Loading...
1f. Minutes Iii 7, 7 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 12, 1991 4 ft Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Workman, Councilman Wing and Councilwoman Dimler fCOUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Mason STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Charles Folch, .Paul Krauss, Todd Hoffman and Elliott Knetsch, City Attorney - - I APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the agenda as amended by Councilman Wing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: - a. Acceptance of $4,000 Donation from the Chanhassen Elementary School , f Association of Parents and Teachers for the Purchase of Playground IEquipment. b. Wetland Alteration Permit for the Realignment of Highway 101 (South Leg) and also the West 78th Street Detachment Project and the mitigation of Yt , approximately 2.5 acres of Wetland, City of Chanhassen. - - e. Resolution #91-72: County State Aid Road System, Turn Back of Stoughton Avenue. • Approve f. Resolution #91-73: Ap Application for Reimbursement for Peace Officer _ ---T-5 Continuing Education Courses. g. Naming of Street South of Chanhassen Bowl and East of Market Boulevard to .- Pauly Drive. -.._ _ -, h. Resolution 1191-74: Accept Sanitary Sewer Extension along Powers Boulevard, Project No 90-7. ,_ . y - I. Resolution- #91-75: Call _Assessment Hearings for: -, } 1) Lake Drive East, Project 89 6 - � -- 2) Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 5th Addition (Park Place Phase II),_T;' - Project 85 Y -'. ;._ - .•.. r, - - - -136 _ _ -..�� - �<��.._4..�-- - �F ':"- -•'' ,_-.,_1r- _ .. r. ,� z j. Approve Contract Time Extension for West 79th Street Improvement Project 91_-8 1 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 k. Resolution #91-76: Approve Resolution Requesting MnDot to add TH 5 from ' Park Drive to TH 41 and the new U.S. Highway 212 from Lyman Blvd. West to TH 41 to their 1995-96 Construction Program. ' m. Approval of Accounts. n. City Council Minutes dated July 22, 1991 Planning Commission Minutes dated July 17, 1991 11 Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated July 23, 1991 o. Approve Contract Amendment No. 1 to Scope of Services Contract for MUSA Expansion, Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer and Water Study. All voted in favor and the motion carried. C. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO DEFINE/CLARIFY BED AND BREAKFAST ESTABLISHMENTS, FIRST READING. I Councilman Workman: I can understand a lot of some of the questions that were raised as far as Zoning Ordinance to define and clarify what a bed and breakfast establishment is but I'm not so sure I understand some of them. The Planning I Commission clarified for me why maybe we don't want somebody to stay there more than 7 days or person or persons so that it doesn't become a boarding house. Why are we concerned that it specifically be 5 or less rooms? IIMayor Chmiel: Paul, would you like to address that? Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Workman. There was a desire, and this goes back to when this bed and breakfast was originally approved. It was approved ; with up to 5 rooms in it and it really set the pace for whatever we did in the future. We only have one at this time and we probably only stand the I possibility for a couple more. But I think there was a desire to put a cap, an effective cap on the size of these businesses because they are taking place in residential areas. Whether or not 5 is the magic number I couldn't tell you but 5 was in the original request for this bed and breakfast and it sort of became II set in stone. Councilman Workman: Wouldn't it make more sense maybe, and I know the one we're I specifically talking about is located, it's probably not located near any other homes. Not too close. Wouldn't it make more sense to maybe put the limit on the number of rooms on how big the parcel is or something? It just seems like II we're restricting this and we're not really sure why. Based on the first one in. I guess I'm not sure where, I mean couldn't realistically the old seminary become a bed and breakfast? IIPaul Krauss: Yes. In fact the individual who purchased the property a year ago is still planning on the possibility of putting in a hotel in the main building and two separate bed and breakfast facilities in the old homes nearby. Yes, you're correct. Councilman Workman: It wouldn't be classified a tri and breakfast though? I 1 2 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 11 Paul Krauss: It depends on how he brings this into us. We think the whole project , if he moves forward, would come in as a PUD so the question is moot at that point. If he comes in and wants to get the bed and breakfast establishment going and running first, which he's talked about doing, that would have to come in under this ordinance. Councilman Workman: Wouldn't this ordinance then be kind of, wouldn't the - ordinance become old as soon as that happens? Wouldn't we have to gut it out? Paul Krauss: If the homes down there were large enough that they wanted more than 5 boarding rooms or 5 bedrooms, yes. There would be a problem. Councilman Wing: We're opening up a variance door then. I Councilman Workman: That's what I don't want to create because it doesn't sound like maybe we're looking too far into, I don't know where there would be another bed and breakfast other than that one. Maybe. Paul Krauss: I couldn't tell you with any certainty either but I think the possibility of Chanhassen having many more bed and breakfasts is getting more remote as we speak. Those kinds of properties out in the more rural areas are just being surrounded by subdivisions and we may get a few but it's kind of hard to guess. Councilman Workman: Well Paul, why don't you and I maybe talk about that some more and why don't I move approval of it as it is and then we can maybe talk between now and the second reading. Councilwoman Oimler: Or do you want to table it? I Mayor Chmiel: No. He's going to move it with working with the language to address some of the concerns. I think prior to accepting that, the balance of the Council should have that opportunity to also review it. Councilman Wing: I'll second that motion. Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the First Reading. of Zoning Ordinance Amendment to define/clarify bed and breakfast establishments with direction to staff to address some of the concerns raised by Councilman Workman. All voted in favor and the motion carried. D. AUTHORIZATION TO PREPARE BID SPECIFICATIONS, HEALTH INSURANCE POLICY. Councilman Wing: Item (d) on the health insurance for city employees. Todd, does this remain an open discussion item? Whereby moving this particular item, does it become closed with that action? Does this terminate discussion at budget time on how much benefit we choose to give city employees? Todd Gerhardt: No. This is preparing the specifications. You need to approve the specifications before we go out to bids on this. So we'd bring those back to you based on the specs that would be prepared by Joe Harten. t 3 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 Councilman Wing: So if we chose to x and e p this coverage, that door is still open? Todd Gerhardt : Yes it is. You could that at the time that you had specifications in front of you or if you want to talk about a specific part of ' it now or into the future before we prepare the specs. You can do that. Councilman Wing: With that I'd move approval of item (d). iCouncilwoman Dimler: Second. Councilman Wing moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to authorize to prepare bid specifications, Health Insurance Policy. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPT ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR AUDUBON ROAD SOUTH, PROJECT 89-18. Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. As I eluded to in my staff report , the assessment for this project involved only three parcels. It might be appropriate to ask the audience if there's anyone here for that project and if so we can go through ai.?etailed presentation. Otherwise, I. can certainly go through a brief presentation on it. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you. Why don't we just go through that particular procedure. Charles Folch: This project is basically the second and final segment of the ' overall roadway improvement project to Audubon Road between TH 5 and Lyman Blvd. . The improvements included street reconstructions, sanitary sewer, watermain, storm drainage facilities and a trail. These improvements were anticipated previously and are included in the City's development and tax increment district No 2. In a manner consistent with the previous roadway segment improvement to Audubon Road, the cost of the roadway improvements, storm sewer, street lights, trail, landscaping and trunk oversizing costs for the sewer and watermain are to be financed by the increment district . The only assessments proposed are the local share of the sanitary sewer and watermain. The cost for the sanitary sewer and watermain installations less the trunk oversizing costs are proposed to be assessed on a front foot basis to benefitting properties. The assessment per foot, front foot rate for the sanitary sewer is figured out to be $18.59 and for the watermain $20.33. The ' overall assessment rate is approximately 4% less than those proposed in the feasibility report. As I mentioned there's three property owners that are directly benefitting from these utility improvements. The project consultant engineer from HNTB is also present tonight if there's any specific questions that we need to go into for the project . Mayor Chmiel: Fine. Thank you. Is there anyone wishing to address this specific item? As I mentioned, this is a public hearing. This is your opportunity to come forth and express your opinivt at this time on this particular project. If seeing none, I'd like a ;.ction to close the public hearing. ' 4 i City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Councilman Workman: I would move the adoption of assessment roll for Audubon Road South, Project 89-18. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? Councilwoman Dimler: I'll second that. Mayor Chmiel: Any more discussion? , Resolution #91-77: Councilman Workman moved, -Councilwoman Dimler seconded to adopt the Audubon Road South Improvement Project 89-18 assessment roll and that the assessment term be set for eight (8) years at an 8% interest rate. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPT ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR COUNTRY HOSPITALITY SUITES, PROJECT ' 89-25. Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. The improvements associated with this project were petitioned for by the developer by the Country Hospitality Suites. As such, with the development contract that they entered into with the City, they have agreed to the assessments and have waived their rights to an assessment appeal. However, out of basically a courtesy we have f notified them on the final numbers for assessment and are holding a public hearing tonight. Mr. Gary Ehret of BRW who was the project consultant engineer is here if there's any specific detail items to address. I Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone who wishes to address this issue? If seeing none I'd like a motion to close the public hearing. ' Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Resolution #91-78: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to adopt the Country Hospitality Suites Improvement Project No. 89-25 assessment ' roll and that the assessment terms be set for eight (8) years at a rate of 8% interest. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPT ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR LAKE ANN INTERCEPTOR. SEWER, PROJECT ' 87-35. Public Present: I Name Address Val Wirtz 1620 Koehnen Circle Janicke 7021 Galpin Blvd: • Ray & Lisa Notermann . 1450 Arboretum Blvd. It 5 1 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 II Name Address I Dean Simpson 7185 Hazeltine Warren & Arlene Phillips 1571 Lake Lucy Road James E. Mielke 1645 Lake Lucy Road I Geri Eikaas 2763 Ches Mar Farm Road Merrill R. Steller 1931 Crestview Circle Roxanne Youngquist 7105 Hazeltine Blvd. II Jim King 6640 Galpin Blvd. Martin Kuder 6831 Galpin Blvd. Ted R. Coey 1381 Lake Lucy Road Hennessy's 7305 Galpin Blvd. II Doug & Teresa Bentz 7280 Galpin Blvd. Sandy Ramsey 6681 Galpin Blvd, . Marlie & Breck Johnson 6621 Galpin Blvd. I Steve Buresh 6651 Galpin Blvd. Mike Gorra 1680 Arboretum Terry O'Brien 1420 Lake Lucy Road Al Harvey 1430 Lake Lucy Road II Mark & Kathy Sanda 1685 Steller Court Clarence & Phyllis Haile 1675 Steller Court Dan Wegler 7010 Ches Mar Drive I Merle Steinkranz John Waldron 1800 Lake Lucy Road 1900 Lake Lucy Road Alan Peterson 1831 Lake Lucy Lane II Bob Christensen 1511 Lake Lucy Road Jerome & Linda Carlson 6950 Galpin Blvd. Sam & Nancy Mancino 6620 Galpin Blvd.. Eric Rivkin 1695 Lake Lucy Road I Don Kelly 2081 West 65th Street Mark Red White Representing Prince R. Nelson Joe Morin 1441 Lake Lucy Road 1 Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. I'd like to start out this presentation by introducing the former City Engineer, Mr. Bill Monk who was the II City Engineer for Chanhassen during the planning stages a few years ago for this project and he's here tonight basically to give a brief overview of the history that occurred in the development of this project. 1 Bill Monk: Mayor, members of the City Council. . I feel a little strange being here tonight after being one for so long but I was the City Engineer back in 1986 when this project was essentially conceived and brought to the public I hearing stage and after talking to Don, with him being absent this evening, he asked me whether I could come over and do a brief history, and the key word is brief and I will do that tonight just to bring everybody up to speed. I'm not II sure who remembers this project on the City Council and so on but to just go through a couple of overheads and try to go very quickly from beginning of this project to how we got to where we are and your exsiting staff member, Charles and Bill Engelhardt will kind of help to take over and go over with you how they II came up with the assessment roll you have before you. If I can go over here, I'll talk as loud as I can. Here's a copy of a map that the City saw back-in 1984. This was what was shoved before our noses by the Metropolitan Council and IIthe Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. They were having some severe flow II 6 I City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 i problems. Sanitary sewer flow problems with the Lake Virginia lift station and the cities that drained into that from around Lake Minnetonka. Their proposal was to come into this lift station and to build a force main to go all the way from the lift station at this point, across northern Chanhassen and it would tie into a large interceptor that they had over 'in the Riley-Purgatory Creek area. Was going to go along Lake Lucy Road and then down Pleasant View Road. We sat this and we were quite excited for a couple of reasons. One is that we were very worried about a lot of the horror stories we had heard about large force mains, especially with the area that this traversed. If there was any kind of a break with a pressure type main, the environmental problems that might come into play. Additionally there was a second phase of the project that they were going to have to upgrade an existing forcemain down in this area that served as the primary service link, sanitary sewer service link for downtown Chanhassen which we had very serious problems with and we questioned their intentions to really upgrade that as shown on this 'plan. Additionally, Chanhassen and Eden Prairie have been showing gravity trunk lines through Lake Ann at Red Rock area since the early 70's and this is directly contrary to that and we were worried about the costs that the City might incur if we had to at some later date put a local trunk sewer up through this area. What the City did at that point was essentially argue with the Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Waste Control Commission that this was indeed a better plan from several perspectives. Economics being one of the keys. That it was much better from Chanhassen's, Eden Prairie's and Metropolitan Waste Control Commission's point of view to look at a facility that could be used by all three cities. Eden Prairie down in this area was already looking at extending what they called the Red Rock Interceptor which was already within the MUSA line and they were looking at significant costs to do it themselves and Chanhassen had always planned or shown on it's comprehensive plan that the Lake Ann area would be serviced by gravity lines through here. If that force main went in, the City was looking at some point when the MUSA line was changed, having to extend a local trunk up to service the area and really questioned whether we'd ever be able to do it. So in essence what it came down to is the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission was looking at spending $10 million dollars for force main work and then leaving Chanhassen and Eden Prairie to do it's own local interceptor. We were saying that this $15 million dollar project would be in everybody's interest because it would " essentially build those local interceptors as they solve their upstream problems. After a lot of pushing and shoving essentially this is the line that was built. As part of the agreement, Eden Prairie and Chanhassen had to agree to pay local share for oversizing of pipe that was done to collect local flow and the two cities had to put in $1.5 million dollars. I keep wanting to say Crystal. I'm going to say it sooner or later. That's where I work now. Chanhassen's share of that was $500,000.00. As part of the agreement it had to be paid in installments and I believe it's already been paid. The important II thing to realize when you look at this is that in essence what Chanhassen was kind of. . .$500,000.0O for the oversizing of the interceptor line so that connections could be made to that and at a future date and run into that line and you would have no capacity problems. The exact same scenario was played down in the Red Rock Interceptor. The line was oversized to accept the... connections and lateral extensions into that trunk line. The $1.5 million dollars of the $15 million dollar project represented the oversizing that was done just for that trunk benefit with the knowledge that laterals would have to be extended. It 's important to realize that it 's just the trunk benefit essentially that we're talking about or is being looked at tonight. Not lateral , 7 - - 1 1 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I extensions or connections right into the main but essentially the ability to 11 connect and to have a pipe there large enough that it can be connected to. Essentially what this comes down to is the line is rather long but you must remember that sections of the pipe as they were constructed replaced a pipe that was already in place. So you really weren't building this pipe to service parts ' of Chanhassen because they already had service. What we were looking at was the trunk benefit associated with a portion of the City that did not have service at the time the pipe went in. When you break that down, as the engineer has for ' discussion tonight, the part of Chanhassen that did not have service essentially was this part of town that was not within the MUSA line. This map was developed essentially by looking at what area of town did not have service previous to the installation of trunk lines and what part of town did have service or trunk 11 service once the line was in place. The area outlined on this map is done by your present staff shows the portion of Chanhassen that can now derive service. This is very, very close to the map that was done in 1986 for the improvement 1 hearing when this was discussed the first time. There's only two points I'd like to raise about this and then let discussion go on from there. Two important parts of the improvement here were one, what kind of a number should ' we come up with or how should we derive an assessment figure to try and assess these properties because this is very rough terrain. Difficult to serve. If you look at your trunk charges right now, you have between 2 and 2 1/2 units per acre and we knew we were never going to see development like you've got in downtown Chanhassen right now so we tried to take a look at it . What I did back in 1986, we had a new plat in. I believe it was called Lake Lucy Highlands. I took a look at the area included in that plat . I took a look at the ultimate development plan that we required for all lots with 2 1/2 acre lots and did some calculations of useable acreage on that and I came back with a figure of what. 1.3 units per acre and applied that 1.3 units per acre, which is low but it seems reasonable given the terrain in this area, to $600.00 per unit trunk charge that you have to come up with a number that was prorated out on an acreage basis and then we did our best job in trying to figure out where the wetlands were and where the unuseable portions of the property were to come up with the proposed assessment back in 1986 to give people an idea of what their assessment might be for trunk benefit. The second issue that comes into play on this and I know it 's going to be remembered by quite a ,few people is when we proposed this project in 1986, there was a fair amount of discussion about when can we expect this assessment to come due. What you have to remember is back then we had just had a 2 year battle I guess with the Metropolitan Council on ' this whole issue. What we were being told rather firmly at that point in time was that there was a good chance that the MUSA line would not be moved or amended until the year 2000. We heard that over and over and over again as we went through this whole process. I'm sure that I said that on a number of ' occasions, either during the public meetings or during the public hearing itself but in essence what has occurred is that since that time Chanhassen has been successful in having the MUSA changed, as you're all well aware. Now this area has essentially opened, is open to development with the extension of lateral lines through the area. So at this point what is being proposed is to move ahead probably a little bit ahead of the schedule that had been proposed back in 1986 but as far as I can see it is consistent with what was talked about in 1986. Charles and Bill are much better versed in carrying I think the discussion on from this point in terms of how ti,;:•y came up with the numbers for the assessment and the acreages involved at this point. I'll be staying. I'll 1 • 1 8 I City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I be happy to answer any questions on the history but I just wanted to give you a 10 minute recap and I'll leave this up for discussion purposes. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Those of you who would like to get up and make presentations, I'd like to ask you to limit your time period to at least 5 minutes and address the issue. If it takes a few more minutes that's fine but there may be several people who wish to address this. I'd like to open this public hearing at this time. Please state your name and your address. Don Kelly: My name is Don Kelly. My address is 2081 West 65th Street. In the fall of 1986 we had an emergency problem with our septic systems in our neighborhood. Eight homes on my street, eight homes on Crestview Street and five lots on the Whitetail Ridge development were sewered the following year , using existing trunks in the Pheasant Hills area. I do not feel that we should be included in the current assessment. Apparently there's been a discussion with city staff and city staff has acknowledged that we should not be in the current assessment but I would like an acknowledgement at the public hearing that these 21 lots should not be included in the assessment. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Eric. Eric Rivkin: Are you going to discuss this first? Mayor Chmiel: What I'd like to do is continue on with the specific questions . and we'll address a specific question if there are concerns, we can address it but I'll just continue. . . I Eric Rivkin: Okay. Less than 5 minutes, I promise. I am objecting. Mayor Chmiel: Would you state? ' Eric Rivkin: My name is Eric Rivkin. 1695 Lake Lucy Road. I stand up to be counted as an objecter to the assessment. I want to explain what my basis is for the objection. What constitutes it. I feel this is the only chance that I have of either deferring or eliminating what I consider an unfair assessment. There are several things that make up for this basis of objecting that some other people may share. But if landowners feel that the City should enforce it's policy on the comprehensive plan to insure that lots develop recently with newer septic systems, quote. I'm quoting out of the comprehensive plan. "Would not be unduly burdened by new local utility lines and related assessments." And ' if landowners believe in the right to use an alternative drainfield site that was imposed by the City on these newer lots in case the original drainfield site failed, and if these landowners believed that because of the imposed stringent standards we had to install our septic systems at 1 1/2 times State standard I believe. In addition to that the education and monitoring program that's going to be enforced now, that that would certainly delay or possibly eliminate the potential for environmental harm by a septic system. If landowners believe that there's no absolute certainty that even if the septic system did fail that hook up to this interceptor would be necessary or the most beneficial way to solve the problem. Well what about septic systems? Everything fails eventually. Our planet is failing and so will septic systems. Right now there's no technology that we know of we can simply put in place of a failed septic system. We have tendencies to hook up a pipe and deliver our sewage out of our backyard. We 9 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I waste too much water that hastens the process of our planet failing. We don't 11 reuse water or recycle what we should or could. There's an article recently in the Star and Tribune called Metro Areas Water Supply Threatened. It makes it very clear, abundantly clear that conservation and reclaiming waste water is the best water management practice of the future. Not putting your problems out into the Minnesota River. Just to refresh your memories here's a copy of it . Because of efforts underway now for reclamation technology to be applied in a septic replacement situation, there is no absolute certainty that in 20 or 30 ' years we have to hook up to what could be an obsolete and expensive municipal system. And if landowners object , believe that in the event assessments might be levied because of this, that wouldn't occur until at least the year 2000 • ' which was according to the, my impression, according to the original Lake Ann Interceptor discussions. And if landowners believe that the levy amount seems incorrect , given a high probability that being assessed for buildable acres is not accurately been determined, as has not in my case, that's another basis for ' objection. And if you believe that you shouldn't pay for a utility you won't derive immediate benefit from, there's another one. So prior to this hearing I made my objections known to as many citizens as I knew existed in that ' assessment area to help people formulate their own objections, if they choose to do so. As for my situation, everything that I said forms the basis of my objection. Also, the amount of buildable land I have estimated as clearly wrong. I bought , the assessment is based on 4 acres of buildable land. I have 10.3 acres according to my survey which shows, the surveyor wrote 1.9 acres above a recorded wetland contour. And so a difference between 1.9 and 4 is a • big deal. And if you subtract things that also deem lots unbuildable besides wetlands such as steep slopes and if there's a lateral assessment easement that goes down along the lake as you've done with many other lakes with that interceptor, that also takes that out of a buildable status. So that land that theoretically could have 10 houses on it could actually only support 1 or 2. So I guess I object to the way in which it was calculated. I'll give you a copy of my map. Thank you very much. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else? Geri Eikaas: I'm Geri Eikaas. I live at 2763 Ches Mar Farm Road. I'm also ' speaking against the assessment. I'd like to clarify something. You're showing Ches Mar Farm on the map as in the MUSA line. I asked the engineer. He thinks it's not . I called today and I was told that we are no inside the MUSA line. ' That the line is TH 41 so can I have that clarified. Charles Folch: That is correct. That area was not included in the new Comp Plan amendment for the MUSA. That is outside. Geri Eikaas: With that in mind, I did speak with Metropolitan Council. I was told by Metropolitan Council that if we are outside the MUSA line, in reality 1 the City cannot assess us because in fact they're asking us to do something that we can't do because it's illegal for us to connect with sewer and water. So how can we be asked to pay an assessment that we can't do? Mayor Chmiel: Charles, would you like to respond? Charles Folch: Yeah, I think there was some misunderstanding with that information. They were included in the assessment area basically because they 1 10 1 - City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I could eventually certainly benefit and hook up by a lateral to the interceptor. I would recommend that that area be removed from the assessment roll. Mayor Chmiel : Very good. Thank you. Geri Eikaas: Thank you. One other thing. - Trying not to think of just my own situation but thinking of other people, I think Eric brought up an idea and the same feeling that I have that I presently take care of my own soft water system. I take care of my own septic system. I have to pay for maintenance on that for cleaning, etc. and there must be a lot of people in that situation who are now considered to have this assessment and in reality they're being asked to pay for two systems. I don't think that people on sewer and water would be paying to clean out their septic tanks and I don't see how you can do that. Thank you. , Mayor Chmiel: Maybe I can address that. I was' in your particular position at the same time back when I first moved to the city. I did have a septic system and of course the sewer line was available. Not only the sewer line but in addition to that we had streets and gutters, and storm water runoff as well. I was required to remove my septic system from use and be connected to the City's sewer line. I know what you're saying because the total assesment that I had on mine at that particular time was $10,000.00 so I know where you're coming from and most of the other people. But unfortunately, through the growth and progress as we go through the city, those things do become available and the best way to remove any of the impurities that we have flowing is by connecting to. Geri Eikaas: But you're asking these people to be paying before there's even anything there that they can be hooked up to. I see that as different. If it's out in the street it's a whole different thing. Mayor Chmiel: Well, someone has to pay for those things and that's where the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission comes in. They can mandate you that you will pay for that. The City can't pick it up so the assessments do have to go out unfortunately. • Geri Eikaas: Thank you. Councilman Wing: I just want to clear up with Charles. Ches Mar is outside the MUSA line? Is that correct? Charles Folch: That's correct. TH 41 is the westerly boundary. ' Councilman Wing: But they're going to be in the assessment area? Charles Folch: Well, they were put in the original assessment area because they could, or it was determined that they eventually could hook by laterals to the interceptor. In fact, if there was ever an emergency situation where they have some system failures, I'm sure we could work with Met Council to get them on city service. But at this point in time, it does not seem appropriate since they are outside the urban service area to include them in. So it was actually an inadvertent error to have them included. LL I 11 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 Councilman Wing: Then what about the new plat that 's being developed out there 11 for the additional 3 homes? They're going to be on septic systems and their own wells or are they going to be tied in the MUSA? Charles Folch: No, that 's correct . If they're west of TH 41, they are outside the MUSA. They will be on septic systems. . Councilman Wing: They won't be in the assessment area? Charles Folch: They won't be in the assessment, no. If they are, if the properties are west of TH 41. ICouncilman Wing: What am I missing here? Their property is west of TH 41. ' Mayor Chmiel: That 's correct . Councilman Wing: And the same development area that the housing development 's going in. ' Mayor Chmiel: That 's correct. That would be west of TH 41 and that's outside the MUSA. 1 Councilman Wing: But the existing homes are being assessed? ' Charles Folch: They were included on the assessment roll by mistake. I would recommend that they be removed from the assessment roll. Councilman Wing: That 's what I wanted clarified. Mayor Chmiel: Maybe if we can just back up in relationship to Don Kelly's question regarding that connection that they were in Pheasant Hills. Charles Folch: That 's correct too. That was another area where a number of homes were hooked up with the Crestview/West 65th/Whitetail Ridge development . Those areas had been removed and letters went out today to all those property ' owners notifying them that they're removed from the assessment roll. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Yes sir. Jerome Carlson: Thank you Mayor. Councilmembers. Jerome and Linda Carlson. I'm representing 6950 Galpin Blvd. . We have not filed a written statement. ' Does this suffice? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. ' Jerome Carlson: I heard the end of Mr. Rivkin's comments about the acreage and we would have a similar concern. 58 acres of our 75 have been included and we think that if we were to come to you and actually want to develop 58, you might have a real problem with that. So we don't think that 58 perhaps are developable and we would question that. We would like to have someone go over perhaps a topography or some other means of helping measure that. If that can ' be shown to us and we can agree that should we come back at a later date and say well then we want to develop 58 acres because we're being assessed for 58, 12 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 that's fine but we object to that at this time because we don't quite understand it . liMayor Chmiel: If I could just add something. As it shows here. Useable acreage is 43.17 as opposed to 53. Jerome Carlson: There's an additional 13 acres I believe or so. II Mayor Chmiel: Yes, 14. You're right. 57. Jerome Carlson: 57-58 acres. I would like to go through the I and understand that. process with Mayor Chmiel: We can do that. II Jerome Carlson: I don't want to be unfair about it. I just want to look at it. Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. I our project consultant who actually was retained to Tonight in discussion with numbers, we discussed the possibility if there was atlotaof and as the exactly how their area was defined as useable. What we did basically was took II our 1989 aerial photography, which contained the contours of all these parcels and we re-evaluated each of the individual parcels on this assessment roll. The II net effect of our re-evaluation was to reduce and overall there was a reduction in total useable acreage for all the parcels involved. But getting back to what I wanted to point out was that we discussed that if there was a lot of pushing II as to how the useable area was derived at on a particular parcels, we could establish a work session time where we could notify all the property owners if ` they had questions and we could set up a time and get together here at City Hall } and go through that with them. II Jerome Carlson: That would be fine. 1989 was the end of the drought. I think you might find some of that land under water is really the problem. When we II agreed to sign the easement through our property on 1988, March, for the Lake Ann Interceptor, it is my recollection that we asked once again, and I say once again because in 1987 we did ask the City when we purchased our original land, if there would be an assessment related to this. Our recollection is that the II answer was no. It was a means of connecting an area that had to have this utility. That has changed. We think. We understand that there's been a great deal of money spent and that it has to be charged back to somewhere. Linda and II • I do not want to be at all unfair about that. Whatever that means. Our belief is that although we did not think that there would be any chance for development until after the year 2000, there is the pipe in the ground. Has consideration been given to charging back assessments at the time that people choose to II develop their land. If they were in fact among that group that were assured that there would be no other development or rezoning until after the year 2000. In other words, if they chose to develop some of their land prior to that time II or whenever, they would then fall under a new category of being assessed for this particular assessment. I don't know what that does to the Metropolitan Waste Commission's requirements but it's a thought and idea that might strike somebody as being fair. Thank you. II { Mayor Chmiel: Thank -- you. Anyone else? I 13 II 1 -7- — — City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, in the interim. This doesn't have anything to do with Metropolitan Waste Control, it's City's money that we're recouping correct? Mayor Chmiel: Right . Mark Red White: Mr. Mayor, City Council. My name is Mark Red White and I'm representing Prince R. Nelson and his area around here, which he does have a considerable amount. As with the rest of these gentlemen, you know most of that land is under water right now. Was under water when they started digging. There's steep slopes that 's on his personal property and as far as the building on the south side of TH 5, and does this include south of TH 5? Charles Folch: No. ' Mark Red White: Why would I have 3 individual different pieces? Paul Krauss: I would suspect it's the individual tax parcels. Mark Red White: Is that what it is? Charles Folch: That 's correct . It's by parcel number so if there's a group of three parcels, which I'm assuming is the case, all bordering together, you'd get three notifications. Mark Red White: Okay. But then this is about one-fifth of the total cost of this thing and like I said, probably 752 of that is, you couldn't build on it if you wanted to. I just wanted to say there's an objection to it. And the gentleman who was just up here before, I think that was a good plan because I don't think that Mr. Nelson is going to build on that property. That's not why he bought it . It just seems very unfair. To go in and rip something up that was so beautiful to begin with and now it looks like the moon out there. That 's about it . I've got some papers here for Mr. Ashworth. Mayor Chmiel: Good. I'll accept those at this time. Mark Sanda: My name is Mark Sanda and I live at 1685 Steller Court which is right adjacent to Lake Lucy there. I guess the first item I wanted to bring up takes us off in a little bit different direction. Last fall a lot of the same people that are sitting in this audience gathered up at the school when we talked about the final hearings for the land use plan for Chanhassen and you were very gracious in soliciting a lot of input . It seems to me that one of the deals that was struck to allay a lot of people's fears is that you had designated two special large lot areas in the land use plan. In fact I do believe they're designated on the map. One is Lake Lucy Highland and then one was south of TH 5. I walked away from that meeting, along with a lot of my neighbors I believe, feeling that we were told that we would not be made to hook . up to the city sewer. I think everybody relaxed quite a bit and thought, fine. Just three years before we had been told it would be 13 years before the sewer would be coming through and then suddenly the C`:y's out of land and we're facing it 10 years early and everybody relaxed a little bit. So I guess what seems to not make a lot of sense as far as I'm concerned is we were told that we ' 14 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 f wouldn't be made to hook up to the City sewer and water and as a result would not derive any benefit from it. Now we are being made to pay a part of that . It lc- just seems illogical and particular when we realize that we have the border of TH 41 there. Let 's say we pay this entire thing up. • Another couple of years comes by and the City's out of buildable land again, a little bit early again. There's a precedent and now we want to move the MUSA west of TH 41. I think , it's inevitable that that's going to happen. So here the citizens of this area have paid for that pipe and now a large contingent of developers and the like to the west of TH 41 will enjoy the benefit. I'm sure they'll be made to hook up off the main pipe and all of that but I'm sure that's the next thing that we will be facing too when we're told someday that we have to hook up to the sewer which it just seems like this is the path that we're being led down. So I just wanted to add on to what Mr. Carlson had said that what seems fair to me is that when someone does approach you and say I want to split up my 10 or 15 acres into. • 35 lots, 40 lots, that that's when they pay for their portion of this project in addition to the individual hook-up of the individual homes, which I understand ' will be of course another charge at that point. So that's all I wanted to say. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else? Councilman Workman: Can I have that addressed maybe by Charles as far as? Mayor Chmiel: - We'll get back to that Tom. Let's just keep going. We'll come back with some kind of answers on it. I think there's a lot of questions being asked that we'll have to look at. 11 Lisa Notermann: My name is Lisa Notermann. I live at 1450 Arboretum Boulevard. Our house is right there by the entrance of Lake Ann Park. I have a hard time with this assessment because I don't know how we're going to benefit from it. The line is on the other side of the ravine and so there's our property, Lake Ann property, then the ravine and then there's the line. I have a really hard time with this because like I said, I don't know how we're ever going to hook up to it being that it's way over there. From what I understand, only those that will benefit from the line are those that will get assessed for this project. So that's my concern. Councilman Wing: What was the address again? Lisa Notermann: 1450 Arboretum Boulevard. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else? Paul Youngquist: I'm Paul Youngquist from 7105 Hazeltine Boulevard which is TH 41 and our property is pretty much the south piece of property there on the map on TH 41. We've been living in a small farmhouse there and this year are building a new house. The City has required us to not use the existing septic { system but to put in a new one and so we had to do that. Basically I'm speaking against it. We would like to have the assessment line just moved a little bit to exclude ours. Sounds funny but I assume it 's an arbitrary line anyway. I . don't know why we're right at the bottom of tA- property there on TH 41. I have a couple of neighbors next to us and we all have sewer systems that are up to f date and I can't imagine, it's going to be a long time before we end up tying , f 15 ' City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 in. We have absolutely no plans of tying in to develop it . We bought it to live there. We have three children and plan on living there until they're all gone and then we'll think about something. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Al Harvey: Al Harvey, 1430 Lake Lucy Road. It 's been told, I would just like to have it cleared up at the public hearing, that ours will be removed because ' we did put a sewer in front of our place last year. O'Brien and our sewer project . I'd just like that cleared up. Charles Folch: That 's correct . The joint venture with the O'Brien property and later sewer was extended to the property and they paid for the benefit. Al Harvey: Thank you. SClarence Haile: My name is Clarence Haile. I live at 1675 Steller Court. We purchased our property and built our house just about a year ago. We have a septic system that courtesy of the City's engineers was very heavily overdeveloped. Very heavily over engineered to protect the environment. With two basins. With a primary drainfield and alternate drainfield. I think it 's a very fine system and I don't see a real good reason why I should go an alternate ' way with a septic system. ' The terrain that we have on our property, although we have over 4 acres, has only one buildable spot but I would imagine there's been more that 's been planned for but you'd have to be a mountain goat in order to be ' able to get the house sited right. Basically we have very strong, very well designed septic systems and for the purposes of our community and our neighborhood, this interceptor is something that we don't need and we don't ' want. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Teresa Bentz: My name is Teresa Bentz. We live at 7280 Galpin Blvd. . A little over a year ago we built a house on our property and you guys made us put in the best septic system that you could get . It was the best. Way over cost for what we got . And now you want us to pay again? This doesn't make sense. You told us it wasn't going to be developed until the year 2000. Here it is. Mike Gorra: My name is Mike Gorra. I live at 1680 Arboretum on the southwest corner of Lake Ann. I have a lot of questions here but quite a few of them have already been answered. My main question now has already been touched upon is the property west of TH 41 outside of the MUSA line. If and when they are allowed to hook up in the future, will the people that have kicked in and paid for I guess this $555,000.00 is more or less a fixed cost and if the people within the MUSA line for 100: of that cost, will they be reimbursed or given credit in the future if a large chunk of land west of TH 41 is allowed in the MUSA line? Mayor Chmiel: That I don't know at this time Mike. That's something that we'll address that particular question. Mike Gorra: So could there be a provision made to address that in the future? I 16 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 Charles Folch: I could probably answer that now. If we did have an emergency situation where we had to provide service down to those properties west of TH 41, at the time of their hook up we'd do for properties that have not paid a trunk assessment before, we do have a trunk hook up charge which we do collect at the same time that they apply for the hook up permit and that runs about $600.00 and basically this assessment rate was established based on the hook up rate that we normally would have for a trunk charge. So they will pay their share. Mike Gorra: Yeah, I know they'll pay the share but. Mayor Chmiel: The assessments going back to the existing people. Mike Gorra: But it 's already.been paid. Mayor Chmiel: Do they receive any benefit from those dollars is the question , he's asking? Mike Gorra: If the bill has already been paid 100% by the people within the MUSA line and more people hook up, will that excess be kicked back to the people who already paid for the bill? Charles Folch: No. , Mike Gorra: Well that doesn't sound right. Mayor Chmiel: I think what we'll have to do is look into that and see what it is. Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, just to clarify. Any properties that were included, r particularly these properties from the assessment roll that are now dropped, we are not proposing to effect or amend the rate that's being proposed. What we would do is basically from our Trunk 401 fund, cover the costs at this point in time for those properties that have been deleted and when they do hook up, pay their hook up charge, we'll then reallocate the money back into the trunk fund. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Al Peterson: My name is Al Peterson. I own property at 1831 Lake Lucy Lane. Hopefully tomorrow I'll have a house there. We're working for final . II acceptance. About 2 weeks ago we installed a septic system and it sounds familiar. It's SB2 with three 100 foot laterals. These pipes are 10 inches wide. We have an alternate drainsite. I have worked with the City real closely being I did my own contracting to try to work with the City and hook up for example to water, even though it was a 650 run with 2 inch of pipe and a 70 foot elevation. I was feeling that was a little bit infeasible but we went through some wetlands and we did it in March to do that. At that particular time I'd like to raise my objections. Number one is when I got the letter it was kind of out of the blue. I wasn't really aware of anything happening on it. There wasn't a good explanation of what the charges were. There was just a lump sum that said this is what you're going to be assessed at and there was nothing that said as far as the acreage and the dollars per acre. I believe that one of the prior speakers had a similar situation. My terrain is very, very rugged. ' 17 ' City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 There's probably maybe, I think I calculated it tonight . There's probably about 33,000 square feet which is a little less than an acre which could actually be considered a building site. There's a lot of wetlands down in my area and I've been working with the DNR to try to preserve that wetland but it 's about maybe 112 feet wide by 250 feet deep on the bottom end of my lot and then I built on ' the top end of my lot . With the exception _of that , there isn't any other place to put it . The rest is under water. If they are taking from aerial photos, in 1989 there was quite a difference between the water level. It was still ' exhibiting wetland properties and the DNR has expressed a desire,, as with the City, to maintain those wetlands. That I can't see how they came up with the figure which, I still don't know what the figure is. Is it $600.00 or $560.00 ' for buildable acre? Can somebody answer me that? Mayor Chmiel: I believe that was addressed before. Yes. Al Peterson: So it 's around $600.00? Mayor Chmiel: Somewhere in that . It was $600.00. Charles Folch: Excuse me, it 's $539.00 per acre. Per useable acre. Al Peterson: So I'm being assessed for basically maybe 2 1/2 acres of which ' there's max 1 if you take into account the terrain so I just want to make my objections known. Thank you. ' Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Tom Turcotte: My name is Tom Turncot and I don't even have an address. I've ' got a parcel number at this point . Mayor Chmiel : Can you spell your last name Tom? Tom Turcotte: Turcotte. We're on 7 something Galpin Road. At this point we've got 5 acres of nice alfalfa fields. We're hoping to build next year but as I hear about these massive septic systems that have to go in and an assessment for ' something that I can't see when it 's going to hit, I'm not sure how I can afford to build in this community. I've got 5 acres of good land. It's a nice place to build but we're talking astronomical septic systems and things I just don't see how I can use. So at this point I just can't tell how this can be justified. Parcel No. 25-0101520. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. ' Joe Morin: My name is Joe Morin. My address is 1441 Lake Lucy Road and I hav e a written objection here that I'd like to file. I'm not going to go over the details. Basically they're the same as many of the other people have already spoken. My total acreage is calculated incorrectly. The number of buildable sites is calculated incorrectly. If you look at the setbacks from existing wetlands and the setbacks from property lines and all that stuff, there's only ' one buildable site and that 's one where I'm presently building on. And again ' I'm in the same position Al's in with a brand new septic system built to -modern standards that we just paid for last year. Finally, it 's basically totally cost prohibitive for us to ever think of connecting to the Lake Ann Interceptor ' 18 City Council M- 2ting - August 12, 1991 because we're on the extreme far east of this boundary and in order to get connected it would have to go through all kinds of wetlands. Through Prince's I property. It would be very destructive to the environment and a total waste. We'll never see any benefit from it . The other point is that, I believe that the Ortenbiat property, the one to the extreme east is, their development proposal calls for a hook up to the east. Not to hook up to the Interceptor so it'd be far easier for me and less destructive to the environment to also connect to the east someday should that ever be necessary, which it won't. The other points are more general points. First of all you've got a $15 million dollar project and we're looking at 3: of that. $500,000.00 and we're trying to say how can we fairly distribute that among the residents of-this area and there really is no fair way as you're hearing. The primary beneficiaries are the people to the west who aren't even in the MUSA line yet. Certainly we are not a primary beneficiary being extremely to the east and the people who have new septic systems. It 's unfair to them also. My recommendation is that this whole thing which was intended to connect two major areas of the City be funded from the general tax roll and that everyone in the community pay a "fair share" rather than unfairly doling 3% of it off to this portion of the community. Also I guess my other points are that all along we were assured that we wouldn't receive any assessments until we did develop the property, if we ever did develop it which we don't ever want to do. I think that would be only fair and also the year 2000 is something that I remember real well and I also have a copy here of the provisions in the Comprehensive Plan which we feel apply to our properties along the south side of Lake Lucy Road which have new septic systems as well as the people in the other areas who this provision was also written for. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Joe. Anyone else? Ted Coey: Ted Coey. I live on 1381 Lake Lucy Road and you've got quite a hot 11 potatoe here tonight. I've been a resident of Chanhassen since 1976. None of you were on the Council back even when this was passed back in 1983. If you were you would have remembered that we went through a lot of discussions. I think we had some of the hearings on this at the school. And as a lot of people eluded to, the year 2000 was brought up-numerous times. I was at all those meetings. Vehemently opposed to this whole thing. They said first of all that it would not be assessed until the year 2000 and that if you couldn't use it, you wouldn't be assessed for it. There's quite a few people here who feel that they are never going to use this system. I've got 20 acres. I'm right to the east of Joe who just spoke and I am right next to the Lundgren Bros. development. If I ever did develop I could connect right to their, they're going to have the line right next to them. It's insane for me to run the septic system along the Lake Lucy and back the way Joe talked about. You're going to ruin the environment. I could easily connect when Lundgren Bros. gets their development going and I think a lot of people on Lake Lucy Road could go east. I've got the biggest block there. Once I connect people west of me could all connect. Why in the hell run the line all the way west to the interceptor? I mean that's a tremendous amount of money and I don't know how you'd pay for it. Number 2, when this thing was originally talked about, the main purpose of it at that time, which Bill talked about, was to help the communities that were having trouble with the flowage. That's why this thing was put in with the potential of land out west being someday in. the MUSA system. - I think you're trying to hit the people in the small area for a system that that is helping not only i - 19 I 1 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 Chanhassen but Eden Prairie which everybody's talked about . I think Joe's idea and some of the other people have brought up the same thing. I think this should be a city wide assessment . The City should be paying for this. Not, us. I mean a lot of these people will never use this thing: There's no way they could use it . It isn't feasible. I think if you were in our situation you'd be up here talking too. Mayor Chmiel: I've been in your situation. Ted Coey: But you haven't been in the situation where you are not going to get any use for something that you'll be paying for. You hooked up to the sewer. 1 can't . If somebody ever does develop, for instance Prince develops his 200 acres, whatever he's got , he should be forced then to pay. But he bought that land to live on and not to develop. He's not a developer. I just don't think that the thinking on this whole project is right . You've also got a situation, I've been listening to about 4 or 5 people come up here. You're taking out people here. You're taking out people there. The staff screwed up on this. They screwed up on that . I mean you're not going to have that many people left to assess to start with. Why don't you just spread it over the city? I think there's a lot of issues here that the Council's got to talk about as far as being fair on this. As a 15 year resident of the city I've seen the ' Council make some big boo boo's. With the downtown area, this is one of the bigger ones. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Ted. I appreciate your saying that we weren't sitting at the time when all those boo boo's were made. Ted Cocy: That 's why you got voted in. Mayor Chmiel: We realize that. I have one other gentleman right here that wanted to speak. I think that baby's getting tired and it 's time to go home. Mike Schultz: I'm Mike Schultz and I have a property 2150 Crestview Lane. I'm sorry if this is redundant . I wanted to see, somebody had indicated that Crestview Lane and the Pheasant Addition was out now. Is that accurate? I do have a question additionally. We purchased the land in February of 1990 and we subdivided the land for financing purposes into two lots. One lot was carried on a contract for deed. As I understand it , the people we bought the lot from put ' some money in escrow for this special assessment and after we subdivided the lot , after the closing was done, we got the notice this last week that we got the special assessment on the subdivided lot that we did not develop and in fact ' it's hardly a developable lot at this point. I'm just wondering what the rationale is at this point for people who have come in and just bought or subdivided after the money has been put in escrow from people who are excluded in this area. Whether it makes any difference at all. I don't know if it does ' or not . Mayor Chmiel: Charles, can you address that? ICharles Folch: Yeah, Mike and I have had a phone conversation over this and ' unfortunately he has two parcels of record and -!'ie other parcel is developable and can have sewer service to it. Therefore it is a developable piece of ' property and therefore should be assessed as such. 1 20 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I John Waldron: Mr. Mayor, City Council. My name is John Waldron. 1900 Lake Lucy Road. For the record I don't know if the Council has definitely acknowledged it but Lake Lucy Highlands, of which I'm a part, is definitely now classified as no sewer service? Mayor Chmiel: Paul, you have the MUSA under control I think. Paul Krauss: Yeah. It's a rather involved issue but Lake Lucy Highlands, Timberwood and Sunridge Court were called out for some special treatment in the comprehensive plan. Now everytime this issue was raised during the comprehensive plan we asked people to differentiate between the Lake Ann Interceptor, which was already a pending assessment, and new local services that the City would be putting in the future. We said that we might have some control and we'd try to be sensitive and not run new services through these neighborhoods. However there was never any indication given and we tried to be very specific about it that this did not apply to the Lake Ann Interceptor. Lake Lucy Highlands was one of those areas that was set aside for some special consideration and sensitivity when new lines were put in. Essentially lines ' that would feed into the Lake Ann Interceptor. John Waldron: Does that mean the way the revised comprehensive plan is now that we're not eligible for sewer service? • Paul Krauss: No it doesn't. Your area is eligible and I think we went to pains, the policy that Eric started to read is really rather lengthy.and indicates that we assume that these systems will fail sometime in the future and at some point we'll have to provide service. But until they start to fail we don't anticipate the City spearheading the effort to serve these areas. John Waldron: Okay. My objection is along the lines of what other people have said. When I built my house I had to locate in a certain location because I had to have a primary and secondary septic system. Also the whole rhetoric about the year 2000 was talked about many times both by people from the City and the realtor and the person who owned the land and plotted out all that sort of thing. Then we had just gone through, shortly after we had built it, that the water was run down through there just after we paid a lot of money for a brand new well. Then the City at that time said well just because you put the new wells in we won't make you get charged for the water until you actually hook up. I feel that same way about the sewer hook up. You know there's a likelihood that it's going to be a lot of years, maybe even past the year 2000 before you'd ever run a trunk down Lake Lucy Road and I think if you do feel that you have to charge us for the trunk on Lake Ann Interceptor that you do defer it until what . time you'd end up running the lateral down Lake Lucy Road. Then we will be paying truly for the benefit that we are receiving. I also like the idea of setting up some kind of workshop because from the amount per acre that's assessed, it looks like my whole 4 acres is getting assessed and I'm sure that there's a certain amount of that that can't be built on. So I would appreciate that and from here what exactly is going to happen as far as making a decision? } Are you going to delay it until people can get the buildable acres or whet do you plan on doing? s Mayor Chmiel: I'll reach that decision when we get done with the rest of the people and I think I'll answer your question. 21 1 City Council Mc: ' ing - August 12, 1991 John Waldron: Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it. Merle Steinkraus: Merle Steinkraus, 1800 Lake Lucy Road. I just have a just letter of objection to the assessments. Who do I bring it to? Mayor Chmiel: I'll take that . Thank you. Anyone else? Steve Buresh: My name is Steve Buresh. I'm in Lake Lucy Highlands, Lot 2, Block 1. I can give you a parcel number if that is more beneficiary. Mayor Chmiel: That 's fine. Steve Buresh: Okay. Well, I hate to sound like a broken record but a lot of • the same comments that people have made prior are the same comments that I have to make. I'd like to add a little bit to that in that it sounds like from some of the previous speakers and the letter that was sent to the property owners, it is not clear exactly to some people whether there is a pipe in the ground. Are ' we paying for a hook up? Are we paying for a main feed that is already installed? It is my understanding that it is already there and we're paying for something that we are not going to be hooking up to. That's a strong objection on my point. The year 2000 again was brought up. There's been no significant ' building in the area. There's no reason for having the City having petitioned to have included this area into MUSA line. The large lot requirements to build on are sufficient and we were required to present a primary and secondary ' ' drainfield site. So each of us has adequate acreage to build a secondary system. There's very little danger of contamination to other property owners from these sites because of the strict standards that the City did impose upon us. And also I'd like to offer this one little aside. Not in sarcasm or anything but I was talking to a neighbor's dad and they offered this comment . Would you pay for a telephone line if you didn't have telephone service because it ran in front of your property? I don't think you would and I don't think ' that 's ever happened. I do think that at such time that we are required to hook up, then that is fair to charge people for it . You don't get charged for something that you don't have any benefit from and we will not have benefit for some time. This area is not growing. The Lake Lucy Highland area is not growing. At this point I believe I could be incorrect but I think it is almost nearly fully built with homes or the lots have been purchased and so I'd just like to offer those comments and reiterate the objections to paying for the ' assessment at this time with no benefit and thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Yes sir. Jim Murry: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. My name is Jim Murry. I live at 6640 Galpin. The question I have is simply one of clarification. Since this was the appointed time in which to lodge objections I would like to simply for the record understand that this work session that was intended to be brought forward would be sufficient for those who do have an objection to better understand how their assessment is arrived at rather than having to specifically place forward my specific objection at the time. That is my concern. I just need to understand it better and would hope that I could challenge it at the time the presentation is made. Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you. Anyone else? ' 22 1 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I John Hennessy: John Hennessy, 7305 Galpin. Back in 1984 our taxes took a dramatic hike. When we addressed the City on this they said well, you're paying for the sewer over on Pleasant View Road. I said well how nice. We'll never get any enjoyment out of that will we. No, but you're paying for it . Everybody in the City is paying for that. Now you're coming to us and putting a sewer that we don't want, need or got to have in our area. Cough up. Come across. I mean this could just as easily be put on the general tax rolls. A little comment. It seems that there's this cast in stone mentality and I don't know where it comes from or why it has to stay but why do we have to have development? Why does every inch of the city have to be developed? It 's like there's this drive to have this area developed and then this area. Why can't we dare to be a little different and have some areas of our city preserved? There's so many of us in this room that enjoy the open acreages. We bought anywhere from 2 to 200 acres because we like it that way. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to pass that down to some homeowner 20 or 30 years from now of that same mentality that would like to have a little distance. A little fresh air. A little less curb and gutter in their backyard. Thank you. Dave Weathers: My name is Dave Weathers. I live at 7235 Hazeltine Blvd. . I'm ' actually south of Paul who indicated he had the south property. By the way that's a tough act to follow. I certainly agree with you that and that's my question too. Why does this area have to be developed? Why does the City continue to push on? Apparently it brings on problems. That's why we're here tonight is because of these situations. I want to go on the record as being opposed to the assessment on the grounds that it 's based on speculation. There's no certainty that my property or properties around me would ever be connected to this interceptor. It appears that just going based an aerial photographs, this • is not a very accurate way to do that and I would suggest that the assessment be deferred until the future when they can actually determine who's going to benefit from it and who isn't. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else? This is your opportunity. Okay. I guess what I see presently right now is, there are a lot of questions that have been asked and rather than coming to a decision at least this evening I would just as soon keep this public hearing open and I'll bring this back and discuss it with Council. What I'd like to see is each of these respective questions that have been asked be addressed and discussed with a conclusion. --I don't know how long it's going to take you to do that Charles but what timeframe do you think this would take to pull this pretty much together? Charles Folch: Well we could certainly try and shoot for the next meeting. Mayor Chmiel: Next Council meeting? Charles Folch: If we can get the Minutes in a rather short period of time and then we can get to work on it so I would at least attempt to try and bring it back on the next meeting. Mayor Chmiel: That would be August 27th? Or excuse me, August 26th. I Charles Folch: August 26th, that's correct. t j 23 • 11 City Council Met ing - August 12, 1991 Resident : Don, are you saying that he's going to address the questions that were brought up or also the one that we wrote in our letters. . .? Mayor Chmiel: I think all these will be addressed. Those that we have in ' response to the letter and questions. Resident : I'm wondering if something we're going to get together in some kind of workshop? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Maybe what you could do this evening is sort of come up with a timeframe to have this workshop on a specific date. Bill Engelhardt : I was going to say your honor, I don't think we'll have time to hold that work session with the property owners between now and the nnext Council meeting and wrap up all the questions. So what I'd like to do is try and get the work session done between now and the next Council meeting and then probably between that session and the Council meeting after that have the ' questions addressed because we'll be able to go out and survey the properties with the property owners and meet with them and talk to them and see where we're at. Resident : We've got Labor Day in there too. Bill Engelhardt : Yeah. So it 's probably going to be, it probably would be the 1 second meeting in September. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. That would be September the 9th. Do you have a definite date you'd like to set up for this information that you wanted to? Bill Engelhardt : I think we should think about that . We'll notify the property owners. Mayor Chmiel: Everyone who's been assessed accordingly will get that opportunity of receiving a letter with the time and where it will be held to further that discussion. Council? Councilwoman Dimler: Do you want us to comment? Mayor Chmiel: I don't know if we need a comment but if. Councilwoman Dimler: I just have a few questions that maybe I would like staff to address and one of them is, I'm not clear if we're discussing anyone who has already have service prior to this project if they're being assessed twice. Also I'd like to see someone address the economic impact on our city if we don't assess until the properties develop or until they hook up. And I'd like to see, to know when we pay the bill, can we carry the debt load until such a time and how this will affect our budget and our property taxes as a result. Mayor Chmiel: I think all those are the specific questions that have been addressed. Richard. Councilman Wing: That was my big question also. One I jotted down as we were going along. I don't fully understand the environmental impact to some of these 24 I City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I things. Are the new septic systems safe Charles and are they as positive as being described here or would the City long term benefit by trying to force if you will or encourage people to hook up to sewer and handle it in one central position so I guess if you could address the environmental issues of the septic system, assuming that they're new and up to current standards versus if we were all hooked into the system. The other item was you're excluding the people west II of TH 41 but the people west of TH 41 probably have the greatest impact on the water quality and pollution of Lake Minnewashta and shouldn't they maybe be encouraged to get in on this system. We were certainly encouraged to do so back II in the 70's and I'm certainly glad we did. