approval for PUD #96-4 for a mixed density residential development rezoning approximately 50 acres from Agricultural Estate District, A2 to Planned Unit Development Resident, PUD-R and to waive second reading. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Councilman Senn: The City Council approves a Site Plan #96-14 for 168 townhouse units and 44 cottage homes, site plan prepared by Steve Berquist dated 4/4/97, subject to the following conditions. You did catch that. I wondered if you would. Change Stevie to Sathre, sorry. And then in item I change to Lots 19. Strike 21,25. Change 31 to 32. 43 leave the same. 44 changes to 45. And 14 changes to 15. End of motion. Mayor Mancino: A second please. Councilman Engel: Second. 77 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded that the City Council approves Site Plan #96-14 for 168 townhouse units and 44 cottage homes, site plan prepared by Sathre-Berquist, dated 4/4/97, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall incorporate side entry garages for the bungalow homes on Lots 19,32,43, and 45, Block 2 and Lot 15, Block 3. 2. The applicant shall incorporate three exterior siding selections for the villa townhomes and four exterior siding selections for the bungalow homes, stamped received April 23, 1997. 3. No two adjacent bungalow homes may have the same elevations and exterior siding selections. 4. The applicant shall make minor adjustments to villa homes adjacent to Highway 5 to increase architectural detail. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Councilman Senn: City Council grants preliminary and final plat approval for Walnut Grove subject to the following conditions listed as 1 through 47 and with the following changes. On number 8, to be worked out with staff and developer. On number. Mayor Mancino: 10 also. Councilman Senn: What? Mayor Mancino: Also 10 to be worked out with staff. Councilman Senn: Oh, 10 also? Okay. On number 43, as per landscape plan dated 5/12/97. I think that's it. Mayor Mancino: Second please. Councilman Engel: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded that the City Council grants preliminary and final plat approval for Walnut Grove subject to the following conditions: 1. The dedication of a public trail easement through the east/west commons area from Highlands Boulevard east to the property limit. Construction of an 8 ft. asphalt trail within this easement. The applicant is to be reimbursed for material costs involved in constructing the trail from the city's trail fund. 2. Payment of full park and trail fees per city ordinance. 3. The development of a "commons" within the plat. 78 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 4. The developer shall relocate the trail northward or southward within the open area, staying out of the drainage swale area, to expand the gathering space/public space and make a more useable play area. 5. The applicant shall work with Southwest Metro Transit to incorporate a transit component within the development potentially providing land and/or funding assistance for a bus shelterlbus cut-out. 6. Landscape species must be selected from Big Woods species list in Bluff Creek Management Plan. Change some of the proposed Ash to American linden as indicated on the plant schedules. 7. Tree protection fencing shall be installed around all trees to be preserved on site prior to commencing grading activities. 8. Staff and the applicant shall work together regarding this condition. Vegetation restoration plan for the slope leading down from road to wetland in southwest corner must be developed. Provide seed mix information for slope down to Bluff Creek and management plan and planting plan for prairie restoration. 9. The applicant shall work with staff to relocate 10 evergreen scheduled to be planted along Boulevard near pond and Bluff Creek to the north property line between Windmill Run and Walnut Grove. 10. Staff and the applicant shall work together regarding this condition. Incorporate prairie areas in open north of the four unit villa blocks on the west side of Village Boulevard. The prairie areas shall have a detailed planting and management plan submitted with the overall landscaping plan for the development prior to recording the final plat approval. The management plan will identify responsibility for the areas and outline maintenance practices to be followed during the establishment period and beyond. Revise the size of the prairie to allow for mown edge on the west side. Provide management plan and planting plan for prairie restoration. 11. Submit soils report to the Inspections Division. This should be done prior to issuance of any building permits. 12. Submit streets names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division for review prior to final plat approval. Submit proposed street names for private streets 200 feet or more in length. All private roads and a number of smaller driveway accesses will be required to have street names. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for which streets will need to be assigned street names. Street names must be submitted to both Chanhassen Fire Marshal and Chanhassen Building Official for review and approval. No parking fire lane signs will be required to be installed on private roads and roads leading to driveway accesses. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy # 06-1991. 13. Street and utility service shall be extended to the Hennessy's east property line. A 45 foot wide drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated over the utilities on the final plat. The development's covenants shall provide cross access easements in favor of the Hennessy parcel for ingress and egress over the private streets within the development. 14. 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 79 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 developments. The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and formal approval in conjunction with final plat submittal. 15. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 16. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and utility plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council approval prior to the final plat being recorded. The private streets shall be constructed to support 7 -ton per axle design weight in accordance with the City Code 20-1118 "design of parking stalls and drive aisles". 17. 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 construction begins and will charge the applicant $20 per sign. 18. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for lO-year and 100-year storm events and provide ponding calculations for stormwater quality/quantity ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post-developed stormwater calculations for 100-year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins, created basin, and/or creeks. Individual storm sewer calculations between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. In addition, water quality ponding design calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model. 19. The applicant shall enter into a PUD agreement/development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. 20. 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. 21. The applicant shall include a drain tile system behind the curbs to convey sump pump discharge from units not adjacent to ponds or wetlands. 22. The appropriate drainage and utility easements shall 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 should also be given for access for maintenance of the ponding areas.. 23. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within the right-of-way except landscaping along the frontage road in accordance with the Trunk Highway 5 Corridor Study. The berm proposed on Lot 18, Block 2 behind Lots 19 and 20 shall be redesigned so it is not situated over the proposed storm sewer. 24. The lowest floor or opening elevation of all buildings shall be a minimum of2 feet above the 100- year high water level. 80 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 25. Stormwater ponds must have side slopes of 10: 1 for the first ten feet at the normal water level and no more than 3: 1 thereafter or 4: 1 throughout for safety purposes. 26. 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. 