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thomas? II Councilman Workman: I say we call in the old touncil.by Prine was being dug and boy was it deep and I�knew rthat bwas to when that big cost somebody someday. I didn't think it'd be this close face -to face. We II bought bonds to finance this didn't we? So we're sort of all paying for this now. The MWCC, you just say those 4 letters, it will bring the hair up on anybody's neck here. I think there's a unique situation here and I'm glad we're not going to vote on this tonight because I don't know how we can. I haven't II heard an unreasonable argument in the room tonight. Every one of them makes sense. But we do have a unique situation. We have Jerome and Linda Carlson's property which is a big piece sitting. The Song property. The Prince property. 11 Maybe the Gorra property won't be developed. Maybe it will. I don't know. The development question is going to bother us and nag us for years and years to come and I don't know that we're the ones that are saying let's develop. I II guess I'd like to know the cost of us saying to somebody with a large developable piece of property, no you can't develop. I think we'd have a real problem with that. People that own property develop that property. The City Council does not. We know what happens when we get into the tangled mess of z telling people what they can and cannot do with their property, let alone they're going to have a sewer assessment, and so I don't want to get into that one. But this huge thing obviously took care of a problem. Eric, you're II article, if I know the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission and the Metrpolitan Council, they are the biggest y ggest supporters of sewer systems around. They want _ sewer systems. They do not want people to use septic, if it's my understanding. That's the only way I've ever heard it and that's why they have a MUSA line so II we don't develop too fast to outgrow the sewer which maybe we have and I don't know but. I don't know how people outside the MUSA line can be assessed unless II we can figure a way to get them in. I just don't understand. There's so many unanswered questions in this whole thing that I'm glad we're tabling it. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, but we're not tabling. We're keeping the meeting open 1 until we get some of the questions answered. So I'd like to thank you at least for coming out this evening. Offering your input and we will come back on September 9th with answers to the questions and then also Charles will be II sending out a letter for those of you who have the interest as to each of your respective properties and how that was taken into consideration. . . .The question was, will the Council be at that workshop. We sit on so many meetings that one IImore isn't going to make that much difference. # Councilman Workman: But are these going to be addressed individually also? - II 1 25 - I City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 11 Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Yes they will. IIResident : Will a work shop date be published so those who might not be here tonight will get it? 1 Mayor Chmiel: I would think so. I think what we'll do is send out to everyone on the assessment roll. So everyone will be notified. 1 Resident : Of the workshop? Mayor Chmiel: Right . So thank you. Appreciate it . IIADOPT ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR FRONTIER TRAIL, PROJECT 89-10. Public Present: II Name Address I Jim & Linda Mady 7338 Frontier Trail Harold & Leona Kerber 7216 Frontier Trail Gary Boyle 7214 Frontier Trail I Jim Kraft 7318 Frontier Trail Paul Differding 7228 Frontier Trail Wayne Mader 400 Highland Drive Craig & Deborah Luehr 7226 Frontier Trail 1 Ed C. Jordan 7341 Frontier Trail Jim Waletski 7334 Frontier Trail Helen & Bill Loebl 7197 Frontier Trail 1 Steven Berquist Don King 7207 Frontier Trail 7200 Kiowa Circle Pat Pavelko 7203 Frontier Trail II Debra Van Dyke 7196 Frontier Trail David Wallin 7303 Frontier Trail Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Our project consultant 1 engineer Bill Engelhardt is here tonight to give a brief presentation on the project . 1 Bill Engelhardt : Your honor, members of the Council. Again my name is Bill Englehardt. We're the consulting engineers on the project. This is the assessment hearing for the Frontier Trail improvement project. Just briefly, I the way the project started out was in July of 1990 there was a feasibility study completed to upgrade Frontier Trail. We held numerous, I won't say numerous. I should say two homeowner meetings where the property owners were invited to discuss the project. On September 11th of 1990 a public hearing was II held for the project itself. That hearing was continued until October 4th of 1990 and on October 4th the City authorized preparation of plans and specs. We prepared those plans and specs and when they were completed we had another 1 public input meeting to review those plans with the public. Go over the proposal. We made some modifications to it anc brought the project forward to - the Council. I believe on April 23rd of 1991 .,;e project was authorized for II construction. The original feasibility study called for a project of $707,000.00. The total project cost now that it 's completed is $620,000.00. 1 26 1 City Council Meeting - August -12, 1991 The main reason for the drop in the cost was the sanitary sewer portion of the cost which is not being assessed. That is being paid for out of City trunk funds was lower than what was estimated. The storm sewer portion of the project , the bid also came in lower than what was estimated. The street portion of the project however did come in a little bit higher. It came in about II$40,000.00 higher. The original assessment called for roughly $1,973'.00 per lot based on 100 foot of frontage. That was a typical lot for a street assessment plus $1,632.00 for the storm sewer assessment. To date the street assessment is proposed at $23.73 per front foot or per foot of adjacent property and the storm sewer assessment is $14.40 per unit . The street assessment is approximately 402 or is 40% of the total project cost where the balance of the money is coming out of general obligation bonds and the reason for that was these people did have a street section up there before and the 40% accounts for the curb and gutter and the increase in size built that street up to a standard city street section. So with that we can maybe open it up to the public and address their questions. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Bill. As I mentioned before, this is a public hearing and anyone who would like to address it , we'll try to keep it to the same 5 minutes per or less. Those of you wishing to address this please come forward and state your name and your address. First one's always the hardest. Ed Jordan: I'm not the bashful type. My name is Ed Jordan. I live on 7341 Frontier Trail. I'm a little bit confused about the dates that I just heard relative to public meetings and announcements. I just moved in last year and I moved in in 1990 and my street was all dug up so I don't know what the heck the timing or the dates you're talking about but it seems to me that some decision was made before I moved in there. At least on Frontier Trail. The question I've got is I've got two parcels of property. Maybe let the buyer beware should be my motto now. One of them is a little sliver of property which has up until the recent assessment had an assessed value of $400.00. I just got a bill for $5,300.00 street assessment related to it. Somehow I don't think that makes sense. I don't mind paying my fair share. I expected to pay around $4,500.00 when I bought the house and the total's up around 10 grand so I guess I'd like some consideration. Mayor Chmiel: And do you have your PID number with you now? Your parcel i identification. Ed Jordan: Yeah, it's 80. Councilman Workman: 8200010? Ed Jordan: Right . That's the little appendage of property that I've got ' which I don't use it. It's just kind of sitting there and it goes along the street. Actually it goes in front of my neighbor's property. I don't maintain it. Actually he maintains it. So it just seemed like it was a little bit out , of whack there relative to the amount of money versus useage. I'm not sure, I'm presuming it's got to do with the length of footage on the road. That's my case I guess. Do you need a letter or something? 1 Mayor Chmiel: Yes. If you have a letter that you wish to spend,' we'll .take that one. Anyone else? This is your public hearing and those of you wishing to address it, it 's your opportunity. _ 27 11 City Council Mee:ing - August 12, 1991 Don King: I'll take the second bite. I understand first of all that in order to be heard or action taken that we must, first of all Don King. 7200 Kiowa Circle. That we must submit all of our objections and comments in writing so I have my scratch notes so please accept my apologies for that. Lived in Chanhassen for about 16 years here and I've seen many improvements taking place of which it 's nice to see Kiowa Circle, Kiowa Trail I should say fixed. 'What I'm very concerned about is the fact that starting back in August of 1989 we had ' many informative meetings and Council meetings to discuss how the whole plan was going to fall in place and the assessment ratio. As a result of all those meetings it was left open regarding what that ratio would be. Much to my surprise I received my assessment sometime shortly after July 25th and it said nothing about the ratio. I made several calls to the City. Talked to Dave Hempel and he finally was able to work up the definition of that it was a 40/60 ratio and that each home had a fixed $1,360.21 per home for storm sewer. I think you said $1,400.00 and something. Maybe I missed a number here. This seems to me that after all the effort that we made to have meetings and the people all along Kiowa with our concern and interest, that there was a complete ' lack of communication between the city and the residents upon that street of where this ratio was arrived at . In fact I listened very carefully tonight to try to understand why did we arrive at a 40/60. In this book here which was dated July 20, 1989 there were about 3-4 plans that were offered and it was a 43/57 ratio that was identified at that time which we all pretty much had objected to. I think we all realize the fact that there will be an assessment. The question is the fairness of that assessment . The number of years we've been here. The fact that there was a substandard street to start with that was put in. To me, as far as I am concerned and my wife are concerned, what benefits we've gained as far as value added to our home is purely the curb and gutter and the apron that has been added to our driveway. Additionally there is a ' triangular section of property which the City had attempted to vacate but because there's an 8 inch watermain underneath it , and I have made a little sketch here of it . It was unable to be vacated and I don't exactly know what the status of that piece of land is but I tell you, it takes me another hour or so to mow my yard now so thank you. I've added about $250.00 worth of improvements there and you can certaily see out there that I've lived up to my ' part of the deal. That if you would come in there and landscape it and clean it up, I would take care of it and I've done so. How the tax assessment was figured based on my comments with Dave Hempel was the fact that it followed the arc of what was to be known as the old street rather than the new street which is about a 20 some foot difference between the arc distance and the straight distance so I would certainly like the straight distance to be considered the same as my neighbor across the street , Mr. McAlpine. I'm further concerned ' about the condition left of Kiowa Circle as a result of all the construction equipment that 's been on that street. It's quite obvious that all the grease and oil and deterioration of that street has not been a result of Ursula Dimler ' tearing back and forth down that street nor any of our previous Council members that no longer live there, because I check her. Councilwoman Dimler: Thank you. Don King: And I think that that is an issue tL-e needs to be concerned. There is also improper drainage in that particular area. In addition I've got problems with my driveway. I talked to Mueller who was your main contractor I believe and he subcontracted to repair and fix everyone's driveways. I believe 28 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 it's the same company. I'm having considerable trouble with this individual in fixing my driveway. It's falling apart. It hasn't even been a year old and I think that's a consideration too. As I go up and down the street I see the same problem in existence. I believe that a ratio of about 10% or less would certainly be considered. I believe that Kiowa Circle should be repaired and this overall driveway issue needs -to'be addressed. The last issue I'd like to bring us is the fact that we were told as a result of all the analysis that the traffic that we would see up and down Frontier Trail would not significantly increase. I want you to know it is a racetrack and someone is going to get killed on that street . The street was made a jog at the very top of the hill purposedly to slow the traffic down. Well I'll have you know it's not. In fact the race is usually down the hill and I wait at night for a big crash at the bottom. I don't know how they make that turn. So I would submit what I have here in writing and my comments for your consideration. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Don. ' Paul Differding: Paul Differding, 7228 Frontier Trail. I guess my biggest complaint is I think the assessment amount is too high. Especially when you look at my driveway. I mean I even work for a utility company. If we came through somebody's yard and did that kind- of work, we'd never be back. Be allowed in the neighborhood again. I agree with Don about the speed. I think - it 's gotten way out of hand. Either we've got to put up some signs. I don't think there's a speed limit sign from all the way down Frontier Trail. At least we've got to get that and maybe some more police to slow it down a bit. That's all. Mayor Chmiel: Can I ask you a question? Is it a repeater? Paul Differding: Some. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, we'll make a point of that. I always welcome vehicle registration numbers. I do write them a letter and they are informed. Before they know it they're having tickets written. I don't like to do that. I don't write them, the police do but we'll make sure that that's going to be addressed as well. ' Paul Differding: You know my driveway, I hope that if Mueller has to redo it that he doesn't get the subcontractor. I don't think I'll allow him to do the driveway again. That 's my opinion. He did a terrible, terrible job. I submit in my letter, I put a copy of the original driveway that I had done and I think Bruce Anderson who works for the City or Engelhardt who sold me the original driveway so he should know a little bit what was there to begin with and I expect the same thing back. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Charles, on this Mueller. Have we paid him off yet? ' } Charles Folch: No we haven't. - - Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you. Anyone else? ! Craig Luehr: My name is Craig Luehr and my address.is 7226 Frontier Trail. Right next to Paul Differding's and I have a driveway very similar to his. Just 29 1 IICity Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 a little history. We moved in May of 1990 and we were aware of the work that was going to be done on the street and the sewer. The assessment that we received was very similar to what we were told that we would get so I don't have a real big beef with the assessment at this point but the letter that I ' submitted to you here at the beginning of this week pretty much sums up three tries. We've tried to get this driveway right and right now, last night trying to get mow my lawn I slipped and scraped my knee on it already so I would like to have it replaced and put in at least as good of a job as it was taken out. Basically the City, everybody agreed to replace the whole driveway because the change in the slope based on the slight difference in the new street compared to the old and that rendered the driveway basically unuseable. So we would like to get something that we can get completely clear of ice in the winter and that we can get up and down so I would like to at least make sure that that is completed before any assessment is finalized and I start paying interest on a job that II know has been completed and is satisfactory so thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you. Anyone else? ' Steve Berquist : I'm Steve Berquist . I live at 7207 Frontier Trail and I have a letter that was prepared by us. It 's been signed by a number of us neighbors as our concern for the assessments and some of the questions which are redundant and some of them are not . Thank you. Jim Mady: My name is Jim Mady., 7338 Frontier Trail. Like many of my neighbors ' I also have some problems with the quality of the workmanship that was done on our street . I also have some safety problems. Those have been addressed. I won't go into those. What I'd like to spend time on is the amount of the ' assessments specifically. Although the assessment came in fairly close to what we were somewhat told, it sounds like the project came in considerably under budget and our assessment , my actual assessment from some of the initial things actually went up. The ratio apparently changed. We should have been informed ' of what was going on at the end. I think the City missed a step here. We should have had a work session prior to this public hearing and let all the information come out to us so we know what 's going on. I believe this project ' went forward without the residents really having a firm idea of what it was going to cost us. We asked for it a number of times in front of the Council and it was kind of just let go until we know what the actual costs were going to be. Well, here we are and now we're being assessed. I have a further problem with the assessment and it's a very large one. We have a 28 foot street put in front of our homes. Real nice. Curb to gutter. There's some problems with our driveways. Mine has problems and I'll be giving you a letter that shows those but I have a real severe problem right now with the amount of money we were being assessed for our street. Approximately all of us are paying -roughly $4,000.00 per parcel. The City is building, going to be building a street out ' in Minnewashta Parkway, 28 feet curb and gutter. Very, very similar street to ours. As far as I can tell, making the exact street to ours. It looks like in the paper those residents will be paying $750.00 per parcel. We're fully paying 5 times, actually more than 5 times more than what these people will be paying for the exact same street. We're looking at, I'm looking at an issue of fairness here. We ask that the City look at the system that Eden Prairie has whereby instead of assessing homeowners, as streets are reconstructed they actually start , they build a fund and everything comes out of the fund. It is funded through general tax assessments. This gets back to sharing the cost 30 • City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 through all parties instead of just those who actually have footage on the street . There are residents in our neighborhood who do not live on Frontier Trail who have to use Frontier Trail. They have no choice to get to their property. They're not paying for that street yet they have no access without it. There are a number of people who don't live on Frontier Trail. They live over in the newer development _area. They come through our neighborhood quite quickly. This is a serious concern and they're not paying for this racetrack that we built. We are very, very concerned about in the neighborhood and we'd like to see the C'ty meet with us separately and discuss this whole issue out before we go through and approve the assessments and I'll give you my letter. Thanks. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Anyone else? ' Pat Pavelko: Pat Pavelko. Live at 7203 Frontier Trail and I guess I just want to echo some of the concerns that have been spoken here. I guess first of all, Frontier Trail at one time was a dead end or a cul-de-sac. The City Council at that time determined that due to the new development that went in at the top of Frontier Trail that the cul-de-sac had to be eliminated and opened through for the use of those people to use Frontier Trail. If indeed that is the case and that is the reason for the elimination of the cul-de-sac, then again if the homeowners on Frontier Trail are assessed and the cul-de-sac was eliminated for those people, then the people up there should also share in the cost. In terms of the storm sewer I guess I've got a question. The storm sewer that was put in, are there holding ponds for the storm sewers before it goes into Lotus Lake? Bill Engelhardt: What we did is we went through and repaired the existing system. The existing system had a series of culverts and some catch basins.. . Pat Pavelko: Correct. You know when you talk about the home improvement or the improvement to your home in terms of the storm sewer that now has been put in and the sewage goes directly into the lake, really instead of the property increasing in value I think it has decreased in value. If you look at the lake by the storm sewers this year you will see a tremendous growth in the weeds that have come up. Cropped up this year and that have not been there in the past. It's a severe problem as the City of Chanhassen decides to dump their sewage into the lake and hopefully somebody is addressing that in the near future. The third concern I guess is the speed and the safety of the street. As I mentioned I live at 7203 which is right at the bottom of the severe curve and if you drive by and look at the curb, you can see the rubber marks of the cars that have bounced off or glanced off the curbs. There have been two accidents in that area in terms of the person that does the lawn, I don't know exactly what address but he was backing up and a car coming down too fast was unable to stop in time. Ran into his equipment. Also we have a dog that jumped out of our little boy's hands. Again, chased a motorcycle and there's two kids on motorcycles that love to come down around the bend and see how fast they can go around the bend and still be able to hold onto it. Promptly ran over our dog. 20 some stitches to our dog. And I mean these are concerns or these are areas that really we did not have a concern with prior to the newly paved street. It's definitely a racetrack. We have three children and I'm afraid that one of them at one time will be hit so I hope you take our concerns and lastly but not least I think what we're all here for is the 60/40 split._ Again, I cannot see a 40 31 I City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 11 split being absorbed by the homeowners on Frontier Trail on an existing street in terms of the repair. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I Debra Van Dyke: Debra Van Dyke, 7196 Frontier Trail. My husband's name is Peter Huber. I have a concern that this was or I was told that , I thought we - were told that this was the first street that had been redone in the City of ' Chanhassen or that it was the first time that it was being, a substandard street was being brought up to appropriate code or to city philosophy or whatever. .I was under the impression that because of that there were several things that ' could not be addressed as, this is our experience so this is what we expect and these are the costs. And we were told, as I understand it , that we would be brought up to date on that on a regular basis and that at the end, no that 's not true. We were told that we would be brought up to date on it on a regular ' basis. During the process of construction when we asked various members and I wasn't personally involved but when various homeowners would ask the City what the construction costs were and how it was progressing, we were put off towards ' the end of the project , which we trust our City and our City Council. We were willing to do that. My concern is that we're setting a precedent here and you haven't addressed our issues with how you went about setting that precedent. ' This is a public hearing and this is one place to start but I would like us to be able to sit down and talk, either on a one on one or a small group discussion to determine exactly what happened and why it 's a 60/40 and that this is the precedent and 2 years from now somebody else in another neighborhood is going to ' be able to make a stink -and they're going to pay half the assessment that we're paying. I would just like to see it be laid out in a way that we're comfortable with and see it happen for future residents as well. Is that correct? Some of that . There was one other issue that I didn't hear addressed and I really didn't participate because we decided not to have our driveway redone by the City's contractor. We were planning to redo it a different way but I understand there's a question as to the homeowner that paid to have their city redone ' because of the apron. You know they did an apron. Whatever it was, 15 feet or depending on the driveway. How far up. Okay, and then the .contractor, Mueller, would go around and say would you like us to finish your driveway. Retop it or ' whatever and here's the cost . I'm giving you a deal, which may or may not be the truth. But the question is, if we paid for, if the homeowner paid for the driveway and the City was paying for the driveway, was there double dipping? ' Absolutely not? Resident: That 's a good question. Debra Van Dyke: Okay. And the reason I'm bringing that up is let's decrease the cost if possible if the homeowners have already paid for it . Let's decrease the cost and that's all I have. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. David Wallin: My name is David Wallin. I live at 7303 Frontier Trail. I've been in Chanhassen there for approximately about 12 years and been over in Carver Beach for 9. 1/2 years previous to that. it 's a good city. Not necessarily always fair though and that 's why I'm here tonight is I definitely don't agree with how I'm assessed. My house is on a pie shaped lot. To the • I 32 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I rear of my lot it goes to a point. To the front of my house, it 's a big pie in front. Now what if my house was a little bit larger in a pie? Well then my assessment would be considerably more than what I'm assessed at this time at $6,358.76. I think that's very unfair. So what you're asking of me Don, and City Council, is you're asking me to pay a little bit more, quite a bit more than the rest of the neighborhood. Now how about another individual that this might come up to later in the city that happens to be on a pie shaped lot? Do you feel that you're being fair? . Excuse me. Would one of you address that question? Don, do you feel that that's fair? Direct question. Mayor Chmiel: In looking at what you have, I would say they're going by the assessed foot of whatever your lot is and that 's what it's being assessed by. David Wallin: But is that fair? I understand what they're doing. Mayor Chmiel: In my position I would say yes at this particular time. , David Wallin: Do you see my position? Councilman Workman: I remember we went over this in pretty great detail because ' it was a new situation. A new scenario and believe me we belabored the fairness question. Do you go by per unit? Per lot? Square footage? And correct me if I'm wrong Bill Engelhardt , this has been discussed on national levels and the , front footage method has been proven most fair and that's why we selected it. Bill Engelhardt : That's exactly right. David Wallin: So that 's exactly right? You're saying that this is the most fair? That my $6,358.76 is most fair to me? Pill Engelhardt : What we're saying is the method of assessment on front footage has been tested many times as being the most equitable way to assess a street project, especially in curb and gutters. And you can show a direct benefit to the property even though it is longer and wider than most properties. You can still show a direct benefit to that particular piece of property. I'm not saying it 's fair. I'm just saying that 's the way it's done. David Wallin: So when I sell my house I should tell the individual, if I sell my house, hey I've got more property out front . It's worth more out front. Bill Engelhardt : That 's very possible. You've got more frontage on the street. David Wallin: But he says you've got nothing in the back. How would you react to that? Bill Engelhardt: I'm not going to. If you want us to look into it and evaluate it and get back to the City Council with what our opinion is, we can.certainly do that. I'm not telling you that it's a fair and equitable way. I'm telling you that that's the way street assessments are done. It's been tested in the Courts. If you don't agree with it, you have recourse through the assessment I appeals through Courts. You can certainly follow through from there. 33 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 1 David Wallin: Okay. I definitely do disagree with it and just a second ago you said that that is fair and now you're just saying that it's not fair. So as you can see there's some confusion here. It 's definitely not fair when you start looking around and asking questions and hearing what other neighborhoods are being assessed and how other cities are picking up so much more and making it a little bit more fair to the rest of the people. I'm starting to hear things, I'm sorry I don't have all my information correct but in the City of Chanhassen the one street that was redone. Didn't the City pay for most of that? Wasn't there precedence already kind of set? Mayor Chmiel: Not to my knowledge. David Wallin: Who paid for the boulevard? Mayor Chmiel: Which specific street are you referring to? Lake Lucy? ' Minnewashta Parkway? Councilman Workman: Downtown? Mayor Chmiel : Some of those are County State Aids. They're dollars that are allocated from the State for those of which offset some of their costs. Which are the basic collectors. Resident : .Our's is a collector too. David Wallin: How about the boulevard in Chanhassen? Who's assessed for that? Main street . ' Mayor Chmiel: nth Street? David Wallin: The main street in Chanhassen. Mayor Chmiel: Each of the businesses within and property owners adjacent to it. David Wallin: And could I ask what they were assessed? What percentage? Does anybody know? Todd Gerhardt : 100%. Mayor Chmiel: I think it was 100% totally if I remember. David Wallin: To the businesses? Okay. That naturally doesn't pertain to us Ithen does it . Councilwoman Dimler: We could do that . Mayor Chmiel: Nice try. ' David Wallin: We have to strike that from the record. Excuse me. You can see my concern though. As being one of the highest assessed property owners in that neighborhood, I'm just looking for fairness here and I'm just wondering how •you as a City Council can help me. 34 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 1 Mayor Chmiel: I understand where you're coming from like I mentioned before with my own assessment. It gets a little testy in total amount of dollars. I see there's another one here that's $6,812.00. ' ()avid Wallin: That must be number one. Mayor Chmiel: I think you're running a close second. No, you're about third. David Wallin: Well I'm looking for help from you folks. I'm looking for some fairness. I agree with most everything that these people said in regards to the information that we were given early up front and a little bit of the confusion that came down as to how we really could have gotten together to make it a little more fairly assessed. ' • Mayor Chmiel: I thought we did, or we tried to do probably one of the better assessment hearings for this previously at construction phases as we went through. I thought we tried to be as fair with everyone concerned in this specific project . We took a lot of time. We held a lot of hearings. We had a lot of open meetings. We had a lot of informational meetings of which has never been done before in this city. We're continuing to do that with every project that we have going through. At least so people have the understanding and the say within each of these particular projects. I think what we're looking at here is what normally what you have is what you pay for accordingly. It's the footage that really gets to that point. Now whether it's in the front or in the back, if you took your lot and turned it around it'd probably be much more to your benefit but of course you can't do that. So with your footage as you have up front along that street, that 's what you have to go by. That's what we have to go by. We try to be consistent within each of these particular projects as well. As we have done before and as some of the Council has done previous to us. ' David Wallin: I understand what you're saying but I don't agree with it and that's why I'm here. And you say that's what I have to go by. No, that's not what I have to go by and that's why I'm up here and I'm looking for help from you folks. Okay. I've got a letter I'll be dropping off to you and is there any timeframe as to when you'll be notifying us again as to what's happened from this meeting? Mayor Chmiel: I think I'm probably going to go through the same thing as we did with the previous public hearing. Is probably keep the public hearing open and respond back to the respective questions that each of the people brought up because I think answers should be given. David Wallin: Okay. And one more concern that I had. When this was brought up I before I was up in regards to the street which was actually a dead end. Now it's a thru street. It was never to be a thru street and the City Council was actually going to be putting some type of bumps in the road there or some type of barrier that a fire engine could actually break down or something. They did not want to make it really a thru street. Mayor Chmiel: That was before our time. All of us on the Council. 35 • 1 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 David Wallin: But see that 's your problem. You came into that seat . You inherit all those problems. Actually they're not problems, they're concerns. ' Mayor Chmiel : May I say something? David Absolutely. Mayor Chmiel: I don't want to use my gavel this evening. I'm saying that yes, we've inherited that given problem but that street is presently a thru street as it is now. There we, a some people who tried to stop that street from going through from some past information that I have read by putting up dirt and a lot of other things to deter those people from utilizing Frontier. Now the 1 accessibility, even in driving anywhere else. Everybody gets a chance to use a driven street no matter where it is. Whether it 's on my street or anywhere else. I can't stop someone from using it . I can't put a toll road out in that road. Everyone has an accessibility to that street. Streets are part of city ' property even though residents have to pay for it . David Wallin: I agree. Then the percentage that the City should be picking up on this particular situation should be more than right now what is assessed to us. That's my concern. Mayor Chmiel: We thought a±. the time the 60/40 was a very adequate split at that particular time. David Wallin: I appreciate your looking into this again and thank you very • much. Mayor Chmiel: Anyone else? Bill Loebl: Bill Loebl, 7197 Frontier Trail. I have some questions concerning the numbers and I believe Mr. Engelhardt will be able to answer most of them for ' me. The first question I have concerns the street reconstruction which is 14% higher, 14.6% higher than the original estimate. Yet conversely the storm sewer came in 16.6% lower than the original estimate. Then on the- sanitary sewer, which was estimated at $223,314.00, the actual came in at 93. I'd like an answer why. Were some corners cut or was it not necessary to repair as much? This is one of the questions I have. And then in addition, there is an item on here in the final bill of $47,371.00 for the watermain construction which was ' not even listed in the feasibility study. Now as far as the front foot method is concerned of paying for it , there was a petition presented to the Council which was signed by 33 of the 47 homeowners and they all were in favor of the ' front foot method. The 33 represents something in the neighborhood of 70% of all the residents. So there's a clear majority of people who would prefer that method and lo and behold when the assessment bill came in, I find that the storm sewer assessment is on a per lot basis and not on a front foot basis. If it had been on a front foot basis, my bill would have been $500.00 less than it is now. Also the figure, the front foot figure of $23.95 which we're being assessed, I'd like to know how that was arrived at. I think that it was arrived at taking 40% ' of the street and add 40% of the watermain construction because when you add the two figures together you come up with a front foot basis of $23.86 per front foot. Also we were told that the three properties on Kiowa Circle are going to be assessed $1,360.00 for the storm sewer. Now if you divide 50% of the storm 36 City Council Meeting - August 12., 1991 sewer upgrade by 57 properties instead of 54, you come up with a storm sewer assessment of $1,288.00 instead of $1,360.00. So I'd like that explained if possible. And finally I want to add my voice to the people who were complaining about unsatisfactory driveways. Our's is in a similar condition. It 's crumbling. Grass is growing through the cracks and I'm afraid in 2 or 3 years we may have to redo the whole thin again but of course I'm not expert. Also we lost 2 trees of which we were never reimbursed because the street in front of our property, as you know Bill is 3 feet lower than the old street and in order to match the new street , our property had to be regraded to a considerable degree and that 's why we lost the trees. That's all I have. Thank you very much. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Bill. ' Bill Loebl: Oh, Mr. Mayor. I don't have a letter. Is it necessary to write one? ' Mayor Chmiel: No. I think your testimony will provide that. Bill Loebl: Thank you. ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, if hearing no others, I'm going to do the same thing because I think these questions have to be addressed. I don't like to see anything ramrodded through. I don't like to have that done to myself and I don't intend doing it again this evening. We will look at each of these respective questions and answer those. I think this, can we get this back on September 9th also? Will that give you enough time? Okay, that's what we have. So with that, this hearing will remain open. It will be continued until September 9th and many of these drives I think should be looked at. I know there is one specific one that Ursula had called me on that she had gotten a complaint on. It is a washboardy driveway. There's no question. I get a little nervous driving in and out every time with all those bumps. But these will all be looked at and all be addressed in fairness and thank goodness we've not paid the particular contractor in full yet so we can get this rectified. So with that I thank you for coming in this evening and I think we're still going to have Council have some input at this particular time. ' Councilman Workman: I don't have any comments at this time other than to say - Mr. Wallin, and most everybody who are probably thinking just like him. I know we were very nervous about this situation. We can blame the Lake Ann Interceptor on a previous Council. This one we can't. However, most people realize that the road needed to be repaired and it wasn't going to be cheap. We are very concerned, I think the Minutes point out that we talked- at great length on how we were going to assess this and I think we looked at 15 other cities to see how they did it because it was new for us. Clearly we spent an awful lot of time. That doesn't mean it's fair. We're friendly or anything else. That's for sure. If there's still something we can do, I sure hope so but I know that the effort was there when we put this thing in. I think we're going to continue to do that so I'm in favor of keeping the public hearing open also. r Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Richard? 37 - I City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 11 Councilman Wing: No sir. This has proven a lesson to me. Don't ever complain. I don't ever want my road repaired. The only thing I'm going to pursue Don, just for information is the traditional assessing going to the users and the cost of those in today's dollars. The State tax. system has an unlimited attack en u.s right now. We saw what the assessments were and our valuations going up and property taxes going up. And as a City Council we can reduce them 1% but the State can come in and do anything they want . I'm still stunned at this past year's taxation and then to come up with these assessments, for me ' personally, it 's difficult to sit here and assess them. I don't want anybody assessing me because with 3 in college, I don't want the burden. So what do we do? I just want to look into alternatives and options to city projects and how they're most fairly handled and perhaps all of us would prefer to have a slight increase in taxes. Overall general taxes and just have the City do these on general funding. Mayor Chmiel: We don't know what that entails as yet . Councilman Wing: Yeah, see I don't know what that entails and I'm sure you ' don't either so I don't want to take credit for any of those comments other than I'm interested to know what the options are and how we might better handle this and Mr. Wallin with that large assessment. It 's frightening. Just because I live on a corner I'm going to owe $2,000.00 more. My interest is what are our options for the future. Councilwoman Dimler: I agree with most of the things that were said here. I do ' have to say a few positive comments however and maybe some of you will remember. I know memories are short but I think that most people favored the project . Favored the upgrade as I recall the public hearing process before. Also, I • think that the process although was very messy, I think that we have to give the developer credit that they were very responsive to individual cases and when we complained they were there. They took care of it . So it wasn't totally ' negative but I'd also like to say that I'm as surprised as anyone here at the 60/40 split . From all of the discussions before and I remember that I did a lot of that discussing, I thought that we were going to go with the 70/30 and I had even mentioned an 80/20 because the road was substandard to begin with. I'm not ' sure that Council ever voted on the split. I don't know where that decision was made and I think that we should rethink that and rethink the 70/30. ' Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Appreciate everyone coming this evening and we will declare about a 10 second recess. ' TROENDLE ADDITION, SOUTH OF PLEASANT VIEW ROAD AND WEST OF VINELAND FOREST SUBDIVISION, FRANK BEDDOR: A. AMENDMENTS TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. ' B. APPROVE DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT. C. APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS. ' Mayor Chmiel: Paul, why don't you start this and give us some information. I'll let Council pick that up as they are standing out in the hall. Paul Krauss: The applicants are requesting final plat -approval with some revised conditions for the plat known as the Troendle Addition. City Council 1 38 1 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 approved the preliminary plat last January of this past year. The plat originally and still ultimately is designed to create 15 single family lots. One of those will be occupied by the existing farm house, the Troendle home that is located on this parcel here. The rest would be open for new development at some point in time. Ultimately the farm house, it's a life estate situation. The farm house would be removed and a new structure put on the property. Access was a primary concern during the review of this plat. The design ultimately calls for extension of Nez Perce through to Pleasant View. This dates back to the orignal Vineland plat which occurs over in this area. Basically Alternative 3 was one of 6 or 7 alternatives that were reviewed by the Council and the one that was selected for making the thru road. This was viewed as the thru road connection that would take place in stages because there are at least three properties that had to be crossed. The three properties include the Vineland Forest plat which today is building out. The Troendle property which is today up for final plat and the parcel owned by Art Owens which ultimately we believe is going to be developed but has been in a bankruptcy proceeding for the past year or two. The residents along Lake Lucy Road raised some concerns with this plat at the time it was approved. It was their concern that Lake Lucy Road, by building this thing in phases that as properties develop into here, that the only means of ingress and egress is Lake Lucy Road, which is true. It's a temporary overlength cul-de-sac situation until the road's connected. They have raised a concern that the traffic levels on Lake Lucy Road, which is a collector street. It's a low caliber collector in that area, would be burdensome, particularly I believe their concern had to do with construction traffic. There was an alternative scenario developed. It was ultimately approved with the plat that called for phased development. Basically what was originally anticipated was I believe 6 lots would be developed in the first phase. Four of those lots would access off of Nez Perce. That basically included everything north of that point. What was intended at that point in time is that the second phase, the rest of the cul-de-sac would be opened up for development at the time that the Art Owens property is developed and the thru street can be connected. That was the condition that was attached to preliminary plat approval in January. We since had a series of discussions with the applicant and I believe there's a basic equity issue that's arisen. The developer, and they're here tonight and they can represent themselves, is concerned that it's somewhat inequitable to put development decisions for a given piece of property completely on the ' shoulders of an individual who has no connection to this parcel. First of all that property is in bankruptcy. Mr. Beddor I think has expressed some interest in the property but is unable to complete any transactions until the property comes out of bankruptcy, even if he did proceed. And secondly, it puts the City in a curious position of deferring decisions on a private property owner's shoulders. Not in the Council Chambers but based on a private decision. There's also the possibility that, a significant possibility that there's increased cost engendered by phasing construction. You basically have to call out the construction crews twice. Once to build the first phase street. The second time to come out and build the cul-de-sac. The cost is not only related to street improvements but also to utility extensions and getting crews out. Having crews set up is a significant percentage of the job and it does raise the price. However, staff and the applicants as well recognize that there was some validity in the concerns that are being raised and we tried to come up with an _ alternative that would secure the City's future enabling us to have some,. very strong likelihood that the street would be completed in a reasonable period of time. Yet to let the development proceed for the Troendle Addition in a i 39 11 - City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 reasonable manner. What 's been proposed is this. It 's that the development 1 that you see before you today would be developed as Phase 1 with the balance of the ultimate 3 additional lots being in the outlot . Now that would put most of the lots, all but one of the lots that would access off -of Nez Perce in at this point in time. Now of course developments don't build out overnight . It takes 2 to 3 to 4 years sometimes to fill it up. What else is being proposed with this is we, our engineering department did an analysis of the cost share that would occur to complete this road. Essentially we believe that whoever develops the Art Owens property will be liable for this expense. It traverses their property. It 's directly a benefit to that parcel and would normally be their responsibility. At issue though is what happens when we curve this back from Peaceful Lane. We need to rebuild this intersection. We know it 's not very safe. We want to narrow the pavement . Hopefully free up some right-of-way on this side as the road curves back down here. This section of street is ' something that we believe should be attributed to people that develop on these parcels here as well as people that develop on the Troendle Addition. Our engineering department has tried to estimate the cost of that , making that final connection. It 's approximately $20,000.00. The amount of lots that will be ' developed on the Owens property is pretty close to what 's being proposed on the Troendle's so there was about a $10,000.00 cost split . The applicants for the Troendle Addition are willing to place in escrow that $10,000.00 so you can ' avoid going through another one of the hearings that you've had several of tonight where you try to go back in and assess people after the fact for something after they're already living there. You would have the money sitting ' in the bank. You'd be ready to go. In addition to that we would have our normal procedures of constructing a temporary cul-de-sac. . .at that point there. There would be a barricade. The barricade would have a sign on it saying that this, clearly that this street is intended to be extended. There would be notices placed in the chain of title of each of the lots in there so nobody would be able to come before you in the future and object to the extension of a cul-de-sac on the basis that they had no knowledge of it hopefully because they ' certainly would. And that we expect, we have an expectation. We can't commit for when properties develop on the Art Owens parcel but it appears that things are moving towards some sort of conclusion over there and it 's not unrealistic to think that this is going to happen before the Troendle Addition is built out. Again I can't commit to it but that 's the way it appears. So with that we believe that the revised stipulations of approval for this are reasonable to the extent that they seem more equitable to the developers of the Troendle Addition and they also achieve the goal that we have of completing that extension for the road in a reasonable period of time. Otherwise the plat is pretty simple. They responded to most of the conditions that we've laid down for the final plat. I ' would add too that there was a variance that came up for some discussion relative to the existing farm house with the original plat proposal. The applicant was able to secure some additional right-of-way in Vineland Forest to take the kink out of the road so it doesn't jog as close to that home as it did ' once before and the variance has been eliminated in the process. So we think it's a pretty clean proposal at this point in time and we are recommending that you approve it with conditions in the staff report. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Paul. Councilman Workman: Paul, quick question. I just have a very quick question. • ' 40 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 1 Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Councilman Workman: Did the Art Owens property go into some sort of condemnation? Paul Krauss: It was in bankruptcy. We've called the State Attorney General's office. It 's supposed to come out of bankruptcy in the not too distant future. I believe Jules Smith, the Attorney for the applicant may have some more current information on that than I have but we're understanding that the State wants to accelerate this process and get the cash out of it and get it back on the market . Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anything that you'd like to address on this first part of it? At least the review of the conditions that staff has also put in. I'll ask anyone else if there's anyone here who would like to address the particular proposal as well. Daryl Fortier: Daryl Fortier here to represent Frank Beddor Jr. . Also with me is Jules Smith, Frank's attorney. We're pleased to have had the chance to work with staff and to go over the proposal in more detail. We're in agreement with all of the staff report but we would ask for clarification of one point which we think is an oversight . On point 8 they point out that the gravel driveway to the Troendle residence is to be eliminated. We were asking originally that Mr. Troendle have a lifetime estate and we not disturb his residence. We would still ask that that gravel driveway be allowed to exist as long as there is only one lot. If we request a building permit or if we subdivide and get another building permit for the front lot, we completely agree to remove the driveway. But until then, as long as there's only one driveway access and Mr. Troendle is using it, we request that we be allowed to keep that. I think that was met with favor before. Paul Krauss: We have no objection to that your honor. In fact it goes a little bit to responding to some of the issues of keeping more of the traffic off of Nez Perce in the interim. We just ask that that condition be written into the chain of title of that lot so that the new owner is made aware of it. Daryl Fortier: Secondly, if I could just take a few minutes. It's running late. I'll try to summarize the roadway issue. The extension of Nez Perce. We favor the extension of Nez Perce as we previously did. Mr. Beddor would like to see this proceed. He unfortunately has no means of making it happen. We have agreed to accept additional assessments to help pay for the extension of Peaceful Lane up to Pleasant View Road. We believe that the Art Owens project when it develops will be sufficient to pick up the remaining cost. This should prevent adjacent neighbors from having any additional tax assessments. We have contacted the State and we have contacted Mr. Owens. We've been working closely with him. We're optimistic that something will be occurring within 2 years and that Nez Perce will develop on it's own volition. Both the State and Mr. Owens have expressed interest in seeing the development occur. There are still a number of issues to resolve so we certainly cannot step forward and purchase the land at this time and Mr. Beddor is not a residential developer so his interest is of course very limited. Regarding the previous proposal and why it was found to be very much a hardship on Mr. Beddor's development. His interest here has I always been to give Mr. Troendle a life estate and to disturb his property as 41 ' ---- -—----- City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 minimally as possible. The previous proposal assumed that there would be four developments on what is Mr. Troendle's property. In fact there'd be zero as ' we're proposing now. This meant that the previous proposal would have required Mr. Beddor to spend over $400,000.00 to develop 2 lots. That 's very much a hardship. The value of the two lots would probably be $70,000.00 to $75,000.00. ' That 's I guess enough said about the cost issue. We are optimistic however that this proposal still makes sense even though it is a long cul-de-sac. It does offer a way out . Unlike Fox Chase which is next door at 2,500 lineal feet , 72 ' residences. Fox Chase has no way to get a second egress. This proposal does. Nez Perce can be pushed across the Art Owen property even if the City must go to condemnation. That 's something of course beyond our powers. I guess that really summarizes it unless there are any questions. ' Mayor Chmiel: I have just one question in relationshp to the plat in itself that we have. I noticed that the name on that is Milton F. Highland, Land ' Surveyor. Minnesota License #20262. It appears as though someone else has signed a name to that under that license number which I understand is not allowable. ' Daryl Fortier: I haven't caught that myself but I do understand that Lot Surveys is the company that has prepared it and that Mr. Ray Prasch, the former owner has sold the firm recently and there has been a change of ownership. Mayor Chmiel: It says Raymond A. Pease. IDaryl Fortier: Prasch? P-r-a-s-c-h. Mayor Chmiel: It could very well be but the name that 's there to the name • that 's above is not legally done. Daryl Fortier: We can certainly get that correct before final plat is filed. Mayor Chmiel: Is there any other questions by Council? Richard, do you have something? ' Councilman Wing: This goes back to the landscape ordinance. We're on the verge of some changes and improvements. This area was a hardwood forest turned to soybean field. Now into houses. Mr. Mayor, if you would indulge me. Mayor Chmiel: Certainly. Councilman Wing: Mr. Workman I'm sure will have something to say after. Is ' there a possibility that we could just ask the developer if he wouldn't consider a little additional landscaping such as has been proposed in the landscape ordinance. Right now we require that they put in one punitive tree if you will and I've asked that the ordinance be changed to reflect a total of three trees. ' Small cost but we've got another soybean field going to homes here without much landscaping. Perhaps they're intending to put trees on these lots themselves. I don't know. I hate to, I wish we. could either throw that landscape ordinance ' out or get it in a fix so as these developments are coming in we could start catching them right now rather than drifting int-. the future. ' 42 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 Mayor Chmiel: I think if I remember correctly what the Planning Commission suggested that they stick with the 1? ' Paul Krauss: No Mr. Mayor. Actually the Planning Commission is considering I think acting favorably. They haven't done it yet on Councilman Wing's suggestion that they look at 3. It was scheduled for last week's meeting and because of several items on ahead of it, we just didn't get to it. It's now being scheduled for our next meeting. At this point in time though there's not an ordinance of course on the books that we can require anything but you can certainly make an inquiry. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. There was some discussion but they didn't go into it fully but there were some leaning to possibly going to those three but I don't know what their decision or recommendation is going to be either. Councilman Wing: I just see another open field being developed without much future for the City and it 's a little frustrating. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? Is there anyone else that has anything to say? Brad Johnson: My name is Brad Johnson. I live at 1001 Lake Lucy Road. We first were notified that there were some changes coming up here by a letter that we received last Thursday. Apparently there's been discussions going on with the City for quite some time and nobody had the courtesy to contact us or inform us that anything was going on. That there was consideration here to approve the whole thing. We left the meeting last January believing that it was the way Paul had stated and now all of a sudden everything's changed. We have heard everything discussed here tonight except our concerns about safety and traffic. We would think that that would be appropriate since that was the basis on which the decision was made last January. That that would be discussed here tonight. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I think that through our new sign requirements that we have for developing properties. Was a sign put up Paul? Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, I believe this started before the signs came out. Now we did take the step, we were concerned that this was a change in condition from which you originally considered. Now we don't normally notify neighbors of final plat approval. In this case we took the step of doing that because we believed that they may want to have some comments and some input for that very reason. It's tough to notify people when you're talking to somebody about thinking about doing something until the proposal materializes and that's what we're attempting to do tonight. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Appreciate that clarification because that was some of our concerns before. People not knowing what's really happening so we've instituted signs to be put up. But this goes back prior to that particular time. Even though a situation occurred, still maybe the signs should have gone up somewhere indicating that this is still the situation. Brad Johnson: We didn't realize it was a different approval-coming up. . . 43 - - ' City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I Councilman Wing: In regard to their property, I guess I'm missing what 's changed. I know the discussion of the corner and the l4idth of the road and your concerns. I guess I'm not , what changes have occurred here? Paul Krauss: What 's changed primarily is that there was, keep in mind that the applicants first proposed and we recommended approval of the entire development going at this time on the presumption that it 's staged approval or construction of the street . When the residents raised the concerns that they did in January- December, there was sort of an atlernate scenario developed and that was approved by the Council and what that said was to develop the property in two phases. The first phase would only have 6 lots, 4 of which would access off of ' Nez Perce. The remaining development was contingent upon the road being completed. • Councilman Wing: But the intersection and the treatment of the road to the west ' or the non-existing road, now that hasn't changed. It 's still going to be straighten out and sight lines. ' Paul Krauss: That 's still certainly the plan, yes. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there any other discussion? Ursual, did you have something? ' Councilwoman Dimler: I guess just as I was reading through this I did think that the comment that it isn't fair to hold up a development for one resident , I guess I agree with that. I think we should go ahead and allow them to be do much as we legally can. I'm not sure right now if I would agree with the condemnation process. I'm not quite sure the timing is right on that . Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that sort of remains to be seen and not to determine what's t going to take place for the City as to what action should be done by City. the Cit Y It will be at the discretion of the Council at that particular time. Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, if I can expend on that too. We asked the City Attorney to do some investigations back when if the desire was there, if we could actually proceed with the condemnation and put the road through today. The answer we got back was no, we could not as long as the property was in bankruptcy. You could condemn it but you couldn't assess any of the costs relative to running the road across there which means the City would have to absorb the entire expense. That seems unrealistic and also as you point out we wouldn't recommend that you commit future Councils to taking a certain action. What you may wish to do though is schedule this thing to come back up in 18 ' months or 24 months so that you can reassess the situation at that time, if you haven't already received the development for the Art Owens parcel. I/ Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Very good. Any other? Jim Stassen: Jim Stassen. I live at 6400 Peaceful Lane which is on the corner where we're talking about getting straighten out. On the, Paul? The other plot you have with the road going through, my chief concern with this is still, I realize the road's going to go through. We weren't informed when this first thing was going to happen so we could come in and vote for our proposal to go straight through from Nez Perce straight up but we've kind of given up on that. 44 I City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I still don't , if we're going to straighten out the corner that exists now and make that, get that more squared off and then go back and put another rounded corner right down at the other end of our lot , that doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. I don't understand why that road can't come out to a T into Peaceful Lane like a normal street would. Maybe even a stop sign there. There's no reason that the traffic's got to be flying through there. It sounds like Frontier Trail has that problem and why create any more of those. I guess that's my main concern. Mayor Chmiel: Peaceful Lane serves probably about what, 1, 2, 3, 4 residences? 3? Councilwoman Dimler: 3. Mayor Chmiel: Including Art. Okay, I thought there was 4. Councilman Wing: Why isn't that a I? Paul Krauss: There's basically two reasons. First of all from a design standpoint when you design a thru street , you typically design it to favor the thru movements. Thai's common practice. Unless there's traffic control situations that you want to deal with. I guess I'd have to fall back on what I said in January in that it's premature to, we haven't designed the street yet. We have_n't designed that section yet and when we do there will be public hearing opened up. We can certainly look at that alternative at that point in time. This is a concept that Dave Hempel and myself developed two years agd' for the Vineland Forest plat. We weren't specifically looking at how that intersection should be designed but rather how the overall system fit together. I don't think Mr. Stasson's comments are invalid by any means but we don't have the mechanism to look at it in detail until we do the design, final design of that street. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussion? Councilman Workman: How are we then addressing the traffic concerns down on the other end of Lake Lucy? I mean I still claim they're going to come down Nez Perce. You folks are all on Lake Lucy correct and that's where you think everybody's going to. - Resident : . . .everybody comes from Nez Perce to us now. Councilman Workman: I thought everyone went into town. Resident: Where do most people work? Downtown Chanhassen? Councilman Workman: I do. But that's then my question but first of all right here. It's very substandard. That concerns me first and then obviously that is going to change the nature but I don't know how else would we be able to redirect that traffic. Paul Krauss: There is no other alternative at this time. As far-as that Nez t Perce/Lake Lucy corner, you're quite right. It's not optimally designed. It was about the best you could do without wiping out a home or an entire yard - 45 I/ City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 11 there. Now from time to time there's been some consideration about opening up 11 that issue and taking the kink out or straightening it out . I think we'd certainly like to look at that but it does have significant impact to one and possibly two homes. So that 's something that could help get traffic to go to the south but no, you clearly in the interim, Lake Lucy Road which is designed as a local collector is going to be the main way in and out until that connection is put through. Brad Johnson: I have a question about that because we were told that previously it was not designed as a collector. That seems to change depending on what people want to achieve. 11 Paul Krauss: Well, if I could comment on that. The guide plan has established two tiers of collector streets. Lake Lucy Road west of CR 17 is designated as a • ' Class I collector, if my terminology is correct from the Comprehensive Plan. ' That is a major street . It 's got an 80, I believe an 80 foot right-of-way. It carries a fairly significant volume of traffic from different subdivisions. Lake Lucy Road and Nez Perce is a Class II collector. It's a thru street . It ' does serve inner neighborhood traffic. The plan does break out the two there but it clearly is a collector street . Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Any other discussion? Bennett Morgan: My name is Bennett Morgan. I live at 940 Lake Lucy Road. I think one of the primary issues that the Lake Lucy homeowners have is when we ' left the meeting in January we thought the issue had been resolved and our primary concern is timing. We have a safety and a traffic concern with the Nez Perce and then the additional traffic, especially the construction. One thing that seems to have changed since we left the meeting, and I think one of the reasons why the Council decided to make the plat amendment were that they couldn't co anything until then. Is that the developer at the time was not in a hurry to develop the lots for 2 years. So what was the hurry in ramrodding this ' through. That fact seems to have disappeared all of a sudden. I mean the key concern we have is that the road go through. I guess we prefer that it goes through in one phase. We're concerned that if the road doesn't go through in ' the initial phase it may never go through and that we'll be continually, forever and ever be sharing the, be entirely responsible for all the traffic. It just seems that that issue needs to be addressed. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: I do remember some discussion about not wanting to do anything with this for a couple of years. Can you address that? Daryl Fortier: Certainly I can. Mr. Beddor's original proposal, when he first purchased the land had very little interest in developing the property. He would be pleased and we originally requested and talked to staff about getting approval with an automatic one year extension attached to the one year we have to develop. Such that we wanted to get an approval that we didn't have to develop and we'd defer development for up to 2 years. We found out we could not achieve that . We could not get it. There's no mechanism available apparently to achieve that . Since that time then Mr. Beddor has accepted the costs that - are going to be involved with developing this and when he started looking at the phased approached he realized that the costs were going to be very considerable and that the only way for him to recoup this amount of money would be to proceed 1 46 • I City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 11 with development. So right now it looks like there would be homes started under construction as early as next spring. That is still I might add a year and a half after he started this proposal. Mayor Chmiel: It's getting close to the 2 years. Daryl Fortier: It's getting close to the 2 years but it is slightly more rapid than we thought it would be. We also have a projection on buildout scheduling that you may be interested in. It has taken one year for Vineland Forest to ' sell 9 lots. Mayor Chmiel: Would you let him finish please. Thank you. Daryl Fortier: It has also taken a number of times for the development in Lake Lucy, which I believe there are 20 residential lots with that subdivision and they still have 6 vacant lots. Over the last year I believe they've added four additional lots that have been sold for construction. There are only 2 open? On my last inspection it appeared to be 6 lots that were unbuilt upon. 4 new ones? Right , that agrees with what I found. 4 additional lots were being built upon this year. That based on the correspondence from the developer last year when we started this project were still for sale. What we're finding is the property seems to be, we find that there would be an inventory here. That there are still 6 lots along Lake Lucy that could be built upon. I don't know if they are all sold. We're of the impression that three of them are for sale and three of them have been sold but a developer is not building on them yet. We think that there will be three homes built next year in the Troendle Addition. The following year we think there will be four and then we think there will be an additional four the following year. That's the best projection we've been able to make. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Any other discussion? If not, I would entertain a motion for the approval. With Paul, I have a concern for the item that you brought up. To look at this within an 18 to 24 month period with regard to the acquisition of the other properties. Now I have a question, legal question. Would this or could this be put under approval of this final plat as an additional? ' Elliott Knetsch: I'm not sure I understand the question. Mayor Chmiel: Paul, rephrase what you said previously. 