27. The applicant shall be given credit for installing the 12-inch trunk watermain from Windmill Drive to Arboretum Boulevard. The credit shall be for the construction cost difference between an 8-inch and a 12-inch water line. 28. Direct access to all lots shall be restricted to the interior streets and not onto Galpin Boulevard or Arboretum Boulevard. 29. The southerly stormwater pond on Outlot A shall be oversized to accommodate runoff from the future Arboretum Boulevard in addition to the site runoff. SWMP credits will be given for oversizing this pond. 30. Final grades adjacent to Arboretum Boulevard will be subject to review and approval of MnDOT for compatibility with the future widening of Trunk Highway 5/Arboretum Boulevard. 31. The developer shall work with City staff in reducing the encroachment of the retaining wall into the right-of-way along Walnut Curve (Lot 1, Block 1). If there are no feasible alternatives the developer shall enter into an encroachment agreement with the City. 32. The cul-de-sac proposed to serve Lots 37 through 40, Block 2 shall be redesigned to accommodate fire truck turning movements. 33. Provide a 1" = 200' scale plan of the subdivision to the Inspections Division showing all streets, driveways, property lines and building outlines. 34. A 10' clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, US West, Cable TV, and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. 35. No burning permits for trees removed will be issued. Any downed trees will have to be chipped on site or hauled off site. 36. An additional 1 to 2 fire hydrants will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of additional hydrant(s). 37. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy # 29-1992. (Copy enclosed). Additional number ranges will be required on the building ends adjacent to main arterial roads. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location and size of letters. 38. When fire protection including fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for water protection is required to be installed, such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during 81 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 the time of construction. Pursuant to 1991 Uniform Fire Code Section 10.502. 41. The following setbacks shall be established within the Walnut Grove development: Lots 1 - 14, Block 1, front 30 ft, rear 30 ft., side 10 ft. Lots 1 - 3, Block 2, front 30 ft., rear 30 ft., side 10 ft. Lots 4 - 17, Block 2, front 30 ft., rear 25 ft., side 10ft. Lots 1 - 4, Block 3, front 30 ft., rear 30 feet, side 10 ft. Setback from Galpin Boulevard: 50 ft. Setback from Village Boulevard: 30 ft. 42. Water Quality and Quantity fees will be based in accordance with the City's SWMP. The requirement for cash in lieu of land and pond construction shall be based upon a schedule in accordance with the proscribed land use zoning. The water quantity and quality fees will be calculated by staff upon review and approval ofthe utility construction plans. The fees will be payable to the city prior to the recording of the final plat. 43. The applicant shall provide additional screen between the proposed development and the existing development to the north per the landscape plan dated 5/12/97. 44. The developer may commence site grading after final plat approval and prior to recording the final plat conditioned upon the developer entering into a development contract with the city and providing financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee erosion control measures, grading and site restoration. 45. The final plat shall be revised as follows: a) On the dedication sheet the dedication of the public streets needs to be clarified. Staffwill be working with the applicant's surveyor to resolve this issue. b) On the dedication sheet the signature line for the City Manager needs to be changed from Administrator to City Manager. c) On the final plat the street named Village Boulevard shall be changed to a name acceptable to Public Safety. d) The final plat needs to dedicate drainage and utility easements over the proposed utilities from the private street sections of the plat. The developer should also be aware that should additional easements be required upon review of the final construction plans and specifications, the developer will be responsible for providing them on the final plat documents. 46. The grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be revised to include lot and block numbers. 47. Final plat approval is contingent upon formal approval of the construction plans and specifications by the City Council." All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. 82 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Senn: Approve PUD Agreement Development Contract for Walnut Grove, Project No. 97- 13. However changing the fee thing ifthey've already paid it to the County, that they don't have to pay it to the City and he should work that out with Mr. Ashworth. Mayor Mancino: Second please. Councilman Engel: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve the POO AgreementlDevelopment Contract dated May 27,1997 conditioned upon the following: 1. The applicant shall enter into the PUD Agreement/Development Contract and supply the City with a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of$I,195,150. And pay an administration fee of $147,026.00. 2. The applicant shall work with the City Manager to determine if the GIS fee has already been paid to the County, that it not be required to be paid to the City. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. CITY CODE AMENDMENT REOUIRING DEVELOPERS TO REIMBURSE THE CITY FOR UPDATING CITY BASE MAPS. GIS DATA BASE FILES & CONVERTING PLAT AND RECORD DRAWINGS INTO ELECTRONIC FORMAT. FIRST READING. Councilman Senn: I move that we table until we find out from Don what's going on between the City and the County and how we're going to work this? Roger Knutson: You might want to consider approving first reading because then you have to bring it back for second reading and then you can get any information you want. Mayor Mancino: Staff report first. Councilman Senn: We don't need a staff report. Move to approve first reading. Mutiny here Mayor. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Actually seriously, may I have a motion please. Councilman Senn: I already did. Do you want me to be repetitive? Councilman Engel: I'll move approval. Mayor Mancino: May I have a second? Councilman Senn: Second. Councilman Engel moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve first reading of City Code Amendment requiring developers to reimburse the City for updating City Base Maps, GIS Data Base Files and Converting Plat and Record Drawings into Electronic Format. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. 83 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: Mayor Mancino: Now let's pull out Council presentations for updates and the Consent Agenda. TH 101 update. Councilman Senn: Well Don's not here so I assume we can't do that tOl1lght Mayor Mancino: Well let me ask Todd. Todd Gerhardt: Charles. Mayor Mancino: Okay, Charles. TH 10 1 update. Charles Folch: I did partake ofa meeting with, a multi agency meetll1g b~t 1 almost rather go through this issue when you're done with the agenda Mayor Mancino: Okay, that'd be fine. Let's go on with the DahlIn update Todd Gerhardt: Mr. Dahlin has secured financing up to $440,000.00 of baci working with the County and looking at options at how they can gap finance The County Auditor's office is getting and opinion from the County AudllO:-, and concerns regarding that gap financing... Mayor Mancino: Does this repay any loans to the city that he had? Todd Gerhardt: The payments to the loan.. .after closing. He has to sIgn u they have to bring the loan current. Right now they're looking for 570JIIII j Councilman Senn: And then it didn't close as promised I'm assummg'! Todd Gerhardt: It did not close as promised. Councilman Berquist: What's in there for penalties? Out of 510, ho\\ 1;1~: ~ Todd Gerhardt: ...