1 Paul Krauss: Well the suggestion was that the issue of the road extension come back up in 18 to 24 months so the City Council can review it and see if it's worth while going forward at that time. Mr. Mayor, I would suggest that it not be attached as a condition of the plat. The plat would already be filed and there's no inference that we'd be coming back to them for anything. We already have their money but that you direct staff to schedule it. Schedule the review LL independent of the plat in that timeframe and then we would bring it back before you. And if nothing's happened by then, you can evaluate whether you want to go ahead at that time. E Mayor Chmiel: I would so move that Council at that time should review that within a 24 month period. Between 18 and 24 months. I 47 • City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, I don't mean to draw this out but for the Lake Lucy neighborhood, I served 10 years on the Public Safety Commission and speeding was sort of our little bag and police enforcement and safety issues a'nd I've heard you comment since we first came in on this last year. I. think I agree with Paul. Lake Lucy is a collector . Lake Lucy's going to be supplying Nez Pence and Carver Beach and growth is here. Progress is here. This area is going to be developed. I don't think this area is your demise. I think you live on a straightaway. A street that 's going to be busy and I don't think that this 1 particularly is goin' to be your worst problem. But I am concerned about your road. I think you do have a problem but it 's a separate issue. I don't think we can tie it to this addition and the additional homes and cars. I think we have to tie it to the entire growth and the fact that that road is going to be serving a large area. I'm Just going to suggest that you don't hesitate to get ahold of our public safety director and specifically deal with the safety issues, speed and traffic because I think you're going to have to irrespective of this addition. I think you've got a problem. Brad Johnson: . . .but let 's face it . You've got one police officer in this entire city . They can't do it . That 's a separate issue that the City Council . . . Mayor Chmiel: Maybe we'll volunteer one or two of the City Council people here to sit with a radar gun. Brad Johnson: I mean one night it too 25 minutes for a police officer to get there so let 's face it guys, you're going to have to get people to. . .but that's a separate issue. Councilman Wing: My own comment is I think your safety concerns here are a separate issue that you're going to have to address. ' Resident : How about construction traffic? Could that enter through. . .? Mayor Chmiel: Good question. What concerns, if any, would the developers have to that? Daryl Fortier: We of course don't want to disturb Mr. Troendle's lot and we have a low area that's going to be used for ponding. Perhaps I can best point this out to the residents as you all have, each of you has a smaller drawing. We have a low area here that 's going to be reserved for ponding which will deny us access off of Pleasant View. The only other choice we really have without going through his grove of trees, which we certainly don't want to do, would be to use his present driveway. At first that sounds very disruptive to Mr. Troendle. That 's a gravel driveway and there's going to be a lot of dust to get to the street and it 's quite long. However there is a third alternate that may work. That is Mr. Beddor is interested in acquiring these three lots and this would allow us access the three lots in Vineland plat which currently has a utility and grading and drainage easement over it and is intended to be used as ' a driveway. If we could use that area we would have to check out how strong the utilities are to make sure we don't collapse them. There is a chance we could possibly get traffic in in that direction. We'v . also made a request and we've ° secured the grading permit to close this off and Id relandscape the front 48 I I City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 portion. We would simply have to withdraw that and not do that work but I think this is something we could seriously look at. Paul Krauss: It 's tough to react to that just off the cuff but staff's original thinking on Vineland Forest is that the road connection should have come out there so we're turning back the clock 2 years, even on a temporary basis. But what we have there right now is a fairly narrow driveway. I've driven it quite a bit. It was okay you know for when we had the one house back in there but I really wouldn't be too excited to see it, particularly in it's present state, carrying much traffic. It also runs, while it's on the Vineland Forest plat, it runs against the back yards of some adjoining properties to the east and I believe that they may have some concerns about having traffic introduced in their back yard. Mayor Chmiel: There is. That's true. . . Brad Johnson: . . .there's a very short distance between the end of that driveway and where Nez Perce will begin. I would think that. . . There's a lot more of us on Lake Lucy that have. . . Mayor Chmiel: Maybe that's something that can be discussed between developer and staff. If that determination is there, then maybe that's the way to go but . II if not, then they would have to go the other route. Councilman Wing: And we hope the Pleasant View people don't catch onto this. Mayor Chmiel: That's right. Karen Green: I'd like to make a comment that just on Lake Lucy Road. Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to just state your name. Karen Green: My name is Karen Green and I'm at 1021 Lake Lucy Road. Just on Lake Lucy Road alone there are 16 children under the, oh excuse me. 17 children under the age of 8 that live just on that road alone and I know that there are very many of us that stay home with our kids and I mean we do try to watch very carefully but when there is new development on our street and there's trucks parked along the sides of our roads, it's very tough to have one car going through and traffic going through there at all times. So for me it makes me very nervous to have my kids out at all because of all the traffic. That's my concern right now. Brad Johnson: This morning for example there was 8 or 9 construction trucks on our street when I left for work at 7:00 a.m. . We don't really need any more. Mayor Chmiel: Well that unfortunately in a developable area, that happens and there's really a hard way to control that kind of. Daryl Fortier: Regarding the issue of using the Troendle driveway, there will of course be some problems with it and we're really not in favor of that. In inclement weather, any vehicles using Mr. Troendle's driveway are going to • pretty much destroy it. It is not a paved surface.. It's something that's going to cause a hardship to Mr. Troendle so he has poor access. Also, his family and 49 - 1 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I relatives that may want to visit . It 's not a good situation for anyone person to be subjected to. However, the idea of where the old road is or was proposed to be originally, even if it is cycling back the clock, that 's an issue where no one lives and counts on that for access. So even if it's slightly destroyed during construction we can always restore it without affecting any one person. It is close to the neighbor, I agree and that neighbor would be suffering. That 's an issue we have to look at . We also have to look at utilities underneath it . Make sure they're not destroyed. But I really see that as being ' much more preferable to even considering Mr. Troendle's driveway. The driveway we know would be destroyed in short order and since we're looking at 3 or 4 homes. 4 homes and 3 homes, you would be looking at almost 3 years of having his driveway destroyed. For an €32 year old gentleman, that's close to the rest of his life. It seems very onerous for him. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Okay, the discussions that we've had. Would anyone like to make a motion? Councilman Workman: Are we going for all three? Mayor Chmiel: No, I think we're going to have to address the second one rather quickly. There may be some questions on the others. At least I have. ' Councilman Workman: I guess I can make a motion. I guess just to make a quick comment . It 's not a situation of a private property owns a piece of vacant land and they want to develop it and they have every right to do that . It does create a problem. It's nice to work with the neighbors as much as we can. I thought 2 years ago that we always talked about , that 's why I asked that original question about the idea had been thrown out about potential ' condemnation of that property. The Owen's property because it was in bankruptcy and everything else so we can get that accomplished and get that through. I thought we've always talked about that going through. I don't know, maybe I'm getting some mixed information here tonight but I don't know how, I hope we can work with construction traffic on this road or at least ask that the road, Lake Lucy Road be swept or whatever needs to be done with construction dirt . But I don't know how you can. ' Mayor Chmiel: While it 's in bankruptcy you can't condemn that piece of property. If we did, even it was at all feasible or possible, the City would ' have to pick up those additional costs rather than the owner of that property. Councilman Workman: Right. What I'm trying to get at is it 's very unpleasant having large trucks and vehicles hauling dirt, etc. anywhere near or around your more established neighborhood. I don't know how we can go about softening that blow. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, unfortunately if there was a way to do that we could but as I see right now it 's probably an inconvenient way of doing it. Councilman Workman: Well I guess I would move approval. It doesn't sound like we're going to add any recommendations to staff? Recommendations, there's 12 of them there. Paul Krauss: There's 12 with a modification to 8. 1 50 I City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 Mayor Chmiel: To item number 8. Councilman Workman: Okay. So with that modification I would move approval. , Mayor Chmiel: Of final plat 90-15? Councilman Workman: Is it the final plat? Is this number A? Mayor Chmiel: Right . Maybe I can help you with that Tom. Plat 90-15 for Troendle Addition without variances subject to the following conditions. Items 1 thru 12 with modification to item 8. Councilman Workman: Thank you Don. I would move that . 1 Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? I'll second it . Councilman Workman moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to approve Final Plat 90-15 for Troendle Addition without variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into a development contract and provide the city I with the necessary financial securities to guarantee proper installation of the improvements. 2. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of the Watershed District Department requirements. • 3. A tree removal plan consistent with city ordinances and policies shall be submitted for Lot 1, Block 1 prior to issuance of a building permit . Clear cutting, except for the house pad and utilities is prohibited. 4. Final street plans shall be developed for approval by the City Engineer Department . 5. The applicant shall install erosion control silt fence around the ponding area until such time as turf is established. 6. Provide the following easements and rights-of-way: ' a. The drainage easement along the westerly property line of Lot 9-11, Block 2, and the ponding area on Outlot A (previously Lots 3-4, Block 1) as shown on the Grading and Erosion Control Plan, shall also be shown as a drainage and utility easement on the final plat accordingly. 7. Park and trail fees shall be required in lieu of parkland dedication. 8. Lot 1, Block 2 shall be serviced by Nez Perce Drive and the gravel driveway to Pleasant View Road be removed at such time when a building permit is requested. 9. The temporary cul-de-sac should be provided with an easement to accommodate 1 the temporary pavement and be provided with a barricade equipped with a sign indicating the road will be extended. A similar notice shall be placed into the chain of title of all lots platted in the Troendle Addition. - - 51 - 1 Ci*y Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 10. Lots 1 and 11, Block 2 are required to have access from proposed Troendle Circle. 11 . Pay a fee of $10,000.00 to the City that will be utilizied in lieu of assessments for the fair share of costs related to the extension of Nez Perce to Pleasant View Road. ' 12. Provide revised right-of-way easements along Nez Perce in the Vineland Forest plat to eliminate the "jog" in the right-of-way between this plat and the Troendle Addition. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Chmiel: Let 's go to item 8(b) . Approve development contract . Charles, do you have just a brief explanation of the special provisions for that development contract? Charles Folch: That 's correct . The special provisions of that development contract incorporate the conditions of approval of plat and since there is an amendment or modification to number 8, we shall make that change on this ' development contract to make it consistent . Mayor Chmiel : Alright . Is there an approval of Development Contract for ' Troendle Addition Project #90-13? Any discussion? I'll make that motion. That we move that as I just finished saying. Is there a second? Councilman Workman: I'll second it . Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve Development Contract for Troendle Addition Project No. 90-13. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Chmiel: Item 0(c). This is for the approval of construction plans and specifications for street and utility improvements for Troendle Addition #90-13. ' Any questions in regard to that? I just want to make sure that the street that's going to go that's going to be the cul-de-sac as we mentioned, somehow that something be put up so that people realize that that 's going to be there ' rather than having discussions at that time and saying the intent was not as such. Clearly get it marked so everybody's aware. Paul Krauss: Yes sir. That is the intent. We would go with the barricade. Basically the same barricade that you see now at the end of the street. It does have a sign that says it's intended to be extended and we would put a notice in the chain of title of each lot so if there's any buyer that buys a lot in Troendle Addition they'd be made aware of the fact . Mayor Chmiel: Good. Everyone looked at the grading plan. Erosion control ' would be taken care of so we don't have any problems with. . .coming from that property and going on. Can I have a motion to approve the construction plans as I previously stated? Councilman Wing: I'll so move. ' 52 1 City Council Meeting - August 12; 1991 Mayor Chmiel: Is the re a second? Councilman Workman: Second. I Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve Construction Plans and Specifications for Street and Utility Improvements for Troendle Addition Project No. 91-13. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Chmiel: If everybody will leave their copies here so we can hopefully save another tree, if they can use that. There will also be a correction to the platting with the proper signature on that as we discussed before. Would you just verify that? Thank you. AMERICANA COMMUNITY BANK, SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARKET BOULEVARD AND WEST 78TH STREET, KRF ASSOCIATES= A. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR AN 8,365 SQ. FT. BANK BUILDING. , B. REPLAT A PORTION OF OUTLOT A, MARKET SQUARE INTO A 40,000 SQ. FT. LOT AND A 39,600 SQ. FT. LOT. C. PUD AMENDMENT TO ADD A BANK BUILDING TO MARKET SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER. Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, the applicants are requesting approval to construct, as , you mentioned, a 8,365 square foot bank building on the corner of 78th Street and Market Blvd.: The site is on one of the outlots that we created or will create as soon as the Market Square plat is filed but it's on that PUD that we approve with the shopping center and our expectation is the latest word we have is that hopefully we'll be breaking ground sometime early this fall. Approval of the bank is tied into approval of the PUD and the shopping center. The bank 1 would access off of the internal system of driveways serving the shopping center. There's also some reliance on the existing storm sewer system or the storm sewer system that would be constructed for the shopping center. Hopefully finally everything's falling into place and everybody will be able to break ground in very short order. The bank is looking to be open, as I understand it, before the end of the year. They have some regulatory requirements that have been imposed upon them to do that. In fact that 's one of the reasons or that's the primary reason we've taken this step of bringing this to you less than a week after the Planning Commission got through with it is primarily to work with the bank so they can meet their schedule. We had a few issues related to the site plan but the representatives of the bank are basically comfortable with, the conditions that have been laid down. We feel that the site plan itself was fairly well developed. At the Planning Commission there were two primary issues that came up. One dealing with access which has to do with the proposed left turn curb or median cut on 78th Street. The other one with the building architecture. I'm happy to report that on one, the building architecture, the applicants have made great strides. They took the concerns, and they were very serious concerns that were raised with the original building and fundamentally redesigned it . They came in to talk to staff last Friday. Gave us some alternatives to look at. The Mayor had an opportunity to look at some , £ preliminary sketches. We gave them some comments. They took those and came back with a design that I think reflects the kind of building that we can be proud of and that really fits in -onto 78th Street. The downtown street scene 53 I/ City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 11 and also met with the Planning Commission's desires. I'll let the illustration 11 of the,' speak for itself. In a moment the architect can show that to you. As to the street issue, that one became a little more confusing unfortunately. The applicants are requesting, they believe it 's essential to their business to have II a median cut so that westbound traffic on 78th Street can turn. Not directly into the site but more realistically into the shopping center and I guess I'd differentiate between requests to serve an individual site which we would- cer-tainly oppose off of 78th Street , and one that services the main driveway of I the shopping center which this in fact does. We asked Strgar-Roscoe who's doing our downtown traffic work to do an analysis of the safety of this curb cut . Their initial report back to us was it was safe based upon traffic they had I forecast . We tried to be straight forward to the Planning Commission however and the City Engineer's here tonight . This is an instance where the City Engineer has some concerns that you know with the .general safety of this that he'd like to convey and I guess we don't always come to you with a unanimous 1 • vote of up or down on a given item and this is one of those instances. He has some valid concerns. I should add that the Planning Commission unanimously supported the idea of the curb cut . They seemed to be very responsive to that . I The plans now call for that and what our intent was was basically to ask the Planning Commission, City Council what you felt because there's some aesthetic impacts as well. If this curb cut takes place, Strgar's done some preliminary II designs of it . You lose a lot of the landscaping that 's in there today. That's something that you or the HRA might have some concerns with. What 's surfaced more recently though is we had a meeting on Friday basically where we were - talking about the ,pest 78th Street project itself and there appears to be a II significant possibility that a major retailer may look to locate on site. A site to the west on 78th Street. It 's not clear and we have no proposal in front of us now but we think that over the winter, whether or not this interest • ' is serious may, we may be able to know more. The West 78th Street project ' I believe either looks like it's going to be postponed or will be postponed. . . ' Charles Folch: It will be postponed until next year. Paul Krauss: We're looking at it being postponed until next year. IICouncilman Workman: The detachment project? Paul Krauss: The realignment of 78th Street . IICouncilman Workman: Why is that? II Charles Folch: Well primarily the project has had, as I'm sure you're aware of through the many different stages has had a fair share of delays. The last set of delays includes modifications that needed to be incorporated into that project based on information gained from the recent downtown traffic study that I was conducted. There was some improvements that were recommended that needed to be interfaced. We felt was appropriate to interface at this point in time with the detachment project rather than going through with an improvement and then 2 1 years later going in there and ripping things up again and widening it and as such. So in order for, we needed to incorporate these changes into the plans and then in order to do that we'll also have to back through all the review steps with all the other agencies involved. So we have lost time again due to IIthese modifications but we feel that it's the time to do it if we're going to do II 54 • City Council Mc ting - August 12, 1991 the project , we either need to incorporate the ultimate design that's required. So with going back through the review process and going through the bidding and such and given that we're into August already, it's likely that the project wDuldn't take place until next spring. Paul Krauss: Now that figures into this in a way and I had an opportunity to , inform the applicants, the bank staff only of this tonight because it's relatively late breaking. That since the curb cut, the median cut, if it is made, would be maue as a part of the 78th Street project and since it appears that that 's not going to happen until next spring and since it appears that we may know more about what's going to happen east of this site before then, you may wish to take that into account and reserve judgment on whether or not the median cut should be made. That does cause a problem for the bank. I'll let them speak for themselves. They believe they need the access. On the other hand we've also had, in our discussions with SRF on the downtown design, they raise concerns that if one of these large retailers goes in on that site, that II the levels of traffic would be greater than what they had projected because they projected a lower level of commercial use and that while they haven't re-runned their analysis, they believe shooting from the hip that it probably would cause a problem to have a curb cut there. It's not something we've had them look into in any depth yet and we have to do that but they did raise a concern with that. With that we are recomme-Hding approval of the bank. As I said, I think they've done a pretty remarkable job and I'm sure the architects gave up their entire weekend to do it. To respond to those concerns. We think basically we've got a good project here. We would ask your consideration on the median cut and would do as you wish. I Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Paul. Would you like to present your rendition as to what's being proposed. ' Paul Krauss: If I may, while Kim is setting up. Steve Emmings, the Planning Commission Chairman was here earlier this evening. He had to leave before this item came on. He did have an opportunity to review the rendering of the revised building and he essentially asked me to relate that he's very comfortable with it . That it really did respond to the issues that were raised. Kim Jacobson: I'm Kim Jacobson. I'm representing KRJ Associates. The Americana Bank. Americana Community Bank. I think I should maybe start with a little bit of this history. We came in about 2-2 1/2 months ago and approached the community. Worked very hard with the staff. We had proposed at that time a cut that we wanted to put in off the site to Market Blvd.. Staff was very good. They went back to the traffic consultants. Came back to us and said, it's not going to work. We thought about it very hard and very relunctantly we gave up this cut on the basis that in the planning study, the traffic study they recommended, instead of taking a cut on Market Blvd, the consultants recommended looking at 78th Street. Creating a median cut. The site is totally based upon access. Business is based upon access. We bottom line pursued this site based upon staff's recommendation, the traffic consultant's recommendation that we would be given a median cut on 78th. Had that not been there 2 months ago, we would have probably looked for another site because we feel access is imperative to get business into that center. We also think from the city standpoint it's very much of a plus to have that direct access in the center.' If you have a center you can't get people into it, it's very tough to make money. And with 1- , l 55 I/ City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 the city being part landlord now, I think that would be a prime concern. We took the recommendations. We closed our Market Blvd. access. We redesigned the site. Wc worked with it very hard to make it work. Worked through staff's . recommendation who were very helpful. Very supportive through everything. We camc sc3rk, looLed at it and said overall we feel that the West 78th is imposing no problems to the city. Right now there is a left turn at Kerber or Monterey, whatever name you want to give that street . AS it backs up, this would only alleviate some of the back up there. It's not going to cause any more stacking problems than is al-oady there. So we're looking at one way to get direct access into the center. Not necessarily our nite. We feel it 's very bad for someone going west to drive by a center, by a site. Go out of sight of it and then come in down Monterey through the back parking lot. It does not seem like �� a good access to a shopping center, thusly our bank. We went through all of ~~ this with the Planning Commission and they were very supportive. They felt that ~ this West 78th cut was a plus for 78th Street , would help the center. I feel overall it would do that. I have no qualms in my mind that that would not be a plus for everyone. We did talk to some people off the Planning Commission and they were very supportive again tonight of some of the things that we have gone through. I think overall what we've described to you is we've got a site that I think the City has worked with. They're in agreement with most of the things that we're doinQ on it , if not all of them. We have looked through some of their concerns and have ag}Jaed to give up a piece of signage so that 's to us right now we will give that up. We'd rather work with the City. Have gone through everything. I think where we started out and I'm going to pull out some architecture and show you a sketch. We started out a week ago trying to fit within a PUD development . Colorwise, we .had a building that was gray. It picked up what we felt were some of the characters of the center. We came to the Planning Commission and rightfully so, were met with why does it have to be gray? Can we take some of the architecture and use some liberty and they proposed to us, what would happen if we said drop the PUD commandment or covenant that says match the architecture of the center. We worked very hard at it . Worked with Paul and his staff. I know we met with the Mayor. Everyone has been involved with looking at some options. We developed a building that we think fits Chanhassen. We looked at it. Tried to keep some of the character that 's at the center now. We kept the green roof, reflecting some of the green that 's there. We looked at opening up the building with a lot of windows. We looked at taking and trying to create a little bit of excitement with some awnings that may not be the same color but we feel match the character of the center' And overall tried to get a building that I think Chanhassen's going to be very proud of. I think overall it's going to be one of the nicest buildings ~~ in your community. From there we've gone back, we've looked at everything. All the concerns we're in pretty much agreement with. We have no real concerns as to how we're goIng to develop the site. If the building is acceptable and people like the looks of it, we feel very positive about it. I think bottom fine, our biggest issue is if the architecture is okay. If everything else is okay, we do need a decision on West 78th Street because it is imperative to the project . We feel from the development standpoint that without that cut we seriously hurt the potential business of this bank and ultimately business at that shopping center. I guess the only thing I can say about the concerns that there's a major retailer looking at a site down the road, we're here today. ~ ~~ We're ready to develop in your community. No false promises. No wishes. We're not asking for anything except to be allowed a curb cut and the permission to 56 �� City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 build in your community. And like I say, we are here. We're real. We're going to do it . Thank you. I Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Councilman Wing: I just had a question. Does that picture represent the curb I cut? Mayor Chmiel: I don't believe it does. It's further down to the west. , Kim Jacobson: Right down probably right about here. I can throw in one other thing and it's not real critical at this point but there was some concern about the scale of our center or our building versus the shopping center. This is a real rough comparison but the average piece of the center is roughly 36 feet • - high. Our building is about 34 feet high. And the Fairview Foods or whatever the grocery store is is about 48 feet high so another 10 feet above this. I think if ycu overlay it to our building it's not , we're two stories. This is a single story. We're not any higher than the major average of the shopping center. So I think the mass is done from a perspective to say this is the building and so of course it's going to focus on it. Mayor Chmiel: Does that have an overhang on the roof portion as well? Kim Jacobson: Yes. • Mayor Chmiel: And how much projection is there? • , Kin Jacobson: There's an overhang coming through here with a large overhang and then. . . Councilman Workman: HRA take care of the specials on this? Just completely separate from. Kim Jacobson: I would defer to the City Manager. Todd Gerhardt : . . .the bank would make application for special assessment • reduction I'm sure for their development on this site. • Councilman Workman: That's the extent that the HRA has.. . Kim Jacobson: That's correct. Mayor Chmiel: I see a vast improvement from what we had seen before. I like the appearance of it. It softens the building as well. Makes it look a little more appealing for you to take our money. Any discussion? Councilman Workman: I would have to agree with the developer on the -cut and I I don't think you're going to really get a whole lot of people that have a love - loss for a lot of that shurbery in the middle of the road there. It causes lots of anxiety. If you can help us get rid of some of it. Some of it's nice but it's getting big. I think it's a fairly impressive looking structure from this point of view which appears to be from the lobby of a competing bank. I'm concerned about, if I were going to be a retailer in that, and again maybe this , 57- I/ ' City Counoll Meeting - August 12, 1991 is, :,.e 're focusing on the building. It looks like the grocery store, you're going to be able to see that grocery store. It looks like you're not going to be able to see an awful lot of those retailers back there. Not that maybe ' 3 J. CO _ern Paul Krauss: "I think the ers ec p p tive is a little skewed, or a lot skewed actually because of the way the illustration is done. ' Councilman Workman: What 's the square footage here? Paul Krause It 's 3,000 square feet. There's only 4,000 square foot footprint so you're talking about a 4,000 square foot footprint against a 100,000 square . . foot shopping center. Mayor Chmiel: It 's not going to hide it . Councilman Workman: It 's not going to appear that big? Kim Jacobson: No. The artist who did it , he's selling the building and that's what he drew. SO it 's a drawing to be put . ' Councilman Workman: How big is the Chan Bank? Paul Krauss: I don't recall. Kim Jacobson: It 's got to be at least 40 some feet high up there. Councilman Workman: I mean footprint . Randy cchultz . . .a little over 10,000. Councilman Workman: 10,000 footprint? Randy Scu1tz It 's not a large building. 'Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. The perspectus as you see there is just enlarged just to let you see what it is. Todd Gerhardt : I'd say McDonald's is 4,000 to 5,000 square feet. Mayor Chmiel: What size is the bank in Medford? Randy Schultz: In Medford? I'd say we're about 4 maybe. 3,500. ' Mayor Chmiel: I was trying to make a comparison because I did drive down there to look at that but then I found out that you purchased that from Norwest but it's comparable to what you're looking at here. I mean as far as the building ' itself. Councilman Workman: I guess it's kind of throwing me off a little bit on the size and maybe I don't need to worry about it . I think it probably would play ' well off of the hotel. It would appear to. I think you ought to go for a sign 58 I City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 that 's about 6 times bigger than that one but that's just a personal thing of mine. , Mayor Chmiel: That was one of the questions I had. What future signage would be there, if any? I Councilman Workman: I'm assuming there'd be some on the other side. Maybe on three sides. Kim Jacobson: There is on three sides. ._ Councilman Workman: Is there a drive up on the other side of the building? Is that where it is? Kim Jacobsen: Yes. Mayor Chmiel: I guess one of the questions I had Paul, is there going to be tenants also in this building? Randy Schultz: We anticipate that . . .to have tenants on the second floor. Mayor Chmiel: Then that's my other question. Future signage for those tenants which is going to really cause probably some additional problems as I see. Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, this one is hopefully a little cleaner than Medical Arts was in that this comes in under a PUD. The PUD is subject to sign convenants and this would be the sign package that we would be allowing for this building. So anyway that 's not to say they won't come in in the future with some additional requests but the obligations and constraints are going to be very clearly laid out at the outset. Councilman Wing: That's a promise? Because I can already see a 3 foot State 11 Farm Insurance sign with back lighting right on that front. Paul Krauss: Well they may, I can't say that someone won't make the request but you're under no obligation to approve it. When we reviewed this I looked at the existing Chanhassen Bank. That only has one sign. Now even though it's got three exposures, it has one sign. This building is pretty uniquely sited so that three wall signs seem to make sense. The entrance is kind of at a 11 perpendicular, well it's at an angle to the .corner. That lays in there rather well and then they have the two other elevations from the west and from the south. There was an additional monument sign. Ground mounted monument sign that was on the internal driveway for the shopping center right _at this point over here. We asked that that be eliminated. It served no real valid purpose for what we can see. Also, Outlot A is only entitlted to one free standing sign under the PUD and it seemed to be rather wasteful of it to stick it on the driveway. Mayor Chmiel: I was thinking that maybe in the future we should look at 11 marquees like they have at the bank where they would flash a name on and off�and another one and continue. I was thinking of the same thing with the sign up there. I don't think we'll ever see it. Just something I automatically thought about it. Just not taking anymore but it just flashes names. ' i 59 I/ City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 ' Councilman Wing: Is this open discussion? M,yn Chriel : Yes. ' Councilman Wing: I understand the question of the massiveness. The Market Square. The retail development is certainly the key goal of the HRA I think and it 's really important and I'm seeing this as a really massive keystone to that ' development and I think that is going to detract. However Mr. Mayor, we may want to detract depending on what that Market Square's going to look like so this may be a very delightful precursory to the Market Square building depending on how that retail center's going to look. It may not be, this could be real addition to the city. I happen to really like it . I think you've done a beautiful job. Mayor Chmiel : Now the back side of this building's going to look exactly like the front side? ' Paul Krauss: Same materials on all four exposures. There is no back to the bank really. It 's exposed on all sides. Mayor Chmiel : No. But I'r, saying appearance wise it 's going to be the same there as it faces that way. Councilman Wing: I really like this. Does this take any action? As a young Councilmec.ber can I move approval of anything? Mayor Chmiel: Sure. Do it . Councilman Wing: But I don't know what . ' Councilman Workman: Site plan review. Mayor Chmiel: Site plan review of a 8,365 square foot bank building. Councilman Workman: I guess if I could, I am a little concerned about how it looks and how it doesn't look and I don't know that I really have as much accuracy here as I'd like. Mayor Chmiel: What's the setback from the street? 