$250,000.00 I think. Councilman Berquist: 50% of it is penalties? Councilman Engel: It's been 8 years. Councilman Senn: It goes up fast when it goes out that many years. Councilman Berquist: How much of it was interest? Todd Gerhardt: I don't remember. I handed out a sheet. Councilman Senn: Interest is generally quite cheap compared to penalties 84 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you Todd for the update. Holasek Nursery. About the sand. Kate Aanenson: Staff did follow up on that. It's an agricultural use... Mayor Mancino: Well we all received a copy of the letter about the noise. Yeah. Councilman Senn: So there's absolutely nothing we can do as far as enforcement of the noise ordinance or anything? Councilman Berquist: Do you know the address ofthat landowner? Was it Timberwood? Mayor Mancino: In Stone Creek. Councilman Senn: It is, hang on a second. Mayor Mancino: I left a voice mail for them twice and haven't heard. Councilman Berquist: Renaissance Court? Kate Aanenson: .. . agricultural.. . but we did follow up on it. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you very much. Let's go back to the Consent Agenda and pull the items. CONSENT AGENDA: D. APPROV AL OF BILLS. Councilman Senn: I pulled it. It's too late. I'm too tired. I'm not going to argue about it. Somebody else can pass the motion on it. I'm voting no. Councilman Mason: Move approval of the bills. Mayor Mancino: Can I have a second please? Councilman Engel: Second. Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve the bills as presented. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn and Councilman Berquist who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2. G. APPROVAL OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT. KMC. Councilman Berquist: I had one simple question that Donald probably could have answered. I also would like a better explanation. I can probably get that from him some other time. The only question that I had is he makes reference, a rather obscure reference to reduce telecommunications costs about 20% to 25%. I wondered about that. But I also wonder what this means. Is this the first of many? Is the first of many? And we have nothing that we can say or do or do about it except approve. 85 City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Senn: We have to let them all into the right-of-way. I mean that's contrary to what I was .. .... ....~ hearin~ before. City Council Meeting - May 27, 1997 Councilman Senn: Well let's sort of find all, move to table. Councilman Berquist: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to table approval of a gambling permit to sell pull tabs at the 4th of July Celebration to the Chanhassen Lions Club. All voted in favor and the motion carried. I. APPROVAL OF ADDITIONAL FUND CLOSINGS & TRANSFERS. 1996. Councilman Berquist: I move to table. Councilman Engel: Second. Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Engel seconded to table approval of additional fund closings and transfers. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Mancino: We'll just put these back on the next consent agenda and have, there is absolutely no question that it certainly helps us having a work session before the City Council meeting and so I think we may want to think through on January 2nd, EDA meetings. When they are. They now are before our City Council meetings which didn't. Councilman Berquist: January, I'm not waiting that long. Mayor Mancino: Didn't work out. June 2nd. Councilman Senn: Well the other thing we might do is consider setting a set time frame for some of them. I mean the reason we ran into trouble, and I guess we let one item take an hour which was absolutely unnecessary to have it take an hour. And so maybe what we should do is get a little more pushy in terms of saying, here. You've got an item and you've got 20 minutes. Ifit doesn't get done, come back the next meeting. Councilman Engel: Yep, I think that makes a lot of sense. Councilman Senn: I mean assign a time element to it and just make it clear to them. Ifwe don't get through it in that time period. Mayor Mancino: Bring your calendars for a visioning meeting June 2nd and we'll decide then when we're going to do it. Councilman Senn: Administrative Section discussion, can we push to the work session then please? Mayor Mancino: Yes. The meeting is closed. Adjourned. Mayor Mancino called the meeting adjourned at 11:58 p.m. lei- CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MAY 21, 1997 Chairman Peterson called the meeting to order at 7 :00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Allyson Brooks, Alison Blackowiak, Ladd Conrad, Craig Peterson, LuAnn Sidney, and Bob Skubic MEMBERS ABSENT: Kevin Joyce STAFF PRESENT: Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Todd Gerhardt, Asst. City Manager, and Philip Elkin, Water Resource Coordinator SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 101.600 SQ. FT. OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDING (HEARTLAND) ON PROPOSED LOT 1. BLOCK 3: LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HWYS 5 AND 41. GATEWAY PARTNERS. STEINER DEVELOPMENT. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Any questions of staff before the applicant makes their presentation? Blackowiak: I have a couple quick questions. On page 10 of the revision that you gave us. You're requiring a multi story building on Lot 5. That's the northwest comer ofTH 5 and TH 41, is that correct? Okay, and is this some type ofa requirements you've put into any other PUD or is this the first time it's been used? Generous: This is the first time... On the Villages on the Ponds they needed the vertical. . . Blackowiak: Okay, and why did you think a multi story was appropriate for that? Generous: .. . goes back to the idea that we want some type of a grand entrance into the community and... It's difficult to plan for what... Blackowiak: Okay. And then on page 11, at the very bottom you're talking about landscaping. Can you just clarify for me what the difference between buffer yard standards C and Bare. Generous: As part of the city ordinance, we've established transition buffer yards and they're quantitative standards that developers go through. Buffer yard B is more a boulevard. Buffer yard C is more intensive landscaping and it provides a better screening. In fact then we felt that within the interior of the development on the north/south. .. 82nd Street, you didn't really want to have the screening. You wanted to get the boulevard effect and then...on the exterior we would like to sort of hide the development... Blackowiak: Okay, so C is boulevard. B is screening basically? Planning Commission Meeting - May 21, 1997 Generous: No. B is boulevard and Cis. Blackowiak: B is boulevard, okay. I'm sorry. Generous: And I can go through the technical. . . Blackowiak: Okay. And then does that explain then, I mean I might be getting ahead of myself a little bit. Does that explain the changes in the tree requirements? Generous: For along the north/south boulevard... Blackowiak: Okay, good. Thank you. Peterson: Would the applicant lik~ to make their presentation? Fred Richter: I'm Fred Richter with Steiner Development. Glad to be back here this evening. What we'll have is a presentation. We've got materials. I'll try to address the issues of making it more understandable, and I think we've also had the architects take a little deeper look at what they thought was appropriate given some of the feedback at the last meeting. So what I'll do is I'll call on Dwayne Kell, principle and President of Ankeny Kell Architects who has some, the boards. Some handouts. We've got some material samples and try to clarify what was given to you in the handout. You did get a handout I believe mid-week or late last week that showed the perspective and that was taken at a different angle than some of the other details so hopefully this is a little clearer. Dwayne is here and will hand that out and we'll kind of go over some of Ankeny Kell's thoughts on the building exterior. Dwayne Kell: Thank you Fred. I'm Dwayne Kell with Ankeny Kell Architects in S1. Paul. I'll leave these on here. Hopefully you'll be able to see them. What I handed out to you is a detail of an elevation and I'll talk a little bit more about that in a minute. I'm also going to give you a sample board, which is a more accurate description of the colors. The color Xerox machine isn't quite into all the refinements of the colors so. .. .and as Fred mentioned, this is the actual pre- cast with the reveal and some of the coloration that you'll see in the elevation and we'll talk more about this, and I'd pass it around but it's pretty heavy. What we've done this last couple of weeks is, as Fred mentioned, took into consideration some of the feedback that we received at the last Planning Commission meeting and have revised the elevations substantially from before in order to accommodate some of those concerns. Primarily