1 Paul Krauss: The structure has been required to maintain the same setback we used elsewhere in the PUD and that's a minimum of 25 feet . Councilman Wing: And what's the medical building? Paul Krauss: 14. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Okay. It 'd be another 11 back. Paul Krauss: There's also, because of the HRA action of a couple of weeks ago, to reserve an additional 10 feet of future righ'.-of-way for the widening of the street, effectively it 's going to have a 35 foot setback until that second • lane's put in. • 60 I City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 1 Councilman Workman: Should we be looking at more detailed blueprints here? Mayor Chmiel: Well this is just the site plan review. This is not the finalized portion of it by any means. Paul Krauss: Well Mr. Mayor, if I could clarify. This would be the last time you would officially react on this unless you ask for the architecture to come back. I think I'd feel comfortable though that if this was the building you wanted, this is the building that we would make sure KRJ Architects gave us on the building permit application. This is not different from what we normally have in terms of elevations. That's typically all we require. Councilman Wing: Where does the curb cutback, request come into this? That would be part of the approval tonight? Mayor Chmiel: That would be with the site plan which would depict. Councilman Workman: The concern is, and Medical Arts building being the example that it all of a sudden was close to the road and who put it there and why and how and you know. Mayor Chmiel: Well you can condition it with setbacks of that 25 feet in there. Councilman Workman: Or 35. Is that spelled out? Paul Krauss: The 25 foot setback is what's on the site plan itself. Councilman Wing: Plus the 11? Paul Krauss: Well we have a separate condition for the additional 10 feet. That only occurs on 78th Street though. Not on Market Blvd. . Todd Gerhardt: Mr. Mayor, before you take any action on the curb cut, I'd like to bring that to the HRA and get their feedback on that curb cut. They initiated a lot of the public improvements in the downtown and the City Manager felt that they have some say in that where those curb cuts go since that is basically their median. Councilman Workman: But it is spelled out in the HRA documents that extra 10 feet? Todd Gerhardt: Yes. That is in the development contract for Market Square. , Councilman Workman: So we can approve the site plan or? Todd Gerhardt: You can approve the site plan but as to the curb cut, I would 1 like to get HRA feedback on that. Mayor Chmiel: Get an opinion back from HRA. I Councilwoman Oimler: Okay, but the site plan does include the curb cut we were - just told so if we approved it, then we would be approving it prior to getting the HRA. 61 ' I/ City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 ' Mayor Chmiel: No, you could condition it upon the review by HRA. With their approval. Paul Krauss: You may also wish to make your intent known about the curb cut or add some guidance for the HRA. That might help. ' Councilwoman Dimler : Should public safety take a look at this too for public safety issues? Esp.:cially if we're going to approve it before the West 78th Street detachment . Mayor Chmiel: Basically, if you have Strgar-Roscoe who has provided that information with the traffic portion, that should alleviate I think that part of it. • Councilman Wing: I would favor tabling this pending HRA review with it returning to us for final action. ' Todd Gerhardt : I wouldn't hold the development up. I think the contractors want to get going on their building. I think the curb cut could be an issue solved down the line after a review has been done. Councilman Wing: It 's hinging on the curb. That's what they said. Mayor Chmiel: But you can condition it with their review and approval on that to HPJ . I think they're anxious and I don't want to push this one way or the other but . Bob Dittrick: Mr. Mayor, Council. I think it's very important that the curb cut be included. Without the curb cut I don't think we have a prayer of a chance to do business here on this particular site. We gave up Market Street , which I thought was probably much more than we should have. . . By doing that, now they've got to pass our facility. Come all the way around and come back in. We basically have to do the same thing here but we're just asking for the edge of the lot rather than. . . You're going to get people to come back. If we don't have people at our facility, we just as well. . . We could have the best place in the world, best lot in the world, if you can't get people to it , it 's not going to do you any good. That 's where we're standing right now. We think we can do a good job for the community. We think we can get. . .good job for our customers but without this cut there's no chance in the world. And I feel very strongly about that. Your people at City Hall have been great in working with us. We 1 appreciate that . They've been doing a good job. They've been with us all the way as far as expediting this thing. . . We're not trying to push something down your throat . We're just saying if you're going to do the deal without the curb cut , we don't have a deal. Councilman Workman: I don't think we're adverse to that. Are we? I mean Thursday night the HRA meets. We're going to move approval of this site plan with the curb cut based on HRA's approval. 2/5 of the HRA is right here. I don't know that we're saying we don't want the curb cut. I haven't heard that yet. • Todd Gerhardt : That's my point. I don't want to have Council give a blanket opinion and have the HRA upset that they never had an option to discuss anything ' 62 I A City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 about the curb cut . Councilman Wing: I agree. Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, if I may add. Certainly the concerns the developer is raising for access and needed important feature for their business is certainly valid and well understood by staff. Intuitively though I guess I've - had some concerns all the way along with that curb cut and reaffirming that on Friday, as Paul had mentioned in discussing this further with Strgar-Roscoe and looking at what they interpretted and figured into their projects based on the type of land use that would develop to the west, they were very clear that the land use that they had projected was low volume, office commercial and not a high volume, high density retail center. With that possible notion, they were very clear that they would retract their recommendation for that curb cut. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I see we have a given problem here with two members in access off of 78th and to have that, let me ask a question. That would have a basic left turn land from the eastbound going west on 78th. Is that correct? Charles Folch: There'd be a left turn for westbound 78th to go south, right. , Mayor Chmiel: That's right. In that particular area, that would have to be widened anyway, the road. Isn't that correct? So there would be sufficient left turn lane without causing problems with the traffic going west? Charles Folch: No, that was one of the problems is with the higher volume of traffic for the eastbound and with the installation of the future signals. The queuing, they did an estimation of the queuing. How far back the eastbound cars would be backed up during a peak hour. Things like that with a stop light and it is likely that they would back up blocking that left turn lane. The left turn lane as it currently stands barely would have stacking for 2 cars. Any cars beyond that would then be basically sticking out into one of the thru westbound lanes and that does present a safety problem there. , Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. A lot of that traffic of course would be going directly from 78th onto Market which would suffice that need there because of the traffic signals which would be installed at that particular time. Charles Folch: Right. There would be a left turn lane at Market. Mayor Chmiel: How much stacking can be within that specific area? Charles Folch: At the one at Market? I Mayor Chmiel: I'd have to evaluate the distance on that. I don't recall what the distance was on that one. I'm trying to determine their basic needs for that access. The amount of stacking that can be there and of course not all traffic is going to be going west. A lot of that could be coming from the east as well. I'm trying to in my own mind determine what that amount of stacking for each entrance into that facility, of the need for the second one. I could see that there could possibly, if there is sta&*.ing for Market and there's a { turn, whether it would be a green arrow or regular green light, that stacking is there and people are coming and there's enough people, they may just so choose I 63 1/ ____— - -- City Council Meeting - August 12,. 1991 to 00 down to the next one to make that left turn. I'm trying to determine, you have to have the accessibility in and out of property for any business that you're doing. • Charlec Folch: Absolutely. Mayor Chmiel: Because that 's how it draws. So I guess I look at that to the point of saying we should probably make that recommendation. Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, I feel very strongly that West 78th Street will not 1 tolerate a left turn lane with the traffic it has. It 's going to tie up traffic. You mentioned cars sticking out . I agree with their access and I agree with the need. West 78th Street has got to be dealt with. If this is • priority, then that center median area has got to be removed for that block or ' it's got to be widened out . I understand that the engineer tells us you can get two cars through there but if a car stalls, traffic on West 78th Street comes to a halt. If a firetruck has to go around a car that stops, he goes up on the 11 curb. . .the amount of traffic we've got . They're going to have to stop for eastbound. They're going to tie up westbound. It's going to bring 78th Street to a halt . I support their need. West 78th Street won't tolerate the curb cut . You can convey my very strong conviction on that to the HRA. I'm just really opposed to that with an improvement. Todd Gerhardt : That segment as Paul is drawing it, will be changing as a part of the West 78th Street detachment . Mayor Chmiel: That 's right . Paul Krauss: You're going to have two westbound lanes there plus part of the reason why we're revising West 78th Street . . .is that quarters will be opened up to allow improved movement of buses and firetrucks and so I think that problem will largely be responded to. Councilman Wing: How are they going to open it to 4 lanes? What 's going to change? The widening, is that what you're saying? Paul Krauss: It will be made wider. ' Councilman Wing: With the widening? Okay, as is, it would be intolerable. Paul Krauss: Yeah but the premise is that none of this would happen until it ' happens with the West 78th Street detachment project which would incorporate all this. Councilman Workman: That should be about 7 years. Randy Schultz: Can I just make a comment. I'm Randy Schultz. President of Americana Community Bank. I just have a couple of comments. One thing in regards to the safety of the median cut. If I'm correct , I believe a lot of - these traffic study assumptions are being made c,:th 78th Street the way it is . now. As I understand a lot of people complain E-7,Jut it almost being a racetrack because of there not being stop lights. I think the, as I understand it Paul we're talking about stop lights going in ,in several places on 78th Street. I t 64 I . City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 think that would make a significant affect on the traffic volume. Especially when you also improve TH 5 around the outside. I think it's pretty difficult today to estimate what kind of traffic volume you're going to have on West 78th. Even if you have a major shopping center of some sort to the west. I'd like to reiterate one other thing that Kim said. We're here today. We have the regulatory approval. We want to come into your community. We are a, I think if you check with the two communities we're in, we're a very community orientated bank. We use the depositers money to make loans back to. . . We don't ship the money off. We're for real. We're not asking for any special priviledges. I think that all you realize that. . . We have no problem with the HRA taking a look at this. We would like to find out if that 's going to happen soon. We are under some time deadline. Mayor Chmigl: I believe it 's this Thursday that the HRA meets. Randy Schultz: We need to give Kim the go ahead so we can get the plans , developed and bid on. We'd ask you for your help. The 78th curb cut is absolutely essential. We haven't talked about how deep that lane might be so how many cars could be stacked in there but we think it 's a safety factor. One 11 thing that hasn't been talked about. If you have some kind of an accident in the center, we think that 's a safety issue. If you need to get a firetruck or ambulance in there fast. That might be another thing. Councilman Workman: Do you want to try again Richard? Councilman Wing: I just want to clarify Paul. Your premise is based on the widening. Is there a timeframe for the widening? I've heard a 7 year comment made. Paul Krauss: First of all the studies that Strgar-Roscoe did tries to I anticipate how this is going to function after we do all the improvements that they're recommending, including signalization. A lot of people would tell you that traffic forecasting is more an art than a science but it's the best information that we have. The West 78th Street detachment project, it's kind of like hitting a moving target and I guess Charles could address this better than I but we know a lot more about the traffic demands on 78th Street and Market than we knew when the shopping center was first proposed and what we tried to do or are trying to do are to adapt the West 78th Street project so we can do it right the first time. But as Charles was indicating, the proposal is that this come in for a spring construction and that it be done right. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and I fully agree with that part. Councilman Wing: I'd like to move. Councilwoman Dimler: Could I make a comment before you do? I would really like to help them out and I know that the Planning Commission and everyone has kind of rushed things through and everybody's worked cooperatively to help them come in here. I don't see any problem with waiting until Thursday. I think the more people that review this the better off we are because we're missing some things that they'll pick up and for that reason, because it is contingent, I'd be ready to approve the building but I'm not ready to approve the street. And you're } 65 I • 1 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 saying it's contingent on that so I would think that we would need to table this until HRA has reviewed it . Mayor Chmiel : I don't think we would have to basically *table it . That portion 1 with the approval of HRA for the access of 78th and I think staff can also be looking more in detail of that part of it . What 's going to develop beyond that . ' Councilwoman Dimler: So if HRA finds some problems, then our action here is basically null and void? Mayor Chmiel: That 's right . Councilman Wing: That was my intent Ursula was just to move approval of site plan for the bank with that condition. Contingent on approval of the HRA and I'm going to be at the meeting so. . .that does concern me. Mayor Chmiel: I'll be there. Councilman Workman: And that will be kind of a precedence too because I don't think we've ever handed over a site plan review to the HRA have we? I mean it's kind of different for us I would think. Councilwoman Dimler: Well just to get their comments and then we could take it up at our next meeting is what I'm saying. Todd Gerhardt : It 's more of the curb cut issue. Councilman Workman: We're going to bring this back in two weeks? Mayor Chmiel: I think there's a problem with construction on this. I don't want to jump before or put the cart before the horse either. I want to make sure that it 's a viable thing but I'm looking at it from a safety aspect of problems it could cause. Not only problems of safety for our residents but also their customers. ' Councilman Wing: So are we trusting the HRA to make that decision or the Council? Councilwoman Dimler: We're trusting the HRA to give us their input and then we make the decision at the following meeting is what I am saying. Councilman Workman: You know even if we, if Chi Chi's was building a restaurant here, anybody that 's going to build on this lot, is going to ask for this. This is going to be. 11 Mayor Chmiel: They're not going to be the only ones, I agree. Councilman Workman: I mean whoever builds on this lot is going to, that 's what I'm saying. I don't know what 2 weeks does to the schedule. It sounds like things are kind of moving fast or these are delicate months for construction. I - think that this is, waiting doesn't hurt me you ?'low. That doesn't bother me. ' I just think with what we know about the West 78th Street detachment and everything else that we need to do to that road from Market to Powers, that is 66 I City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 1 going to happen. And that this is going to be a part of any site plan that comes into this thing. I don't know that delaying it , I guess I would rather approve the site plan unless HRA has a serious problem. Much like we do with staff. Councilwoman ['limier: But then you're giving the HRA the final say and that's kind of reverse of what we usually do. Mayor Chmiel: We'l we're making that say here basically too but if they don't agree with that , otherwise why would you go to the HRA. Councilman Wing: But maybe the HRA needs to look at the fact that there needs to be a formal entrance at that point to the shopping center and bank and maybe that should be a stop sign entry. If it's that critical to business and the entry, maybe that shouldn't just be a haphazard left turn lane to feed the bank. Maybe it ought to be actually a stop sign to feed the center at that point. ' Mayor Chmiel: Stop sign in conjunction with the stop and go light. Councilman Wing: I look at the curb cuts in Wayzata. What a nuisance trying to get across and in and out. They tend to want to cut them down and keep traffic flowing one direction but it is true. I don't like coming back to something. I mean with all due respect to them coming in or not coming in, I think we've got. a real future problem we've got to address and I would sure hate to. I wasn't here for West 78th Street but I know there's people who would like to hang some people who were and I don't want to make a decision that 's going to further. . . Councilwoman Dimler: Exactly. I can see some problems. If it's that critical, I guess maybe it needs more addressing. Councilman Workman: I just think it's going to happen. Mayor Chmiel: No question. Anybody who's going to go into that particular location is going to request another access. I don't care if it's the bank or as Tom said, Chi Chi's or whoever. Councilman Workman: And I think the curb cut 's going to happen and the nuances ' of exactly how that's going to be addressed with stop signs or how long or how deep or how wide should be handled when the West 78th because I think it's going to happen. , Mayor Chmiel: Accessibility from west or going west. How about if that curb cut was put in there and it was a right-in/right-out? Paul Krauss: It basically is just that. You will not be able to leave the site and go east. You will not be able to go up through here. You'll be able to turn through there and come in and this will feed.. . Councilwoman (limier: Going west is going to be a bummer. You have to go east to go west again. _ I { Mayor Chmiel: Essentially it's going to be there. With the right-in and right-out with that curb cut. 67 _ - 1 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I Paul Krauss': If you want to go westbound on 78th Street you'll have to go over to Monterey and come out that way. Councilman Workman: I agree with that , we'll go to Market . Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I think we should come up with some kind of conclusion. There was a motion on the floor to give this to HRA to review. ' Councilman Wing: I think we all realize the gravity of this situation and I guess I'll stay with my original motion Don if you're comfortable with that . Mayor Chmiel: Do you want to repeat your motion? Councilman Wing: I move approval of this site plan as presented with the request for the curb cut pending review and final decision by HRA. I would approve it with the HRA's parallel. Councilman Workman: So it would not come back? Councilman Wing: It would not come back. Councilwoman Dimler: So we',re giving them final say? Councilman Wing: What we're doing is approving the curb cut unless HRA says no. IICharles Folch: Mr. Mayor, if I may interject. We should probably clarify the terminology for curb cut because a curb cut could just be the right-in/right-out but I think what they're requesting here in addition to that is the median cut . I think that needs to be clarified. Councilman Wing: Yeah, the median cut would be left turn westbound only and that 's what I'm intending here. Charles Folch: Exactly. ' Councilman Wing: Would somebody clarify my motion and make it proper. Mayor Chmiel: I think you just clarified it right now. IICouncilman Wing: If there's an understanding of that. But let me clarify it then. Right-in/right--out , left turn westbround median cut. Alright. And we II recognize that West 78th Street as is is not very functional so it's really pending on the HRA's decision to get going on that widening process. Councilman Workman: Well I think this calls that point to question. It's got II to be done. Now we're going to just start going all the way up to the Dinner Theatre to take care of it I guess. Councilman Wing: I like the project and I'd like to move that motion. Councilman Workman: I'll second it. 1 I 68 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 1 Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve Site Plan Review #91-3 as shown on the site plan dated July 29, 1991 pending review and approval of the left turn westbound median cut by the HRA and subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. Sign plans should be revised to eliminate the monument sign, reduce the wall sign height to 3 feet and incorporate requested directional signage. 2. Additional landscaping shall be provided along the north edge of the site as proposed in the staff report. The applicant shall provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in calculating the required financial guarantees. These guarantees must be posted prior to building permit issuance. Provide a plant schedule indicating the size and type of all plant materials for staff approval. ' 3. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required. If the West 78th Street curb cut is approved, the applicant shall be required to compensate the city for all costs related to its design and construction. 4. Revise architectural plans as follows: • - Incorporate dormers of increased size or other acceptable measures to enhance the design of the roof line. - Provide details of HVAC screening. - Incorporate the use of Timberline or similar quality shingles that I provide an image of a cedar shake roof. - Provide details of building exterior treatment indicating consistency with shopping center construction. - Eliminate the proposed building addition from the plans since adequate parking cannot be provided on site. - Revise plans as necessary to ensure that a 25 foot setback is provided to all portions of the building, including the entrance canopy: I 5. Revise the plans as required to ensure that room is provided for safe turning movements for cars exiting the drive-thru lanes. II All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Chmiel: Replat a portion of Outlot A, Market Square into a 40,000 square foot lot and 39,600 square foot lot. Any concerns regarding that? At least I don't see any on that specific one. • Councilman Workman: I'd move approval. • • Councilwoman Dimler: Second. 69 1 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve Subdivision ' #91-8 as shown on the plat dated July 29, 1991 with the following conditions: 1.. Park and trail dedication fees shall be paid at time building permits are .r.e q u e s t e d. ' 2. Provide the following easements: ' a. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of all lots. b. A 10' x 30' utility easement located to the southeast corner of the bank building running in favor of NSP. c. The final plat for the entire Market Square shopping center must be ' submitted to staff for approval and filed with Carver County. The plat needs to be revised, as does this requested lot division to accommodate the additional 10 feet of right-of-way along West 78th Street that is beinc, required by the City. d. Cross access easements need to be provided over the south driveway and northern 30 feet of the newly created parcel located south of the bank on Outlot A. All voted in favor and the motion carried. • Mayor Chmiel: Item (c), PUD amendment to add a bank building to Market Square shopping center. Councilwoman Dimler: I move approval. Councilman Workman: Second. tCouncilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve an amendment to PUD #89-2 as shown on plans dated July 29, 1991. All voted in favor and the ' motion carried. Todd Gerhardt : The HRA meets here at 7:30 on Thursday. Mayor Chmiel: Thursday evening. A couple days from now. You'll see a few of the same familiar faces. Kim Jacobson: What do we need to do to present? Do we just attend? Todd Gerhardt : It 's going to be a staff report and you answer any questions. Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to see staff spell this out a little bit more clearly with a drawing with those respective cuts. Showing that right-in/right-out with curb cuts as with the left turn lane. And the same approximate location this would be located in relationship to the property. Paul Krauss: SRF has already taken a look at that. We have a drawing we can bring. In fact if I would have remembered we could have brought it tonight. 1 70 1 City Council Meeting - August 12, 1991 I ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: 1991 CONGRESS OF CITIES CONFERENCE. ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. ' Todd Gerhardt : How many people will be attending this year's National League of Cities Conference in Las Vegas? Don wished that I poll Councilmembers that will be attending so we can start looking at reservations. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I'm going to be. . . Councilman Wing: I would intend to probably use my own airfare as a cost savings. Councilman Workman: For all of us? Mayor Chmiel: Can you take friends? Can you rent a 747? ' Councilman Workman: I am a member of the Transportation and Communications Policy Group. Councilman Wing: Under Council presentations, did you by-pass that? Mayor Chmiel: Yeah I did intentionally. I pretty much mentioned it in the • first part of it. Councilman Wing: I would like to move tabling 10(b) which was an item I requested until the next meeting. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? Councilman Wing: With one additional item. I would like added to that list. Mayor Chmiel: You know could I just interrupt you for a second? I think that a lot of these items are done at the Planning Commission with the updates that staff goes through so with the Minutes that we have, normally you can read on each of these respective items that Paul presents. Councilman Wing: I'm looking for a little bit of advertising and public record so I intended it to be a very short simple presentation because it has been covered. I'd just like it almost to be read off but I would like to add as an item 5 for the next agenda, and I'd like it to be earlier in the evening, HRA presentations, specifically regarding downtown mall or center. It's status and I'd like to request the HRA to comment on their architectural intent for that center. Are we still friends Mr. Mayor? Mayor Chmiel: I don't know what you're talking about Dick. Councilman Wing: I'm suggesting these be very simple. Very brief comments. Councilwoman Dimler: I'll second that motion. 1 f 71 nc;=t.i.i-ig -- august 12, 1991 11 Councilman Wing moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to table item 10 ) 1 thru 4 with the addition of HRA status and architectural design. All voted infavor and the motion carried. Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:55 i p.m. . Submitted by Don Ashworth ' City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim II I I 1 . I 1 1 1 1 72 1 • CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 7, 1991 Chairman Emmings called the meeting to order at 7:30 p .m . . 1 MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart , Ladd Conrad , Steve Emmings , Brian Batzli , Jeff Farmakes and Joan Ahrens IIMEMBERS ABSENT: Annette Ellson STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss , Planning Director ; Jo Ann Olsen , Senior II Planner ; Sharmin Al-Jaff , Planner I ; Kathy Aanenson, Planner II ; and Charles Folch , City Engineer IIPUBLIC HEARING: LUNDGREN BROS/ORTENBLAT/ERSBO PROPERTY ZONED RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL AND RSF, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY LOCATED EAST OF POWERS BOULEVARD AND SOUTH OF ILAKE LUCY ROAD: A. PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 30+ ACRES TO CREATE 37 SINGLE FAMILY ' LOTS. B. WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT TO ALTER/FILL CLASS B WETLANDS. II Public Present: Name Address . IITerry Forbord Lundgren Bros . Rick Sathre 15311 Knob Hillturve, Minnetonka 1 Frank Svoboda 22752 County Road 7 , Hutchinson Peter Pflaum 18670 Breezy Point Road, Wayzata Bob Peterson 6650 Powers Blvd . Brian Tichy 1471 Lake Lucy Road Jim & Claudette Schiuck 6800 Utica Terrace Scott Reinertson 6801 Utica Terrace Wendell G . Gravlun 6270 Blue Jay Circle 11 Jeff O'Neil 6511 Devonshire Drive Bill 1, Julie Infanger 6740 Powers Blvd. Joe Morin 1441 Lake Lucy Road IIJim Ravis 6660 Powers Blvd. Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report on this item . Chairman Emmings called the public hearing to order . Terry Forbord: Mr . Chair , because the staff did such a good job in their I staff report and the detail is very complete, if it would be okay +1ith you , I guess I 'd reserve my comments until later on because I only have , for the most part I think we are in total agreement. .There are a few items that I ' would like to present to you but if it would be okay with the Chair I would do that later on in the meeting. That would be up to you . II Emmings: I guess if you have reaction to conditions that they 'd impose on approval , I 'd like to hear those now so that other people in the audience • I IIPlanning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 2 II can comment on them too if they want to . II Terry Forbord: My name is Terry Forbord with Lundgren Bros . , 935 East Wayzata Blvd . . I know you 're familiar with this proposal because we were before you not too long ago in an informal capacity to share with you the I real nuts and bolts and dynamics of this proposal . As I just stated , the staff report on tnis , I 'm sure you 've taken the time to read it is quite detailed . This is actually been somewhat of an exciting endeavor for us II because in our line of work , as well as an engineering and planning , municipal planning and engineering , things are changing really fast relative to the environment . Thinks like water quality . Quality of life and for us to maintain our presence in the real estate development industry I as a leader , we need to be cognizant and be on the cutting edge of some of the newer things that are being developed to be sensitive to those environmental concerns . And it 's been refreshing for us working with city I staff because they , we all seem to be in agreement . Our objectives seem to be very much in step with one another . I think it 's been a learning curve for all of us . Rick , maybe you could put up that first exhibit . As you recall there was some discussion of why this proposal should be looked at II as a planned unit development or PUD . I appeared before you prior to this proposal talking about planned unit developments . I think we 've been forth right and you 've been forth right with us and we 've shared a lot of II information about it . Our objectives I believe with this proposal are the same as the City 's are . We believe we 're a quality developer . The City 's looking for quality developers to come into their community . This is a I quality neighborhood community . This proposal will eliminate the undesireable Ersbo plat which some of you may be familiar with . You were involved with . If you would like me to elaborate on any of these items , please stop me in case someone doesn 't recall something that I 'm speaking I of from the past . We are going to improve the pre-treatment of storm water . We are going to improve and enhance conditions of existing wetlands - and we are going to create additional wetlands that are of a higher quality II than the wetlands that currently exist on the site and there will be a net gain of wetland area . There will be further protection of wetlands with an established preservation zone . Now we probably need to decide what we 're going to call these areas . Whether they 're going to be buffer strips or II conservation zones or preservation zones and that 's something that will be worked out in the final platting process . The reason we decided to opt for a preservation zone , because we want to make sure that the home buyers in 1 their mind 's eye , when they 're buying something from Lundgren Bros . , that they realize that this needs to be preserved and we 're going to depict that in our marketing materials . We 're going to take a hard look at the way we I present that to people who come and buy homes within our community . We want to make sure they understand what this is all about and what we 're trying to do and what the City 's trying to do . Those preservation zones will include easements and they will also include deed restrictions on each II lot to maintain compliance with the preservation objectives . With a PUD there will be more landscaping than a standard subdivision requirement would allow . There will be a greater degree of sensitivity for the I protection of significant trees and vegetation with an established preservation zone and easement similar to the one that 's around the wetlands . In other words there will be deed restrictions protecting II certain areas of trees so homeowners cannot come in and cut down those areas of trees because they will not be allowed to do so . As already II Planning Commission Meeting I August 7 , 1991 - Page 3 mentioned by Jo Ann , there will be increased architectural standards . She talked about architectural elements like wood and brick . I think it also should be noted that every year Lundgren Bros . travels the United States and gains data and comes back and updates their entire product line of housing . We do that in every subdivision that we do . We do it so we 're always hopefully on the cutting edge of what it is that homebuyers want and " delivering to them the things that they would find most appropriate for that present time . There will be a transitional area of housing . This is not inexpensive housing . We are talking about housing that ranges anywhere from $170 to $270 . Somewhere in that area . That is not inexpensive I housing . At the same time it 's not very expensive housing . It certainly falls within the realm of the housing that is needed within the City of Chanhassen . As mentioned by the staff , one of the purposes of the PUD that 's outlined very explicitedly in Code is why do you have PUD 's? Why would one do it? Well in this particular case we 're not doing it because we 're asking for smaller lots or anything . We 're trying to find a way , II after meeting with .staff it was very clear that Chanhassen wants to be on the cutting edge of being sensitive . Not just to wetlands . Not just to trees but the big picture of things relative to real estate development . Storm water runoff . Traffic . Quality of life . Everything like that . By I pursuing this as a PUD , we are able to cluster the homes in areas closer together and maintain an open and green space which is an objective of the City . There 's also as you know added tax base to the City anytime a quality development is promoted within the city . At this time I would like II to talk to you about the recommendations that are being presented to you . The first thing that I will do at this time if we could put the first page of the recommendations up . As I stated earlier , for the most part we are in step and in total agreement with what we 're trying to do here . Since our last meeting with staff and everybody was scurrying to get all this stuff together so it could be mailed out to the Planning Commission , in reviewing the information and the recommendations , we have found some items that make it very difficult for us to proceed with this proposal . They 're not necessarily overwhelming items but when you add them all together , the economic feasibility becomes unmanageable . And for many , some of these may 11 be items that are put before you as compromises but what I will urge you to consider would be , are they practical and do they make sense and really so they make an economic sense as well . On the bottom of your first page II dealing with recommendations , under the section labeled preliminary plat . Item number 1 . It talks about where the proposed street is reduced to 26 feet there shall be no parking signs posted and a 6 foot wide concrete sidewalk shall be provided over the boulevard. Sharp curves located in the I long loop street shall be limited to a 10 mph speed limit and shall have sharp curve signage . We would propose or request that that would be modified and that we would maintain the back to back curb would maintain a II 26 foot width throughout the entire subdivision and that there would be no sidewalk . If I may let me just tell you why . Nationally , and this is fairly well know to those who are planners and engineers and even real estate developers . Nationally there 's a - vement afoot to reduce the right-of-way and the pavement , the hard sLrface coverage in neighborhood communities . Why? Because in the 50 's and 60 's neighborhood communities were designed for automobiles . Nowadays they 're designing them for families . They 're finally getting around to where we don 't need to have these huge right-of-ways , freeways running hither and there through neighborhood communities . We do need adequate right-of-ways on arterials II Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 4 and collectors so traffic can move in an orderly manner and certainly within a safe manner but within local , small little neighborhoods and II certainly one of this size where we have 37 total home sites in a loop street that serves those 37 home sites , we feel that it 's really , it certainly isn 't a necessity to have the street any wider than 26 feet . Now that was just , that 's one aspect of it . The other aspect of it and the reason we even pursued the reduced right-of-way to begin with is because as you know Chanhassen is right on the leading edge of tree preservation . Wetland protection . Right-of-way is for roads , is probably the single IIbiggest culprit nationally for impacting both trees , vegetation and wetlands . The point is that .the larger the right-of-way kind of flies in the face of conservation . Now if health , safety and welfare is an issue , it certainly should be considered . We do not believe that health , safety and welfare is an issue on this particular proposal . We 're talking about 37 housing units and we do not believe that it would be impacted at all by having a reduced right-of-way . I would like to point out that right in front of City Hall , I believe the street is called Chan View , that is a 26 foot right-of-way . Right out in front here . IRick Sathre : Terry , you 're saying right-of-way . Terry Forbord : Excuse me . Pavement width . Right in front of City Hall and I 'd be willing to suggest and feel fairly strong that I 'd be accurate , that there are more vehicle trips per day occuring in front of City Hall than there would be through this neighborhood community . The point I 'm trying to make is that it has become kind of a status quo in the past to r make big streets where they 're not needed and we don 't believe in this particular case that the 26 foot pavement back to back is too small . Now the compromise apparently that was reached was that the only portions in 1 this particular proposal that would be reduced to 26 feet are the areas around significant trees . So in other words , we 'd be having a pavement width that would go from 26 feet to 31 feet then back to 31 feet as it goes Ithrough the subdivision . At least that 's the way I interpret it in the recommendations . We believe that 's confusing and we believe that what did we really achieve by it . I personally cannot find anything that there was II any gain anywhere . Then there was a request for sidewalks . 6 foot of sidewalks on only those portions that happen to be 26 feet back to back . We believe that that 's probably not a good use of funds . That it would be confusing . We do not believe that it 's giving or protecting anyone . We 're I somewhat confused by it . It seems like an attempt to compromise but again I only ask does it really make sense . Is that a good use of money to do that so we would request that that portion of the recommendation would be I changed so there 'd be 26 foot back to back of streets throughout the development and those small little sections of required 6 foot wide concrete would be deleted . And I believe when I looked at the plan I could come up with they 'd be sidewalk approximately 100 foot long in one space I that all of a sudden then would disappear . Then in another space it was hard because it 's somewhat ambiguous . Then there 's another section that might have 200 feet of sidewalk and none of them are connected anywhere so II it just seemed to me that I would ask you to consider that it 's not necessary and that you would delete it . On page 2 of the recommendations , this primarily deals with landscaping and I think you all will agree with me that Lundgren Bros . has probably done more landscaping in their subdivisions than any other subdivisions within the city of Chanhassen and I Planning Commission Meeting I/ August 7 , 1991 - Page 5 typically in any other city that we develop . We have established a $45 ,000 .00 budget for landscaping in this subdivision . Let me ask you just for a minute to focus on this . I 'm sure most of you have landscaped at ' your own homes and you 're operating within a budget . And so you look at your home . Probably walk out in the street . This is what we do . We 're looking at the ent-ances to our subdivision or the areas that we choose to landscape . We try to get a view of what is it that people are going to see . What is important? Is there something we 're trying to screen or is there something that we 're trying to create what we call a peek-a-boo that ' we want somebody to look through and get a corridor of something . When you 're operating within that budget then , you find out how many places.can • 'I put landscaping materials where it really has an impact . One of the things that 's fairly well known in the landscaping industry , if you 've ever II done this on your own home or worked with a landscape architect , they will tell you to try to form areas that you concentrate your landscaping so it looks like there 's really something there rather than spreading it all over II the place because otherwise what happens is there 's nothing that really grabs you and goes wow . So I 'd like to run you through (a ) thru ( f ) and give you an explanation. pf what we would like , how we 'd like to see these modified . Item 2( a ) states that the landscaping on the south right-of-way of Lake Lucy Road directly north of the Class A wetland . We would like to delete that for the following reasons . First of all it would block the view of the wetland . One of the reasons that we chose that site was because there 's a wetland there . We knew it had a problem . We knew it was II 90% dead , or we discovered that through the process but still it was something that was really pretty to look at . That 's why we came to the site . To landscape along there would block that view and that isn 't something that we think is what people would want . The other issue that 's even more important and forgive me for my typing but survivability is misspelled . We don 't think they 'd survive because we looked at that and I II sat down with our landscape architect because we want to put some trees around the entrances and come towards that wetland but we 're real concerned for the distance between the back of the curb of Lake Lucy Road and the wetland . Rick , could you put up an exhibit that would depict that . Probably just a site plan . You can see where the edge of the wetland is in green . I marked it off just by walking . At the closest point from the back of the curb to what appears to be where it just drops off right to the II wetland is probably about 5-6 feet. The furthest point it 's about 17 feet . Kind of varies along there . If any of you have ever driven down TH 169 in Shakopee in Valley Fair where all those evergreens are all along the highway there , go look at them now . 30 feet in they 're all dead and they 're still standing there and the reason they 're dead is because of the phosphates and the chemicals that are put on the road for deicing in the winter . If we did plant trees along there they 'd all die . I think for that reason alone it was probably a better idea to take that money in the budget and put it somewhere there 's going to be some impact and I 'll get to , that in a second . By the way , these aren't items that I had a chance to talk to staff about so if we would have had a chance to talk about it , I think they probably would have agreed with some of this . Item number (b ) , we would like to delete that . Landscaping along the rear lots adjacent to II the Class A wetland . We believe it 's a waste of the budget and that it's not necessary and Rick if you 'd put up something that would show the lots . It has been suggested on more than one occasion during both the informal and the formal public hearing that there is something possibly negative 1 IIPlanning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 6 about being able to see the back of eo le 's homes . Or the back P k yards of people 's homes . I should have brought with me slide trays this evening of I Near Mountain . You would find all through that development that the back yards of the people 's homes are far nicer looking in many cases than the front yards because people spend the majority of their time in the back II yard so they tend to fix it up pretty nice . All those lots that are around that large DNR wetland are around there and designed there for a purpose . So the people who live there can have the quiet enjoyment of what is there . II Some of the area as you can see on Lots 14 , 13 , 12 , 11 , 10 , 9 , 8 , etc . have some trees there . Lots 8 , 7 , 6 , 5 , 4 are 700 feet away from Lake Lucy Road . Lots 3 , 2 and 1 face directly west and the point I 'm making is that first of all I don 't think the backs of people 's homes are something that II is negative to look at . Secondly , I think that that money , rather than being spent to plant trees in the back of somebody 's yard which they 're probably going to do themselves anyway , we could take that money and we II could us73 that in other areas that I ' ll get to here in a moment . Number ( c ) . I 'd like to modify number ( c ) . That the landscaping along the 2: 1 slope adajacent to the Class A wetland . Establishing the growth is important there because the degree of slope is going to be somewhat severe . II But it also is important to see the views and we do not believe that landscaping is necessary there . And Rick , if you 'd put that same exhibit up again and then point to the area that we 're discussing . Okay this is IIthe area that we worked very closely with staff in trying to figure out how to minimize the impact on existing vegetation , the slopes and on the wetland . Because there will be a severe slope off from the back of the Icurb back down towards that wetland , erosion is a concern . Not only to the City but to us . We don 't want to erode away the base of the road there . Staff has recommended that we use I think it 's wood fiber blankets or mat along there to prevent erosion but not only that . When we were out there IIbefore we discussed and maybe this is just semantics so maybe it 's something that can be better understood if we had a chance to talk about it . But I 'm not sure if that 's an appropriate area for landscaping . I II guess I would suggest that 's an appropriate area for very good erosion control and establishing of different types of vegetation so it doesn 't erode and go away . Right there as you can see , when people come in , if -1 you 'd point to that street . When the home buyers are driving down that road and they 're coming into the subdivision , once they get around Lot 3 , one of the other reasons it 's designed , we really want them to see that wetland . That 's really pretty and we don 't want to put anything there that I may interrupt that view for the same reasons along Lake Lucy Road . So it 's an aesthetic , a design idea that we hope people find pleasant so we do feel very much and very strongly that there should be erosion control right I there and there should be vegetation established to make sure that the roadbed doesn 't go away or anything like that but I 'm not sure if that 's the best place to spend our landscaping budget . Okay , item number ( d ) . We do not have a problem with item ( d ) . Item ( e ) , 3 trees , 2 hardwoods and 1 IIevergreen or ornamental per lot . We believe that 's excessive . We are aware that the City is considering amendrg their tree policy . I would just like to point out as far as that exeessitivity . Remember the 1 homebuyer who keeps paying for all these things that we keep adding onto the cost of every home and typically home buyers , when they buy a home , they always want to landscape but it 's the thing they do over time . They Ido a little bit the first year . A little bit the second year . A little bit the third year and after they 've gotten adjusted to their payments , I Planning Commission Meeting I/ August 7 , 1991 - Page 7 about the 4th year they start really doing some nice landscaping 'and I 'm sure , I know I 've gone through that and you have all gone through that too and that 's why we always think that getting beyond the 1 tree per lot becomes excessive . It 's just another burden in the cost of the home that we 're trying to control . Item ( f ) . We would prefer to modify that . There 's a home , if you would put up your exhibit Rick . It would depict the !' home north of the westerly entrance . Okay , and if you could just stand up there maybe you could point . Would you point to the entrance to the subdivision? Okay . Right now that is the westerly entrance and would head south into the subdivision . You can see that it comes in . There 's a ' number of modifications made to this entry point . Some of them had to do • with the preservation of wetland . Some of them had to do with the preservation of significant stands of trees but the other thing that we were concerned about is the impact of traffic heading north towards Lake Lucy Road and what impact , if any , that would have on the homes to the north . At the informal neighborhood meeting that we conducted in July , the ' homeowner there was concerned about lights . They were concerned mainly about what happens in the evening when it 's dark and everybody 's got their headlights on and will this impact our home? That was a really good concern . We were concerned about it as well so we spent considerably time out there looking at it and we actually moved the road to the east . You can also see it 's angled a little bit right there where it intersects . The reasons that we 've done that primarily , the adjustment to the angle were toll make sure that when cars leaving this subdivision . By the way , there are two ingress and egress so some of them will be using the other exit but the primary reason was to try to direct the traffic down what would be the property lines or 'if you 're familiar with that subdivision , there 's kind of " a wetland area that goes northeast that those headlights would go that direction . Additionally we met with the owner of that property . Found out what their concerns were and I personally , we believe very strongly and our landscape architect does as well , that we can nullify any impact to that home by the planting of some trees like evergreen trees along in there . But in the recommendations it suggest putting berms in and landscaping . Once you go into an area that 's already established . It 's already landscaped and you start hauling dumptrucks of dirt in there , we open a can of worms and this becomes a major project right there where we do not believe there 's going to be a significant impact and we do think that we can I nullify any impact with the planting of - some evergreen trees . It will be green all year round and that should screen that area . So we would request that that portion of the recommendations would be modified so rather than II stating what it does , that it would say that the applicant will work with that homeowner to plant coniferous trees to screen from headlights . And by the way , the headlights don't go directly into the house . They go into the " back yard . Anybody who does choose to go left , they may sweep through the windows and that 's what we 're concerned about too and we think we can accommodate that just with planting of trees . So we would ask that you modify that . Okay , then I believe on the next page is the last item that I ' would ask you to consider modifying . This would be at the bottom under wetland alteration permit. Item 3 . We would ask you to delete item 3 . It states that alteration to the wetlands must occur when it results in the least impact to the wetland and not during the breeding season . The first question was I did not know what the breeding season was because if you want to talk about breeding season it would be 12 months a year if you take . into every species of animal that there is'. So that poses a problem I IIPlanning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1'?91 - Page S IIobviously because there 's certain things you can 't do in the wintertime . The City he-7.s a policy that you can 't pull a building permit until the IIstreets are blacktopped which means you have to start construction of a particular development sometime in the spring and I assume just for a minute that breeding season maybe meant for maybe ducks or geese or something like that and that would be in the spring . Well , if we were II unable to go in a.,d do any work in the spring , it 's to the point when do you do it? Then the other part of that is if you look at the whole and we do have a wildlife expert with us this evening . If you look at the whole II impact of development on a particular piece of property and on an area in general , there is some benefit into concentrating that development process into the shortest timeframe possible rather than spreading it out over a I long period of time because you may be trying to save maybe a duck or ducklings here or there but over a long period of time of development maybe the erosion and the sedimentation problems created with development are worse because you 're taking more time to do it . So there 's a trade-off . II Every time you try to save something here , you may be exaccerbating the problem here . So we would ask you to delete that . That does not mean that we do not want to be careful but the way that this is written , it puts what II we believe to be an unr.e:asonable constraint just on the development process . In summary , I would like to reiterate again that for the most part we are 100% behind and in agreement about what staff has done and I 'd II like to also reiterate that it 's been fun . This has been challenging . I think as Paul stated , or excuse me . I 'm not sure if it was Paul but as staff stated in the report , he believes that this is kind of the shapes of things to come possibly . Not only in. Chanhassen but possibly everywhere . III mean where there 's a working relationship between the public and private sector towards these sensitive types of issues . We like to think we 've always been like that but we 're learning more about this as times goes by II also and so in summary I would like to ask you to consider our request for amending the recommendations . I do have for each of you a copy of that for your reference . If you have any questions we 'd be happy to answer them . We do have our wetland and wildlife people here and our engineers so please I feel free to ask any questions that you may have . Emmings: I 'm sure the questions will come . Thanks Terry . This is a II public hearing . We ask at this point if there are any member of the public that are here that would like to express their concerns or ask any questions they may have with regards to this proposal . Is there anybody ' here who wants to speak? Erhart moved, Batzli seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in ' favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. IIErhart: I 'll just start out maybe , one subject that seems to run through two discussions tonight and that 's the street width and right-of-way width . II I seem to remember for most of the time I 've been on the commission here that the standards for right-of-way in curb and gutter streets was always 50 feet and you kind of state here that in the report on this subdivision II then it was changed . Let 's see , City Code recently amended to increase urban street right-of-way standards from 50 to 60 feet so that right-of-way would be consistent throughout the City . What does that mean to be consistent throughout the City . II r Planning Commission Meeting I/ August 7 , 1991 - Page 9 Olsen: in the rural areas it was 60 foot ri ht-of-wa so we wanted it to 9 Y be consistent that a 60 foot throughout the City . And another reason and Charles can add to this was so that all the utilities and everything was within that right-of-way . It 's not necessary to have the outside easements in addition to that . Erhart : Did we at the same time then increase the street width from 26 to I 31 feet or has it always been 31 feet? Folch: I 'm not. sure if it always has been that way but it has been for a II number of years . The narrowest road width has been 31 feet back to back . Emmings: What does back to back mean? You 've both used that term and I don 't know . Folch: Back of curb to back of curb basically which is considered a roadway dimension . Emmings: Okay . Erhart : Then I heard the other night , the difference between a 60 foot right-of-way for use of utilities may still be justified . However I thought the reason there was a difference in rural lots you had a ditch which took up a. lot more space on either side surface . I assumed that was always the reason why rural was 60 and urban was 50 . But again we have more utilities and cables and everything like that . That may be justified . I thought I heard the other night , you were talking . It was in the staff here that maybe we ought to look at and then again it suggested a landscape ordinance discussion that we look at at least going to narrow streets maybe in smaller subdivisions . I guess I would tend to agree with that . 1 Certainly we ought to study it when we get to that point because there is some areas around here where the streets seem massive . The expense of putting the street in . You 've got to maintain it over the next how many • hundred years . Plow it and quite frankly it 's hard to service . Whether this subdivision ought to have 26 feet or not , I don 't know . It just seems that if there 's inclination to review that , this ought to be one that ought to be considered . I don 't think , it doesn 't make any sense to me to put the sidewalks in . I guess that doesn 't make sense . I 'd also like to say it 's unfortunate that maybe the applicants and the staff didn 't get a to talk about some of the additional landscaping so maybe what we ought to address there is , leave it loose and end up with the developer and the staff meet to kind of nail down those last items before Council rather than try . . . In general again , as I stated the last time , I think the developer II has taken an area and obviously gone over almost every square foot and tried to address and come up with a plan that makes sense and I guess . . . I have a question on your page 5 here where it implies that , and maybe this is just verbage Jo Ann . On the first paragraph there you say that you 're II referring to the tree preservation plans ,.. ere we require . Tree preservation plan comes in . Let 's see . Luilding pad is showing moving some of the most significant trees and then we're left to argue with builder and homeowner over redesigning their home . Do we really argue with homeowners about what their homes? i 1 # Plannirg Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 10 11 Olsen : Well yeah . Sometimes you do have where we 've had , some of the problems recently in Shadowmere where we 've had tree removal plans required ' and what 's happened is the builder has actually gone out and removed the trees . Well they 've met with the homeowner . They know that there 's a tree preservation plan required and they remove the trees so it fits the design ' of the house that they want where actually if you rearranged it you could have saved those trees so there 's been some , in the past we 've had the tree preservation plans and it really hasn 't preserved the trees . I mean there still hasn 't been very much sensitivity in designing the whole and working ' around what exists there . It still comes to where it 's cleared . They put in the home and then they call us and we go out and it 's a little late . SO yeah , there has been some difficulty . So what we 're trying to do with this is to really preserved and make it clear that , and with that tree preservation plan we have worked around saving sizeable areas for housepads . Erhart : In your mind who is the ultimate authority to decide if a tree gets removed or not? Olsen: The homeowner? I know what your 's is . Erhart : Home owner . I 'm sorry , home builder . The builder . . .homeowner , who 's got the ultimate authority to decide if a tree gets removed or not? Olsen: I know what your opinion is . Krauss : To back up on that a little bit . When you buy a project and you 're buying into tree preservation as one of the elements that sells the project and is a good move for a city , you have to have some assurance that that tree preservation is going to occur . Now on plans where we 've had specific areas set aside or specific trees . For example in Vineland Forest if you recall there were specific trees that we said were going to be ' preserved and we Lent out there and they were preserved . The contractors who built the rc -.ds knew they had to be preserved . People who built houses on those lots knew they had to build around those . - ' Olsen : But since then they have been removed . Krauss : There was one that had been removed . But the problems come into ' play where we 've had this ambiguous statement like Lots 13 thru 14 should have a tree preservation plan . Well you get the old line . I 'll save every tree . . .to cut down to build the house . What we want is to put the cart before the horse and to say where we have specific areas that are valid and worthy or tree preservation , let 's block them out . Let 's put an easement around them . That easement will show up on the title and when somebody looks at buying the lot . When Lundgren 's sits down with these people , ' they 're going to say you can't put house plan 49-A on this one because it doesn 't fit . You 're going to have to twist it around to accommodate what you want in tree preservation . It puts the emphasize .I think where it should be . Erhart: I don 't have any problem with the tree preservation easements . I think that 's a good idea because that 's part of the overall design for the development . I 'm just a little curious what our City 's position is with r Planning Commission Meeting 1 August 7 , 1991 - Page 11 the homeowner who buys a lot . He wants to build his house the way he wants to build it and he wants to end up the trees the way he wants them ended up . Much as I agree we want to encourage and enlighten and coerce and everything , I guess I just want to make in my mind there 's a point where by II golly if it 's his lot and he wants to cut down the trees , that 's his perrogative . That 's my opinion . II Olsen: Right , that 's your opinion . Right . Erhart : When I see the term , what I 'm trying to clarify is what the City I staff . Olsen: We 're not beating each other up out there . Usually what we do is work with , when we have had these in the past I 've brought out Alan Olsen II and then we have worked with the homeowner and actually had the homeowner out there with us to work with them . This is the house design they want , then these trees will be impacted and remove them now. It 's not , maybe that was the wrong word but we have had some cases where we have specifically , such as Vineland , say specific some really important stands of trees and where now ie have the homeowner who wants to put the garage II right through those and that 's where we do try to take a strong stance . Erhart : I agree because a lot of times a lot of that gets lost between the time the homeowner really doesn 't think about it and I like the process to II force him to think about it . But anyway I 'll get off that . On page 9 there , am I reading that to say that our PUD doesn 't allow , on the top there , doesn 't allow 30 feet setback from the street? I Olsen: That 's the perimeter . Exterior sides . Erhart : That doesn 't affect their desire to do a 20 foot , okay . I Krauss: In fact there 's language in the PUD that waives the internal II setback requirement . Olsen: I thought I read that one place and had a hard time tying it together . What 's under the concern about raising the wetland 2 feet and I II realize you 're going to go into that . Maybe Charles you could address it . Are you talking about Lake Lucy or are you talking about the street the developer 's putting in? II Folch: , This particular issue was brought to my attention late last week by my street superintendent who has been with the City for a number of years and recalls back to when this road was improved and it's his belief that . II Emmings: When you say this road, you mean Lake Lucy? Folch: Lake Lucy Road . It 's his belief that one of the primary reasons II why the road was raised at that location basically is to get the road subgrade at an elevation above where it normally would be wet and saturated from a stability standpoint . I 've gone back through the file . I cannot find any specific information related to that . However , my gut feeling is this could be a valid point to at least investigate and make sure that we aren 't adversely impacting the road subgrade by raising the water level . I r IIPlanning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 12 11 It 's something that needs to be addressed . At this point in time I don 't have enoug`: information but we need to look into it . IErhart : Just my comment on that is I think one of the really .good things that they 're doing on this is stablizing the water level in that whole area. II and whether we agree it looks the way it is because it 's some nutrient loading or whatever it is , it 's only going to become a valuable wetland when you can stabilize the water level at a higher level . I think it 's really good . . .so -I guess obviously the developer would have a problem . Let II me just stress quickly the other issues that were raised regarding the conditions that were added at the last minute . I assume you 're looking for some comments on that Jo Ann? IOlsen : Yes . I Erhart : Okay , so we ' ll go to page 21 on 2( a ) . Item ( a ) . Again since you haven 't had the staff and the developer hasn 't had a chance , I 'm not going , I think it 's best for you guys to get together and talk these through so I ' ll just give you some views . I think we should do some planting of II deciduous trees along the , again without really studying it . Along the south right-of-way of Lake' Lucy Road but in those areas where there 's adequate highland area and where it can be a reasonable distance from the Icurb . So I think you 're going to have to kind of go out and rook . Olsen: And that 's what we were planning on doing in a species that would Isurvive . Erhart : Like every 40 foot plant a hardwood and you could still see underneath the hardwood and out there . Item ( b ) , I agree that we shouldn 't II be asking them to put landscaping in the rear lots . ( c ) again , I would agree that we ought to put some hardwoods along that 2: 1 slope maybe every 30 feet to give it the boulevard effect . IIOlsen: And again , that 's a pretty extreme slope and what we were thinking about was something that would maybe not even , trees that won't work with some higher . . IIErhart : Item ( d ) , given that this is a PUD and it appears as though we 're going to adapt some kind of a landscape ordinance in the near future it 's II reasonable to ask the developer to conform to that . I also think in item ( e ) though if we 're going to do that we ought to note that the landscape ordinance allows them to have alternatives to planting 3 trees also . So if II existing 6 inch trees exist . Lastly , I do believe , I think Terry has a good point . Going in and dumping a bunch of dirt on the north side to build a berm right now may not , probably didn 't sound very practical but I do believe planting evergreens would solve that problem with the lights . IISo that 's it Mr . Chairman . Emmings: They have one more Tim over in 'ne wetland alteration permit , II number 3? Erhart : Oh yeah , I did have one . You must have seen my notes . IIEmmings: The Chairman sees everything . II • Planning Commission Meeting I August 7 , 1991 - Page 13 Erhart : Yeah , I think we 've been very consistent in not allowing alteration of wetlands during mitgatory waterfowl breeding season . We should stick with that however we could delete the other verbage that talks about le st impact to wetland . - Probably the comments are valid . Do I have 11 anymore St eve? Emmings : No you don 't . Was I right? 1 Erhart : Yep . Conrad: Jo Ann , can you briefly summarize for me what the previous subdivision looked like? Olsen: Ersbo? 