what you're looking at on the screen that's showing. Can you see it on the screen? So what you're looking at, at the top elevation here is the east elevation which arrays the openings and the patterns and the modulation of those entrances. Each of the entrances has been modified to include a shallow arched detail, which is much more traditional in terms of, and softer in terms of some of the architecture that exists in the community of Chanhassen. In addition we have identified specific signage areas which are located immediately over the doorway entrances. The banding that you see has been increased substantially horizontally in order to break down the scale of the building vertically and to give more articulation to that facade. Window placements reflect the use inside of the building for 2 Planning Commission Meeting - May 21, 1997 offices and solid areas. So basically the detail that you see is an actual detail of one of those entrances and all of the coloration is basically defined within the reveal system that's part of the facade. So as you see the purplish color that's adjacent to the doorways, again to try to break down some of the scale of the entrances. To make it more human scale is within a reveal as well as the color banding that's horizontally placed on the panels. Each of the facades is, or each of the entrances is recessed approximately 5 feet which creates significant shadow lines and more articulation to the facade. And as you see the elevation along the south, the entrance detail goes around that comer so that it again modulates that part of the building. And if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. Skubic: I have a couple questions regarding your entrance elevation here. Would this be the shadow that we see here in black? Dwayne Kell: Yes. The shadow is shown as black, right. Skubic: And above the near the signage here, would this is window or is that opaque? Dwayne Kell: No. That will be a solid panel but it will be recessed so it will be within the shadow area and it will be painted. That putty tone color that you have on your sample board. Skubic: Okay, thank you. Peterson: The depth of the recess is going to be approximately how much? Dwayne Kell: 5 feet. Each of the entrances. Sidney: I see on your elevation that you have what looks like notches in the top of the panels. Are those the downspouts or? Dwayne Kell: Those are basically overflow scuppers for the root: To relieve excess water that might accumulate if drains get clogged on the roof. Fred Richter: They're required by code. The drainage is interior with the building. Peterson: Other questions of the applicant? One more. I think, turn to the parking lot. I think this may have been recommended by staff. I'll look for comments by Bob too. We've got a couple of. . . but a couple of center islands on the east side of the parking that we've kind of put to separate out the expansiveness but I think currently the size of them doesn't really allow any trees to be put in there, or at least doesn't portray them to be put in there. I'm wondering whether or not, and what the rationale was for putting those in there. Whether staff recommended that. And if so, I guess I'd like to hear from staff as to the true rationale for putting those in there. Generous: We are recommending that... Peterson: Is that, is it really big enough for trees to go into those or not? 3 Planning Commission Meeting - May 21, 1997 Generous: You can put a tree in a 4 foot wide area. Fred Richter: It is a tree. We have islands...1 know we're working on the final number with staff. We recognize we have to break up the parking. .. Peterson: All right. I don't have any further questions. Does anybody else? Sidney: I guess one thing about the type of signage that you propose for the building. Dwayne Kell: Fred, maybe you can address the signage issue. Fred Richter: Well, I think we probably, our drawings indicated, because it's probably we've got one large tenant initially. This is potentially a multi-tenant building and with that we would have signage over those entrances. That signage under this scheme would be signed. Limited to that dimension. We really haven't worked out the details. Whether it's just letters on the wall or panel. Most likely, one of the things we like about this approach, we could put just letters on the wall which we think is a little more. Sidney: Yeah, I'd vote for that. Fred Richter: And because of the fact that we can repaint them when tenants move out every 5 years or something. So that is something that we would be going to... Dwayne Kell: Also on the signage issue, the intent of that band was to more or less frame the sign and create the place for it consistently throughout the building so that a panel in back of it wouldn't be as desirable as just placing it on the band itself. Fred Richter: .. . about this archway, we will probably have some down lighting up into the archway so at night... We're actually, we think this is architecturally a big improvement to what we've done the last couple of years in addressing the overall issues and trying to take an office warehouse, manufacturing building... Peterson: All right, thank you. This item is open for a public hearing. Can I have a motion to open it to a public hearing and a second please? Conrad moved, Blackowiak seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission, please do so now and come forward and state your name and address please. Conrad moved, Brooks seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. 4 Planning Commission Meeting - May 21, 1997 Peterson: Commissioners. Bob, any thoughts regarding this presentation? Skubic: It's very nice. I think the applicants have done a good job of, when I first looked at the perspective from the front I was, had a very good initial reaction. I think it's a vast improvement. I'm happy with it. What more can I say? Peterson: LuAnn. Sidney: Yeah, I like the plan as it's presented and think it's a good improvement over the past presentation. I guess one thing I was going to ask about the bicycle parking and storage on the site. I guess I didn't see where that was. That was my only question. But other than that I guess it looks fine to me. Peterson: Okay, Ladd. Conrad: Yeah, far better presentation. Thank you for doing that. That's night and day. Fred Richter: You notice we had to bring the boss in tonight. Conrad: Well I noticed that changed too but, no. It's good. You reduced the size of the scale but also the presentation and what you gave us was what we wanted to see so thank you for doing that. No other comments. Blackowiak: I agree. Much better and Allyson and I were just commenting. It would be nice to have windows over these doors. That might be asking a little much. I do think it's much better. Thank you and a little more glass might be nice but. Fred Richter: We had that option but the tenant. .. Blackowiak: It would be a nice feature. I'm sure it would be more expensive but. Peterson: Allyson. Brooks: W ell like Alison was saying, we were just sort of muttering between ourselves that yeah, more glass would. I think more glass would give it that little extra character and again, you know I understand it's expensive. Just something to keep in the back of your mind. I think it would look really nice, particularly consider the archway and whether that's feasible or not, I don't know but I agree with everybody else. You know 2 weeks ago I was fairly rude about the fact that I didn't like the building and I have to say this is much better and the presentation really made the building come to light and gave me a much better feel for it so yeah, I have no problems with this building. And thank you for taking the time to make a presentation. Peterson: Good, thanks. My thoughts are the same too. It is a tremendous benefit, I think the Council will appreciate your time and effort put in also. I think it will give a much better 5 Planning Commission Meeting - May 21, 1997 perspective of really what they're approving so I totally agree. With that, may I have a motion and a second please. Skubic: I'll make a motion that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan #97- 6 for Heartland America, a 101,600 square foot office building on Lot 3, Block 1, Gateway Business Park shown on plans prepared by Ankeny Kell Architects dated stamped April 4, 1997, subject to conditions 1 through 23 as presented by staff. Conrad: Second. Skubic moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the site plan #97-6 for Heartland America, a 101,600 square foot office industrial building on Lot 3, Block 1, Gateway Business Park, shown on the plans prepared by Ankeny Kell Architects, dated stamped April 4, 1997, subject to the following conditions: 1. The storm sewer in the rear of the building shall be redesigned to connect to the stonn sewer proposed in the north/south street. The storm sewer in the southeast comer of the site shall be redesigned to drain into the proposed storm sewer along 8211d Street West. 2. All driveway access points shall be constructed per the City's Industrial Driveway Detail Plate #5207. 3. Erosion control fence shall be installed and maintained around the perimeter of the site except the west side until all disturbed areas have been revegetated and removal authorized by the City. Storm sewer inlets shall be protected with silt fence, hay bales or rock filter dikes until the parking lots have been paved with a bituminous surface. 4. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 5. The City's boulevards must be restored with sod. If a trail/sidewalk is installed along 8211d Street West or north/south street, the site plan drawings shall be revised accordingly and include pedestrian ramps at driveway access points. 6. Commencement of construction for this development is contingent on the recording of a final plat for Gateway Business Park. 7. Increase evergreen plantings on northwestern and southwestern ends of building to screen loading area from road. 8. Plant materials used shall meet minimum requirements. Revise Heartland plant schedule to reflect ordinance requirements of 7' evergreens. 9. Each landscape peninsula must have one shade tree. Landscape peninsulas less than 10 feet in width must have aeration tubing installed. 6 Planning Commission Meeting - May 21, 1997 10. The buffer yard requirement along the north/south road and 82nd Street is buffer yard B. The applicant shall install 17 overstory, 35 understory, and 52 shrubs along the north/south road and 5 overstory, 11 understory, and 16 shrubs along West 82nd Street. 11. Watermain shall be looped and extended to the west side of the building. Hydrant spacing shall not exceed 300'. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact locations of additional fire hydrants. 12. No Parking Fire Lane signs and yellow curbing shall be provided. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact locations of signage and painted curbing. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy 06-1991. 13. Install a post indicator valve on the water service coming mto the building. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location. 14. When fire protection including fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required, such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction. Pursuant to 1991 Uniform Fire Code Section 10.502. 15. The building must comply with Chanhassen Fire Department policy regarding premise identification. (Copy enclosed.} Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy #29-1992. 16. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department policy regarding maximum allowed size of domestic water service on a combination domestic/fire sprinkler supply line. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy #36-1994. 17. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention policy regarding notes to be included on all site plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy #04-1991. 18. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention policy regarding pre- fire plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy #07-1991. (Copy enclosed). 19. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department/Inspections Division policy regarding water service installation for commercial and industrial buildings. Pursuant to Inspection Division Water Service Installation Policy #34-1993. (Copy enclosed). 20. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department policy regarding fire sprinkler systems. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division #40-1995. (Copy enclosed). 7 Planning Commission Meeting - May 21, 1997 21. The applicant shall add painted panels with reveal edge to mimic windows which shall be continued on the north and south elevations. 22. Pedestrian access shall be provided from the site to the public sidewalk and trail system on West 82nd Street and out to the north/south street. 23. The applicant shall provide areas for bicycle parking and storage on site. All voted in favor and the motion carried. APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.6. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO.6-I. Todd Gerhardt presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Any questions for Todd? I guess you got an A on your verbal presentation too. Sidney: One comment I guess I was noticing the PUD plan as it's attached. 1 don't think It'S up to date in terms of information. Gerhardt: Yeah, that was the most current plan that I had. I think that is the reference so they understood where the project area was. That will not be included in that plan itself. And Bob will make sure that the developer...A good point. Peterson: Other questions? Does this require a public hearing? I don't think it does, does it? Gerhardt: It's not on the Planning Commission agenda. It does on the City Council and this coming Monday, the City Council has that scheduled to take city input. And we also provided notice over to the School District and County and to date we have not received written comments. However, the School District does have us on their schedule for the 29th to give them an overview of the project. Peterson: So all that's really needed from us is just the approval as presented tonight? Gerhardt: Yeah. I think it was 2, or 3 weeks ago that you did approve the PUD for this area and basically that's when you took your action on this. ... through their application they have met the state requirements and they have made all.. .so when you made your motion basically that night, you have approved the development consistent for the city and the overall development. However under Minnesota Statute.. .recognize that issue by.. . and the plan does call up for a water reservoir built in the area. Future possibility of extension of Coulter Boulevard. Parklands that are to be used as part of the development... transferred from the developer to the city. And a trail system and the intersection changes. Traffic signals and the intersection construction. All that is outlined in the plan as public improvements that need to be.. .also know that we are going 8 Planning Commission Meeting - May 21, 1997 to enhance the tax base, industrial tax base. Create employment opportunities in our community and assist this development. . . Peterson: With that, May I hear a motion from my fellow commissioners? Blackowiak: Can I make a quick comment? We had, I mentioned this to Bob the other day. lea) states the extension of Coulter Boulevard. And I would request that we consider amending that to the potential extension of Coulter Boulevard or something similar so that should the Council or the Park and Rec Commission or whomever decides it. That is something to do, that we have not passed a resolution stating the extension. We just, there may be the potential or possible or some word that would not require the extension. Gerhardt: That can be done. Blackowiak: Okay. Gerhardt: I think the Council would probably... Peterson: With that comment, may I hear a motion. Blackowiak: I will move then the Planning CommIssion approve the development of Distnct No.6 and TIF District No. 6-1 consistent with the city's comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance, including items I through 5 with item 1 amended to say the potential extension of Coulter Boulevard. Peterson: Is there a second? Brooks: I'll second it. Peterson: Any discussion? Blackowiak moved, Brooks seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the resolution declaring the program and plan for Development District No.6 and Tax Increment Financing District No. 6-1 consistent with the city's comprehensive plan and the plans for development of Chanhassen as a whole with item 1 in the purpose of the district being amended to state the potential extension of Coulter Boulevard. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. BLUFF CREEK ORDINANCE DISCUSSION - MARK KOEGLER. Mark Koegler: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. I don't know if Bob had any introduction. Did you want to do anything or do you just want to launch into this? We'll launch into it. I'm Mark Koegler with Hoisington-Koegler Group, for those of you that I haven't met in the past. If you don't mind, I will adjourn to the table over here so I can take some notes as we go through some things. I know some of you were present at the meeting we had Monday night 9 Planning Commission Meeting - May 21, 1997 to kick off, at least formally kick off the comprehensive plan effort. I think in talking to Kate, kind of what she envisioned for this evening's efforts as well at least, not kick off in such a grand scale but kick off.. .as far as the Planning Commission's direct involvement goes. And what I'd like to do is kind of briefly outline. I think you're all familiar that we're talking about the Bluff Creek management plan that undoubtedly by now you've all committed to memory. A lot of information. We're kind of talking about framework issues tonight and what it's going to take to take this plan from the plan you adopted at the end of last year into actual implementation and there's been some... The management plan really relied upon three principle tools for implementation. They're pretty well detailed there. ... there probably are a few tools that we're going to have to look at supplementing. SpecIfically there is the.. . ordinance and issues that are within that that you're aware of may need to be modified in order to achieve some of the recommendation revision that's outlined in this document. One of the tools that we've talked about before that's likely to be used will be some form of density transfer. At least we'll be discussing that as an alternative, whereby obviously we will take that density from otherwise very sensitive lands and apply that to other areas.. .parcels which may not be as sensitive and the issue with the. .. problem in transferring that density from say a higher density classification to a lower classification and in the attachment I think the packet.. . memorandum that Bob put together in January or so, did a very nice Job oflaying that out... As we look at some of the issues, just to kind of give you a preview of what likely may happen, we also... that public acceptance of this concept IS probably going to require some education. Maybe in general will require that. It's easy to sit here tonight or in previous sessions and talk about how a good way to achieve this might be to cluster or transfer density and so forth but when you start really looking at what that means, what that means is we're taking the density from one area and we're concentrating it in another area. And if you focus on one area, yes indeed.. . higher density. Look at the watershed as a whole...parcel as a whole, overall it's much lower. I think we'll have to kind of walk through that together and probably spend some time sorting that out. Because clearly as part of the implementation is kind of these conceptual ideaslhat we talk about will actually become a reality... I think it's probably fair to anticipate that again it will take some public education and acceptance if that concept... The actual form of the ordinance that we're going to be looking at, you've worked with various... The model that's likely to be followed is similar to I think it's the Highway 5 ordinance which is.. .but a provision that will have a set of overlay standards that will be on top of or inclusive of the. ..zoning classification and requirements that are contained within that. So within the geographic area that's defined as the Bluff Creek area itself, this extra set of rules apply. The intent also is clearly that the ordinance will have outlining within it specific tools and standards also.. . achieving the overall objectives of the Bluff Creek management plan. We also would anticipate and is probably again similar to the Highway 5 ordinance is that there will be a fairly liberal use of graphics within that to help very quickly convey the concepts and ideas that sometimes are more difficult to sort out as you read through a report. So we're going to try to make the ordinance very understandable and very, certainly true to the purpose of implementing the plan. It's probably premature to sit here tonight and focus specifically on one thing.. .because we've just begun some background research and we're kind of meshing that with the recommendations of the plan and coming back to you in subsequent sessions. I think it's fair to say though that the tools that we'll be focusing on, there will be a number of them. There wiiI be a number of them that, some of them are probably ones that you're familiar with. I touched on density transfer before. We'll attempt to undoubtedly 10 Planning Commission Meeting - May 21, 1997 look at specific standards regarding impervious surfacing within the overall district. It may be different. It may need to be different than the.. . from a technical standpoint. Chanhassen has been pretty diligent throughout the years in it's application of best management practices.. . context of larger study areas but... For those of you water quality enhancing methods that undoubtedly will be used and employed. The conservation easement.. . again to preserve significant open space or significant natural resource area... Land dedication to the degree that park and open space can be included as a part of that. Another tool that will be looked at. We should be so lucky to think that maybe we'll get a couple ofland donations along the way. You never know. We have seen that in other communities that we've worked in where once you've identified an overall plan that's as comprehensive as this is and it... that may be a factor... Purchases of land clearly is one of the items detailed in the capital improvement program. There are corresponding budget amounts within there a!1d I think that will be refined and it will be used as a tool that will be outside of the ordinance work that we're specifically talking about tonight. Then there's always the possibility of conjuring up something new.. . incentives that we may be able to look at them may be appropriate here... typically might require special legislation in order to. ..so we're not closing our eyes I guess to only traditional tools and taking a broad spectrum look at what actually is done to implement the plan. I think it's probably safe to say that there is not anyone specific rule that handles this ordinance to make this comprehensive of a plan actually take shape and.. .over time it's really going to be a collection of the structure of the ordinance and recommendatiOns of the ordinance and some of the peripheral or the buying of. .. Things that tie back to the plan a'1d the comprehensive plan itself. As far as a schedule goes. we are looking at trying to wrap this up by potentially the summer and I think it's...Kate's kind of trying to coordinate with the comprehensive plan. ~pecifically tonight after the introduction of this. be able to slot in an agenda time in June. depending upon what the agendas look like, to take a better look at the graphic analysis. Maybe an... You've all had the large plans and you've had the color plans and so forth but taking a look a little harder at the densities that are Within that and what that begins to mean if we talk about density transfer or something of that nature. And how will that really work and what might it look like. We'll be focusing on that a bit next time. Perhaps I'd expect we'd have.. .things that set the tone in the ordinance itself and are important in that "egard. We're looking then at having a draft of this together in, basically in total for you to look at in July. As necessary. July and August to work your way through that and then tentatively looking at a public hearing sometime in September. The goal then being over the course of time, once it's in place. to actually begin implementation of the particular Sites. So that's kind of my walk through. Give you a preview of what we're going to accomplish. We have a lot of detail.. . and then field any questiOns... Peterson: Questions from fellow commissioners? Skubic: Density transfers will be within the Bluff Creek zoning all right? Mark Koegler: Yes, correct. Skubic: So people who are moving into the chstrict really wouldn't know what would be going next to them. We wouldn't be able to say a whole density development. There might be a transfer and that might change. 11 Planning Commission Meeting - May 21, 1997 Mark Koegler: I think that's why we want to get into some of the picture of what this looks like next time. Really the first step, raising a good point. How are we going to work that property? What are the expectations? Not only for your property but the property next to you and if you spent some time pouring through that you noted there's a primary and a secondary zone that are talked about with regard to preservation... And indeed we are looking at standards that apply to the Bluff Creek area but the Bluff Creek area is also adjacent to property that's not in the Bluff Creek area, and I think we can look at all those interfaces and ultimately that might lead to standards to provide some kind of transition. . .kind of buffering between those types of uses where those situations occur so we're going to certainly focus on that... Skubic: Thank you Mark. Peterson: Mark, is there any way, and I think we've at various times talked about this before but waiting until September to really have a formal publIc hearing. Are there ways that we can proactively get feedback and involvement from the community before the plan is done? Mark Koegler: Yeah I think, I would certainly assume that's possible. Particularly since perhaps the opportunity might be there that there are these series of comprehensive plan meetings that the public's going to be appnsed of. ..how that tits into that schedule. Peterson: And I know it's difficult to get invo!\'ement but I guess I'd certainly like to try as best as we can. Mark Koegler: There's always a fine line in defining exactly when is an effective time for involvement, not from the Planning Commission point of view but the public's point of view also. I think we need something to kind of... that's a little definitive to look at and say I like this about that or I don't like that. I think we clearly need to get part way down the road but certainly there's probably interim times when we... Peterson: Other questions? Conrad: To get, density transfer's going to be a tough one. Although it's a great concept. We've just never done it in this town. Mark have you, you haven't mentioned reducing the minimum lot size. And that's probz.bly a better way, more, welll don't even know that. But I'd sure like you to take a look at that in this overlay district and I'm not sure if that still goes back to a zoning issue or if it can be beveled in but I think we have to look at that because I think density transfer's just going to be a tough one to. Mark Koegler: That's a good point. I mean I think really all of the regulatory aspects of the zoning ordinance will be looked at.. .so I think clearly that's within the boundary of what we'll be looking at. Peterson: Other questions? 12 Planning Commission Meeting - May 21, 1997 Conrad: It's interesting. So basically the Bluff Creek plan is not implementable unless we, in full, unless we make it economically feasible by compensating the landowners around. It's kind of a nice way to preserve an asset but now we're trying to figure out how to fund the preservation of the asset. Mark Koegler: Well there's obviously a line that's being walked here and you can't simply go out and identify land.. .open space without some kind of compensation to the owners. When you reflect what rights property.. . for various parcels. So there's going to be an interesting interplay there. I think the lot size issue.. .could have application here... We're going to look at all feasible alternatives and bring those to you but yeah, that does have some... It's not going to be easy to do. It's easy to identify it but.. .my comment, it's easy to talk about kind of abstract density transfer but once you're looking at a specific plat, it becomes a different world. The other comment that I would make quickly is that I think clearly and recently staff and the CouncIl have accomplished some of the goals. ...one of the subdivisions that you reviewed, and you have to help me with the name of It Bob. Generous: Walnut Grove. Mark Koegler: Okay. The one that RICk Murray proposed. I know there was a lot of give and take and yet the bottom line is, the hne ofland to be conserved is pretty close to what's Identified in this report. So even without the structure being in place today as we hope it will be, whIch will make it more effective, there are ways of implementing It now. It's not as though there's no way to begin to do this until such time :1S an ordinance is in effect. It's clearly in the City's best Interest to just head off what. . . Conrad: What was your leverage when you were working wIth Rick Murray? How do you do that Bob when you really don't have an absolute mechanIsm to preserve the added 150 feet for setback'1 How do you negotIate'? Generous: It was a confluence of good things. Sathre-Berquist being the engineer for the project and... He saw the benefit for the development overall. Conrad: More marketable maybe, okay. Generous: But it took a long time. Ifwe had the ordinances. Conrad: But he could have said you can't do it. He could have couldn't he? Generous: .. .plus Rottlund was willing to.. .new bungalow style home and that provided some... they wanted to try out some new villa homes. We showed them the advantages of getting a walkout unit... Peterson: Other questions? Comments? Brooks: Does land donation usually have a tax incentive? 13 Planning Commission Meeting - May 21, 1997 Mark Koegler: I'm sorry. Brooks: The land donation program. Is that usually a tax incentive? Mark Koegler: Yeah, there are some tax incentives that certainly are attributable to donations and I know Chanhassen going back it was probably 15-20 years ago has used that with their parklands. Herman Field for example was acquired, or when somebody realized the tax donation. Peterson: Okay, thank you. Thank you... APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Conrad noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated May 7, 1997 as presented. ONGOING ITEMS: Generous: The next thing you'll see in regard to the... Fortunately Chanhassen has a lot of ordinances in place to do preservatIOn... We've had discussions with Villages are looking... Skubic: When is the hotel const!'uction going :.0 s~al.t? Generous: Any time now. There's an office building, commercial building... That will probab1:, be in '98. Conrad: TIP didn't go through. Generous: At the legislature... Conrad: Specifically for that project. Generolls: Because the way the statute's currcnl.y v"ritten, if a property is green acred, you can't use TIF. Create a TIF district out of it... There are some other ways that we could look at, the Carver County HRA... Peterson: Any other items? Generous: I can update you. The Springfield Addition.. .TH 101 and Lyman received final plat approvaL.. It was put on hold because of the utilities upgrade in that area... And Meadows at Longacres 4th Addition... City Council did approve a wetland alteration for chemical treatment notification... Phil's here. He can explain how we... Elkin: Basically we put together a brochure.. .and also notified companies that provide the service to let us know where they're treating because there are some, in investigating I found a couple different bacteria products that are a tenth the cost and are advertised more effective... 14 Planning Commission Meeting - May 21, 1997 Hopefully steer people in a different direction. On that note, I've gotten an article in the newspaper... Probably 5 calls about... Last year I didn't so I don't know what to tell you. .. but the City's position is not to... Conrad: .. .talk to Phil a second here and I don't know ifit's, it's probably worth the discussion in front of the Planning Commission. Lotus Lake reviewed milfoil control funding, I thmk funding came through. Elkin: DNR. Conrad: DNR and a little bit monitored by Phil and we hired a consultant. And what I wanted to do was for the whole lake to get some kind of a management plan. Now just some consensus, and it's not as much a plan as consensus from lakeshore owners as to how do you manage milfoil. Real polar thinking. Some people don't want to treat because worrying about 24D and some people do want to treat because you can walk on water in the lake. The milfoil's that thick. The hope was that this consultant would bring things together and that just, you know I've got to do some, I've got to talk to you Phil separately but it didn't happen and I just want to, it could be my fault too for just not managing it a little bit better but basically he laid down five alternatives that you can roll them. You can do this but really there wasn't a lot of insight. The concern was. what does 240 do to you. Milfoil will come back every year and you know, you sort of worry about, well not every year but it will come back and then so you treat the lake and you treat the lake and pretty soon it will enter the whole biological, it will be part of the animal cham. It was a hope that we could have heard some stuff like that and we didn't so you know, I'll end my convers?ttlon here. I think we didn't do a good job as an association really managing it because we kind of hoped the consultant \vould do it and we didn't manage the consultant that well. And he didn't give us maybe the information so, I just want to share that with you and it's not his fault. It's just the way we managed him and I don't know that we got our $3,000.00 W0l1h of gUIdance. Elkin: Well the problem with milfoil, right now it's spreading and there's no easy, quick fix solution to it. It's choking out the lakes What happens is, unlike other aquatic species that will grow up from the bottom and get a distance from the top. Milfoil goes right to the top and mats on the top so you can't, it makes it difficult for water-skiing is out of the question. Getting your boats in and ou!, you're constantly getting weeds caught in your propeller. And they are treating it with.. .as this consultant pointed out, the most effective way without doing work is treating it Spraying chemicals. You can weed it out. You can pull it out manually with.. .racks, but it fragments on it's own it goes crazy. The other plants in the lakes in Minnesota have not learned to compete with milfoil. Eurasian milfoil. There is a northern milfoil that's native to lakes but have not learned to compete with Eurasian milfoil so basically it's just taking over. Similar to purple loosestrife. What that's done... There i8 some hope that some weevils that are found native to, in our lake will start feeding on milfoil but as I was afraid that this report would show, there's no, that's another issue "you can spend thousands ofdo!lars at and you're not going to have an answer you like. I think what I'm try"cg to. . .lakeshore owners frustration with the raising tax rates, you've got lakes now you know over crowded. Jet skis. Load watercraft are really."as more people move to Chanhassen, the lakes are getting used more and milfoil and 15 Planning Commission Meeting - May 21, 1997 these exotics are coming in and just really the lakes are not that much.. .as people remember them 10 years ago. And another Issue on Lotus Lake is we have a Lotus lily which is an endangered plant species and... will kill it and that's probably the biggest fear J have is that... it will become extinct. Conrad: Yeah, it will be gone. Well the good news is that to a degree there's coordination. Half the lakeshore owners will treat at one time. Will know when the chemical's in. We saw some real bad stufflast year when individuals treated and you don't have a clue that they're treating. Little orange signs go up but the skiers who are usually from off the lake, they don't have a clue. You don't want to fall in that stuff. You just don't. So again, the good news is there's probably some degree of coordination which is positive. Peterson: Thanks. Anything else Bob? Generous: Not right now. Conrad moved. Blackowiak seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 16 lei- PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MAY 8,1997 ~ PRESENT: Colleen Dockendorf, Bill Bernhjelm, Bill Wyffels, Steve Labatt, Brian Beniek, Jim Sloss ABSENT: Greg Weber STAFF PRESENT: Scott Harr, Public Safety Director; Bob Zydowsky, Deputy Public Safety Director; Steve Kirchman, Building Official; Beth Hoiseth, Crime Prevention Specialist GUESTS: Chairperson Labatt opened the meeting at 7: 1 0 p.m. New Commissioners, Colleen Dockendorf and Bill Wyffels were welcomed to the commission. Commissioner Sloss motioned, Commissioner Bernhjelm seconded, to approve the April 10, 1997 minutes as written. All voted in favor and the motion passed. FIRE DEPARTMENT: No Report. SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT: No Report. INSPECTIONS DIVISION: Building Official Steve Kirchman gave an update on the status of computer software for inspections and the city's position with the network system. Steve Kirchman stated that even though inspections are down for this time of year, revenues are up for 1997 and should be comparable to 1996. Steve Kirchman informed the commission that the city was asking for a continuance in the Dean Johnson law suit due to the fact that Elliott Knetsch, City Attorney, will be out on sick leave. Steve Kirchman stated that the contractor breakfast meeting went well. PUBLIC SAFETY EDVCA TION/CRIME PREVENTION: Crime Prevention Specialist Beth Hoiseth gave an update on the activities currently underway. She stated that the neighborhood watch block captain meeting was held last week. Bike Safety has been in full swing in the schools with the assistance of State Patrol Sergeant Dave Marquart. Bike rodeo's are scheduled, bike helmet sales have been fantastic, the bike safety citation program will begin again in June - hamburger certificates from McDonalds. Beth Hoiseth stated that Chanhassen will have it's first "Safety Camp" this summer. This is a one day camp for children entering 3rd grade, with representatives from different areas of safety, police; fire; NSP; etc. Donations have been requested from Pillsbury, Public Safety Commission Minutes May 8, 1997 Page 2 Target and NSP. Pillsbury has also donated more money for the trading cards currently used by the Public Safety/Inspections Department. OLD BUSINESS: Public Safety Director Scott Harr reviewed the shooting boundaries. Deputy Director Bob Zydowsky stated that the DNR recommended keeping the same boundaries. He stated they have had few complaints. There was some discussion on deer population control and how other cities deal with the issue. It was decided to continue monitoring the shooting boundaries for future review. Public Safety Director Scott Harr reviewed the 1997 flood situation. He stated the crest was slightly below the 1993 levels. Director Harr stated it was educational to be able to implement the emergency management procedures within our city. He also stated that we would assist the City of Carver with any inspections they may need. Deputy Director Bob Zydowsky stated that a meeting was held with the other animal control contract cities, and discussion occurred regarding the possibility of Chanhassen discontinuing animal control contracting in the year 1998. The support staff will now be taking the money from owners whose animals have been impounded at the Chanhassen Vet Clinic because of problems with violators at the clinic. This will be done during office hours 8:00 am to 4:30 pm. There was some discussion on different places to board and impound animals. Public Safety Director Scott Harr discussed the new fire/police training facility proposed by the City of Edina, to be shared with other cities. Does Chanhassen have enough interest to invest in the facility? If so, how much will we invest? General discussion occurred. Deputy Director Bob Zydowsky stated that the current Clinton Cop position is set to begin on 6/1/97. The position will be a Carver County Deputy used for Chanhassen. Other potential creative financing was discussed. NEW BUSINESS: Bob Zydowsky stated that he is checking on additional Clinton Cop monies to be used for the City of Chanhassen. This money will not be available until 1998. Discussion on the position duties included possibilities such as community policing, crime prevention assistance, emergency management, having a uniform in the schools and daycares, and how the position could best assist with the needs of Chanhassen. Commissioner Dockendorf suggested having a joint meeting with the City Council and the Public Safety Commission to discuss inspection status, contractor complaints (if any), personnel issues and general inspection information. Commissioner Bernhjelm motioned. Commissioner Sloss seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion passed. g:\safety\pscomm\thursS .8