1 Conrad: Yeah . Several years ago . Rick Sathre : I 've got the initial one . , Olsen: It 's right in this area . It had the cul-de-sac coming in directly across. from Arlington . It had 6 lots in addition to the Ersbo property . Conrad: So we never had a plan for the westerly part of that? Olsen: No , we never did . Conrad: Okay . Why isn 't the DNR , what 's taking the DNR some time to get back on what they 'd like to do? Olsen: Well have to , we did have Ceil come out and that was kind of as this application goes out . It goes kind of midway into our application that the DNR was brought in because they received our submission to them for our comments . Once she was out there it was really difficult for her to determine exactly where the ordinary high water mark is . So what they II have to do now is bring out their survey crew so that takes some time . That 's why it 's taking . It 's going to be another month. I don 't know if you know when they 're coming out . The survey crew but . Conrad: So their first letter back to us on July 10th. Olsen: Just with the plans . That 's all they 're looking at was our plans . II Krauss: Well I 'd add too that the DNR letter that was included in your packet was based upon the original plan that we brought to you conceptually several weeks ago . The plans that are before you tonight have been refined extensively based on not only concerns the DNR raised but our concerns as well and we brought them back out to the site and we think a lot of their concerns are being addressed and _they 've indicated to us that seems to be the case but they just don 't have the final letter ready for us yet . • Conrad: Well I 'm real interested in what they have to say . When we get a II proposal for modification to Wetlands , we really don 't have experts . Other people can bring in experts and I guess the best we can do is lean on the DNR and maybe a few other agencies that can help us . I 'm kind of , IIPlanning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1?91 - Page 14 a fascinates' b) what they believe . We 're talking state-of-the-art wetland II preservation and it kind of sounds neat but then again I don 't know . I 'm probably hearing one side and I don 't know if you two or staff believes . Do you believe that this is state-of-the-art type of wetland preservation? To me this sets a lot of precedent for what we should be doing . And therefore II it 's just absolut,._ly , if this is the precedent , I want to make sure it 's the right one . The obvious next direction is to follow it up in terms of what our wetland ordinance says . Some of the things I endorse are some of II the things I just don 't have a clue if they 're right or wrong and I need somebody other than somebody a developer brings in . I need somebody that advises us that this is . Everytime you do. one thing you really , you can be II improving one thing but you can be doing some harm in another area . I think we 're all aware that wetland serve a different function and is this wetland , is this A wetland primarily habitat? Is it water quality? What is it? Is it the setting? Is it ground water? Then I get a little bit II confused but anyway , I really would have liked to have seen what the DNR said as I react to this design . It 's sort of like saying I kind of like it . What I 'm seeing . I like the idea of a PUD . I think this is a great II example of how a PUD ca work . Some clustering . I like how this can work but then there 's so many other unknowns to me and the only experts that I have that I feel are kind of non-biased maybe , I 'm not sure that they 're II state-of-the-art but at least unbiased would be the DNR and so I 'm reacting to nothing right now . I 'm not going to take a whole lot of time on some of my comments but tell me staff about the 6 foot path . I assume as we go down from 31 to 26 we 're worried about pedestrians . But I also assume , III 've got to make sure that I heard what Tim 's comment was . It is a 31 foot pavement except in a few areas where it 's 26 . Why is it? I heard Terry talk about 26 might be a better way , or a future way of going in .the II country . Is that a future way of going in Chanhassen and why are we at 31 versus 26 for this? And speak to me a little bit about pedestrian . I go through the Lundgren development , Near Mountain and on some days the streets are lined with people . They 're just lined with people walking and II Terry you should go over and see them . They 're all out in the street and I guess they like that but then that gets back to my concern always of how we 're moving people around . As we reduce the size of the street , then I we 're moving people around on that street . So I 'm sort of at a loss . I like shrinking the street but I worry about people moving . Olsen: And those are some of the concerns that we had also . We are looking at reducing the right-of-way with like the landscape ordinance and is kind of the way things are moving is to less pavement and all of that but the City still has a 31 feet which is we 're still comfortable with that . We 're 1 not prepared to say that 26 feet is the right width and if you do have it 26 feet , then you don 't need a sidewalk or you do need a sidewalk . It has been done in other cities and they ' ll probably go through that but it is II being done in Minnetonka and Eden Prairie and other cities do successfully have the reduced pavement . Conrad: Is there an associated sidewalk with that or how does that? IIOlsen: Not in all cases . IFolch: Mr . Chairman if I might add some light onto that . The 31 foot ordinance was established for a number of reasons . It wasn 't just an II Planning Commission Meeting I/ August 7 , 1991 - Page 15 II arbitrary number that was set . And I think safety is a key issue here . You can ay parking 's not going to occur on the street but yes it does . People har.c gatherings . People entertain guests . You have mail service . Car bags service . There 's going to be vehicles parked on streets from time to time and when you narrow that roadway width down , you not only are narrowing the competing area between vehicles manuevering around that but also the pedestrians and that 's a very , very important issue because I think in this area particularly where you have some quality environmental amenities that people are going to want to get out and walk around that II neighborhood . They 're going to want to see things and take a look at things . They don 't have a walk so they 're going to have to make use of the street . In the 2 areas where there was difficulties getting around the wetlands where we were agreeable to reducing the width down to 26 feet , we thought it was a good compromise by also providing this walk off the street to allow the pedestrians not to have to compete with the automobiles in a narrowed road width . 31 feet also allows better sight lines and clear I distances for people getting in and out of the driveways . Looking down streets , especially on curvalinear roadways . There 's a number of aspects related to safety that are involved with that road width establishment . II It 's not just an arbitrary number that somebody decided 31 sounds like a good number . Conrad: Terry when you were in here a couple months ago you were talking about the Near Mountain development and talking about Silver Lake and maybe there 'd be some nature trails there . You didn 't design any nature trails in this development . You were saying in the very beginning you factor in _ all the costs and that way later on things are going to come out economically for everybody but I think you were speaking real positively of some of the amenities that a nature trail could bring . Hasn 't been designed here . Not that I need you to put it in but I 'm curious why in II this particular development , I mean given that you have a wetland that 's rather pretty and given that you did talk to us several months ago about how that would be a nice amenity in some cases . Why wasn 't it put in here? II Terry Forbord: Mr . Chairman , members of the Planning Commission . Terry Forbord , Lundgren Bros . . I don 't recall speaking to you about nature I trails or anything relevent to Silver Lake and Near Mountain . I do recall speaking to the Planning Commission about planned unit developments and some of the things that may enhance a planned unit development . That was . not a sweeping statement where all planned unit developments should have those types of amenities . Every situation is different . The other thing , II there 's been three times during this discussion where this subdivision has been compared to Near Mountain . Near Mountain is 360 acres that has close II to 500 housing units . There 's a big difference between a 30 acre site where 41% of the land is open space , wetlands and only 37 housing- units versus a huge planned unit development and so when you look at the scale you get into practical thoughts real quietly . What really makes sense from II a dynamic design and aesthetic standpoint 'a.nd then obviously from an economic feasibility standpoint and that 's why . I mean it wouldn 't make a lot of sense to do that . And even the Park and Recreation Board agreed . I . Conrad: So basically a walk trail in people 's back yards is not a sellable commodity? I II I Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 16 IITerry Forbord: We find in 22 years that the vast majority , and I say the vast majority of people , number one they do not want a sidewalk in front of their home . They don 't want to pay for it and they don 't want to maintain II it and they don 't want anybody walking in front of their yards . Number two , they 've even more adamant about a- trail in their backyard because that 's where they go to relax . Nowadays when you 've got a spouse , both ' spouses are working , they come home , what they really want to do is have some quiet enjoyment of the things they 're working so hard to have and they usually escape to the backyards of their homes and the last thing they want II are a bunch of people walking back and forth in their backyard so it 's a phenomena that from an idealistic standpoint it would be truly wonderful to have trails everywhere • but from a realistic standpoint , when you look and say does it really make sense . Do people really want it and are they IIwilling to pay for it , we find exactly the opposite . Conrad: You did make that statement several months ago about the validity of nature trails and when you design them in the front end and economically factor them into the equation they will happen but I don 't need a nature trail here . I 'm just curious about what Lundgren 's sees as important amenities as sort of a way I learn about what 's going on and what 's IIsellable and what people are wanting . But thanks . Terry Forbord: I don 't want to misunderstood because there certainly is a II point where that would be appropriate . So don 't misunderstand that I 'm against them . I am for them . Conrad: They weren 't factored in here . Yeah , I know what you 're saying . - They 're just not here and I wanted to know why . Staff , who will monitor this buffering strip around the wetland? IOlsen : Us . Staff . Conrad: Who? IIOlsen: Who specifically? Conrad: Yeah , Paul? So there 's a stake out in the ground where the wetland is and then there 's a 10 yard or 25 yard . Krauss: We 'll have a couple of things . IIOlsen: It will be on easements and show up on surveys . I Krauss: Any survey 's that submitted to us for building permit will show both the wetland line plus the conservation area , whatever we call it . We 've been talking to Terry about monumenting the line . That 's always been a problem . IIConrad: The wetland line or the . Olsen: The buffer . Conrad: The buffer? Okay . I I Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 17 I/ Krauss: So everybody knows where it is and you know if your neighbors I monkeyed with it and that kind of thing . It 's something that you go back out and retrace . Conrad: And what 's this buffer zone going to consist of? Olsen: The vegetrtion will just be a natural vegetation . Mostly canary grass . Conrad: So if one person cuts into it it might stand out? -, Olsen: Well it 's going to be going from 10 feet to 25 feet . It 's not, - •going to be just a straight line so it might not be real obvious if someone 's cutting their 25 feet into a 15 foot but that 's why if we do notice something , if somebody calls , we will be able to go in and find those stakes and look at the survey . Conrad: Well I like the idea . I 'm just worried about carrying it out . Olsen: I think we 've hid the most difficulty trying to protect them in the past and these are things we 've always talked about that might be good so II again it 's experimental . Conrad: The setback from the wetland , especially Class A is 75 feet so we 're saying 45 now . The DNR has final say? Olsen: No . They have no setback on that . Conrad: They don 't have a setback from a Class A wetland? Krauss : Only from lakes . I Conrad: Only from lakes . It 's our ordinance that 's 75? Olsen: Right . I Conrad: Are they reacting? They 're not reacting to that are they? II Olsen: We 've told them about the buffer strip and they think that that 's a real good idea but as far as the setbacks themselves , they're not concerned . I Conrad: Okay . What is a 2 foot increase in water and Class A wetland makes it more of an open water space right? Less vegetation so it 's more of a pond than it is a wetland or what? Olsen: Well they 're doing it to see if that will kind of remove , there 's a lot of , I don 't know if it 's duckweed but there 's a lot of algae on top so II they 're hoping that that . Conrad: Aeration planned or there is no aeration planned for that? There 's II no dredging to clean up all the stuff that 's run in there? I Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 18 Olsen : We discussed that and a lot of , again with the DNR and Fish and Wildlife and people aren 't real excited thinking that would really resolve the problem . So with dredging the sedimentation you mean? Conrad: Yeah . Erhart: If I could interrupt here . I think keep in mind some years , in dry years the whole thing dries up . Currently the way it is . . . Conrad: I think there has to be some pedestrian . I 'm comfortable . I 1 don 't know . I don 't mind taking a 31 foot street to 26 but I need staff to endorse that right now and right now they haven 't . That sort of bothers me . I guess I have a tough time reacting to that . I almost have to go with what staff 's saying . I do need some pedestrian , I do need to be confident that the pedestrians have been taken care of , especially around the 26 foot areas . I don 't know what to do right now . I guess in the absence of not knowing what to do I have to go with staff on what they 're suggesting . However , on the other hand , I sure don 't mind reducing the impervious surface of that street if somebody could satisfy my needs to move people around safely . The walkers . Does the Lundgren plan of $40 ,000 .00 for shrubbery and what have you , does that meet our new standards where let 's say this was a $6 million dollar development , 1%? Olsen : It doesn 't apply . • Conrad: It doesn 't apply . I know it 's not in but are we tryin g to use some of those standards? 1 Olsen: Those standards don 't , we can 't really apply them to this to residential . Krauss : What does apply though is , it more closely correlates to the landscaping standards that are being proposed for the subdivision ordinance . This talks about perimeter landscaping and boulevard planting ' and trees on the lot . Conrad: Okay . Last couple things are just reaction to some of the ' landscaping issues . It 's really tough when Terry 's saying one thing and staff is suggesting another . Like Tim said , I really would like to have staff and the developer work it out . I think there 's something to having 1 vistas on wetlands so that people driving by . We don 't need to block them . I think if you take a look at the other Lundgren developments , back yards really aren 't unattractive the way they 've developed other properties so that doesn 't bother me either but I still want , I still feel comfortable in ' saying , enforcing the 2 hardwoods and 1 evergreen in this development and less offset . Would that be , if they 've already got 2 or 3 on that property , then that particular lot is taken care of? Olsen: Oh yeah . - ' Conrad: Okay . I really have to defer to staff and the developer to work those things out . I can 't be smart enough to outguess that . And then point number 3 on the wetland alteration permit . I guess I don 't know what the wording should be on that . We 're certainly , as you get so close to a 1 Planning Commission Meeting I/ August 7 , 1991 - Page 19 wetland and it 's so close you 're in the wetland when you 're putting in the II streets and what have you and fill , I guess I 'm concerned about how that 's done . And so I think that 's what Lundgren has to live within is what the staff sets up as permissible so. that it doesn 't affect the wetland that II much . If spring is the time that the developer comes in and puts roads , that 's when there 's a lot of runoff . I 'm concerned with what happens but again I have to defer to what staff suggests . I Rick Sathre : I 'm Rick Sathre . I 'm the engineer for the project . There were a couple things that Commissioner Conrad , issues that he raised that I , think I could address . Specifically how we changed the impact on the DNR wetland . Emmings: Do you want him to address that? Did you have a question you 'd II like him to answer? Conrad: Let 's keep going and Rick if you could comment after we 're all done . Maybe that would be appropriate . Emmings: Alright , Tim . What 's your name? II Batzli : My name 's Brian but I ' ll answer to Tim tonight . Emmings: Okay , go ahead . I Batzli : I 'd like to say that I think , I appreciate the sensitivity that Lundgren and staff have put into this and now I 'd like to hammer it a II little bit . Jo Ann , have we figured out what is the net average lot size? Olsen: It 's 30 ,000 . . IIBatzli : No that 's gross isn 't it? If you took out- the wetland portion here that are totally undevelopable . Do you know what kind of lot sizes we 've got here? II Olsen: No I don 't . Batzli : Okay . I 'm not going to talk about that much. I think Jeff 's I going to , unless I call you Brian tonight . I don 't know . I think that we 've got some really small lots in here and we 're going to be putting some pretty big houses on them and we 're not doing ourselves any favors . If II recent experience with PUD 's is any indication regarding- real small lot sizes and houses put next to each other as far as variances in the future go. As far as what these homes look like , granted you 're going to have a II big wetland in the middle of a lot of them especially on Block 2 but from just looking at the impact of what these homes crowded next to each other would look like fairly small lots from the road , I think some of the II neighbors and maybe none of them spoke tonight but I think they all- feel like it 's going to appear as if these are very small lots . Even if you put a fairly nice house on there , they 're concerned and I 'd like to know what the heck these lot sizes are really going to look like once you factor out II both the protected area and the wetland because it appears , especially in Block 2 that they are going to look very tiny . I also have a comment or 1 II II Planning Comrnis ion Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 20 IIquestion about what your density net is . Did you calculate the wetland size to be taken out as 8 .6 acres? IIOlsen: No actually I did the 8 :3 . Batzli : And do you take out the road when you calculate that? I think II that number should be much higher . Closer to 1 .7 or better . I 'd like you to look at that again . On Lot 7 , Block 1 they 've only got 40 feet on the curve . Don 't we have some kind of rule or regulation about that? III thought we had required more . Olsen: On a curve you have to have the 90- feet at the setback . IIBatzli : At the setback? . Olsen: Right . IIBatzli : And we 've got 90 feet there? Olsen : No , no but . il -. * Krauss: Keep in mind this is a PUD . It 's not RSF standards . II Batzli : Yeah , I understand . Do we like that? Do we comment on it? Do we look at it? IIOlsen: It was in the table . I pointed out which ones don 't meet that . Batzli : I know but do people look at it from the standpoint of we 're going to have a couple of driveways right next to each other on the curve? Do we IIcare? I don 't know . Should we share a driveway there? Krauss: We have actually asked that that be modified . IOlsen : As a curve . II Krauss : We wanted the eyebrow removed and the driveway shared if necessary but it would open that area up quite a bit . Batzli : I guess I 'm looking at it from the standpoint that it looks mighty I crowded on the curve and especially if , well I don 't think the pavement is reduced in width there is it at that point . Is the road width in Fox Hollow reduced from 31 feet? Do you guys know? It seems to me that there II was something granted in Fox Hollow . Either the right-of-way or either the width itself . Do you guys know? Folch: That I 'd have to check on . I 'm not aware of off hand . I 'd have to IIfind out for sure . I don 't recall . Batzli : It seems to me it 's narrower in that particular development and I 1 guess I 'd , I mean I agree with .Lundgren that I think sidewalks would detract from this particular development from a sellability standpoint . With the tight curves : I know in my particular development it 's a IIpotential problem with people driving their cars too fast around the curves II Planning Commission Meeting I August 7 , 1991 - Page 21 IIand especially there 's a hill and a curve area in our development and this has a couple of slope areas . I 'm not sure , is the elevation of the street going to be fairly consistent Charles do you know? II Folch: In fact it won 't . You 're going to have the grade will be coming down on both sides from the north down to the south where you 're going to have your lower points so it will fluctuate . I Batzli : So you 're going to be coming , especially on the east side going south? You 're going to be coming down a hill and then around a corner II there? Folch: Exactly . IIBatzli : Is that one of the areas where the width is reduced? Folch: That 's one of the areas where due to the existing site limitations 11 it has been proposed to reduce the width in order to get the road to work in that area geometrically . Batzli : I don 't know . From a safety standpoint I 'd like to see something II that 's for sure . There 's been a lot of close calls with little kids on our road in an area similar to that . I 'm not sure if the reduced road width is going to impact it that much or not . I asked last time if we could take a II look at incorporating any of the road structure of this development into a potential development to the west . Was anything really done on that? Krauss: There 's a couple reasons we didn 't pursue that . First is that I there was an original plan that looked to do that and when the property owner to the west was thinking about throwing the property in . He since II decided not to pursue that which makes it difficult to anticipate a street connection through there . The grades get rather tough . If you don 't have the cooperation of property and know how it 's going to develop , it gets rather tough to see where a road 's going to cut through . II Batzli : I know we 've done this hypothetically in the past and I just think that we 're going to end up with another entrance right on the other side of II charing bend there in the next development down which is going to be somewhere between 100 and 200 feet away when it seems to me we might try to incorporate it . I don 't know . If you say it 's impossible , I believe you . IIKrauss: I don 't think it 's impossible . We see a concept that demonstrates that it 's not impossible but it 's quite difficult . Olsen: There are some wetlands right adjacent to , on the west . I don't II know if you 've got something that shows that . Batzli : If and when we ever get a trail system in this city , are we .going II to have one along Lake Lucy Road? Olsen: I think that trail system is there . There 's an additional easement II for that trail . Batzli : Is there one already? II II I Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 22 IIOlsen : There 's an on street trail . Just a bike trail . Bat:1i : Thrt 'E as much as we 'll ever get there? IOlsen : Well there 's an easement for of street but I think that what you 've got is what you get . You know it 's for the park department to Ireally determine . . Batzli : Terry , if I can direct this question to you . Who will own the little piece of land on the northwest corner of the development there that 's by the entrance? Is that Lot 23 's property up there? • Terry Forbord: Mr . Chairman , members of the Planning Commission . Terry II Forbord with Lundgren Bros . . Just to make sure I understood your question . The very northwest corner just west of the road there 's what appears to be a triangular piece of property that goes along the western boundary . That Iis part of Lot 23 , you 're absolutely correct . Batzli : So it will be up to Lot 23 to maintain that piece of property? I Terry Forbord: Sir , Mr . Commissioner , that area is a preservation zone . It will have deed restrictions on it where it will maintain it 's natural state . If you look on the exhibits that have been supplied by staff and II upon staff 's recommendation , that is an area that they feel should be maintained in it 's natural state and it 's always been our intent to keep it that way . There are some significant trees . As you know , the City of Chanhassen requires a tree survey of every tree that 's I believe larger IIthan 6 inches and we have done that on this particular site . That area along both sides of that road in approximately 400 feet has significant trees on both sides of the road and that 's why that area is depicted on the IIpreservation map exhibit as a preservation zone . Batzli : So you 're not going to have any entrance markers or anything like Ithat in that area? Terry Forbord: To the contrary. Actually in the very northwest corner , as you will see on the exhibit on the overhead , there is actually a Walker II Pond which is a sedimentation pond that will be trapping the storm water runoff that comes into this . Eventually goes into the large DNR wetland and you can see it kind of there depicted as kind of a kidney shaped little I object there . That is a pond on that side . The landscape plan depicts landscaping all around that area . Now as you know when you 're putting in roads and you have a right-of-way and especially by entrances to 1 subdivisions , it 's very important that your sight lines be established so people at that stop sign are turning , they can see some distance . So yes there will be some landscaping but a safety considerations are there so the people ingressing and egressing will be able to see in a safe manner . IBatzli : So you 're not going to have any entrance markers into this development? . IITerry Forbord: No , that 's not true . II Batzli : Where are you going to put them? . II Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 23 II Terry Forbord: The entrance markers are on the landscape plan . They are depicted there . Olsen: It 's up on the transparency . I Terry Forbord: Rick , would you put the landscaping plan up. please? Batzli : Maybe I should ask it this way . Is there going to be a homeowners " association in this development? Terry Forbord: No sir . I •Batzli : So will it be that Lot 23 's responsibility to maintain the . entrance monument and the landscaping on that corner or is that all going to be on the right-of-way? Terry Forbord: It will not be in the right-of-way? What we have done in the past , even within this city and many other cities is that there is a II landscaping easement , a monument easement . Often times a utility easement on those particular lots where there is monumentation . There is an agreement with the individual who buys that home that they will maintain II that in perpetuity . That 's been done in this city as well as every other city that- we 've had . Batzli : When do we normally do that Paul? When would we require that? , Krauss : The homeowners agreement? IIBatzli : Well he said there 's not going to be one . But require for example that landscaping and sign monuments , things like that get taken care of in a PUD . 1 Krauss: Well , if it 's a concern you can require that it be set up at this time . In the past we 've had problems with some- of these monuments that II included lighting and backlit signage and stuff that would fall apart and the homeowner didn 't maintain it . I think Lundgren typically has gone to , what is common now which is a low or zero maintenance type of facility . Sometimes a rock wall with brass lettering fixed to it . It 's a difficult II one on that particular lot Commissioner too . We want to have a low maintenance or no maintenance landscaping . The homeowner reasonably is not going to be maintaining it . The homeowner reasonably isn't going to think II of that as being part of their property . Batzli : That 's my concern is that you 're going to have a development full II of unhappy people because somebody 's not going to take care of it and they 're going to think that it 's the City 's responsibility. Terry Forbord: That has not been our problem in the past . We 've been in II business for 22 years . We 've have done this and we have not had that problem . Batzli : There 's been that problem in other developments here . I 'm not II saying Lundgren 's is the problem . I just suggesting that this has happened before . II 1 I Planning Commission Meeting August ? , 1>'?1 - Page 24 I Terry Forbord: You 're right . It does happen with other developers . I think the basis for that is how is the agreement handled between the home buyer and the developer . Is it thought through beforehand . As I stated , Iwe don 't have those problems . Batzli : Typically when you put this kind of restriction on the deed Ithey 're buying , who has the right to enforce it? Krauss : Well , it wouldn 't be the first time . We could arrange for the City to be involved in the chain of title so that if the property wasn 't I being maintained we 'd have the . . .to go back to the homeowner to require the maintenance . We 'll do it ourselves and assess the cost . That would be a possibility . IIBatzli : I 'd like to see something like that . Terry Forbord: Mr . Chair? Mr . Pflaum , President of Lundgren Bros . is here and he deals with these things himself so maybe he could better address some of those questions . II Peter Pflaum: There 's no easy answer . What we do is there 's an easement on the property that in the event the homeowner doesn 't take care of it , we have the right but not the obligation to come and take care of it . So Ithere is a protection from the homeowner if this person is not doing it , we can come in and rescue the situation . Batzli : Lundgren? IIPeter Pflaum: Lundgren , yeah . And we use that in those cases where there 's not a homeowners association . If there 's a homeowners association II we give them the right to do it . But like Terry said , we 've never had a problem but if we did , we have the right to come in there and take care of it and then figure out how to resolve it with the neighbors . Usually you 're not talking about a major item in terms of dollars . I Batzli : No , typically it 's for an individual or group of individuals inside the subdivision and you 're right . But I guess I would feel more IIcomfortable . I have a lot of confidence in Lundgren but I think the City might be here longer than Lundgren . I would prefer that the City have that right . ilAhrens: What is the sign going to look like anyway? Is it going to be no maintenance? IIKrauss: I don 't believe we 've gotten into the details yet . Batzli : The building inspector 's comments on the type of house and 5 foot II drainage easement and stuff Jo Ann. Is that handled in your condition 8( f )? IIKrauss : I believe the condition that 's handling it is condition 9 . Batzli : Okay , so 8( f ) plus 9 handles it because really they talk about 2 things . The type of house and then the 5 foot drainage . Okay . I share 1 Planning Commission Meeting II August 7 , 1991 - Page 25 Ladd 's concern . I would like to see it demonstrated that there 's kind of II no net loss . That this is really top drawer and we 're doing the 'right thing . As far as the landscaping , I agree with ( a ) that I think we should put a couple in provided they 're going to survive . ( b ) I think we can get rid of . ( c ) , I really don 't have something to protect the slope but that doesn 't necessarily mean trees . Is that right Jo Ann? Olsen: Right . I Batzli : Yeah . And then ( e ) , I think as long as they 're acting in accordance with what we 're proposing in the new ordinance regarding if II there is existing trees , a minimum of 1 or whatever the language ends up . I • don 't know if we 're going to pass it that 'they can delete all three . They 're credited with existing trees over a certain caliper . I just think II that should be worked out depending on what we talk about later tonight . I agree there shouldn 't be a berm . And as far as the wetlands , I think there should be some kind of language in there that it should minimize impact on it from the standpoint of I guess we don 't want their grader running around the entire wetlands . I don 't know how we say that but I think there should be some protection . As far as the during breeding season , it seems to me we always do have that in there but I guess Terry raised an interesting point . It might be all year round . Olsen : Well , it usually is in the spring when we mean it and when we say minimal disturbance , a lot of times you can do that grading when the ground • is still somewhat frozen and stuff so when you 're filling in a portion of a wetland you 're really not , that 's the least impact . It 's the harder ground . That 's what we intended . I/ Erhart : . . . Item 3 that you 're discussing deals solely with the timing . Not the extent of granding . I Olsen: Right . The timing . That 's what I mean . Batzli : I 'm done now . II Olsen: If I could , I did go through the , you 're right . The actual net density is 2 .1 without the wetlands . For some reason I had that done -and II another one got in there . So what was in there is the net lots and it had not removed the wetland . So if you remove all the wetlands , 8 .3 acres , it 's 2 . 1 units per acre . Thanks for catching that . I Emmings : And our city average is 1 .7? . Olsen: That was shown in the Comp Plan . I Rick Sathre : . . .37 lots on 22 acres . _ IIOlsen: What I did is I had added up all the lot areas . Had removed the streets and then what I did was just remove the wetland areas from that and I came up with 17 .7 acres . I Rick Sathre: And roads . But if you just take out the wetlands , then the density is 1 .7 . i II II Planning Commis ion Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 26 IEmmi nags : We take out both . When we say net , we take out both . Jeff? Farmakes ' I 'm going to start out with some stuff just in general that I I have questions on that we didn 't cover in the previous meeting . I just can 't find in here in all this paperwork . I 'm going to start out with this tree preservation . Go to Exhibit H that shows some of the trees . It 's on I this sheet here . The road that comes up in the northwest corner that you said that you changed the angle so it wasn 't going straight into the road . The one we 're talking about the light shining into the homeowners home . I 'm looking at how that relates to the trees that are in existence there . I I can see that whoever did the plotting on this thing was trying to get a lot out of what is now Lot 14 . Buildable lot there in the corner . The southwest corner of Lot 14 . Was I guess trying to get a minimum building I lot in there . I 'm wondering are there any other ways to run that road through there so you wouldn 't have to slice through? IIOlsen : We did talk about running it right like adjacent to the wetland . Farmakes : Sc� that would curve it off to the east? A little more to the east? IIOlsen: Exactly . Then once you get the building pad in there , you 'd be losing them so we weren 't really , there really was no way to get around it I even if you did move it all the way over because then , like I said , with the building pad . Also the ponding area that 's in that northwest corner , they 're going to be dredging that out and making it deeper . That 's going to be removing some of the poplars and stuff there too so it is kind of getting hit from all angles . Farmakes: I guess I ' ll get into this Lot 14 in a few minutes here . It II seems that the stand that 's there essentially will be eliminated either through the road or that holding pond or Lot 14 . Correct? IKrauss : No . There will be some trees removed . What you have is a trade-off . If there 's a potential and alternative for the road to come out in another location onto the adjacent property , that would be the only way to do that but there 's net environmental impact damage on that site to I accomplish it . If the road 's going to connect there at all , your other alternative is to come through the Class A wetland and we 've been trying to keep some , everybody 's been trying to stay out of that . What they did is I sort of split the difference and they 've got trees located on either side of the road . Significant trees located on either side of the road and as the road comes through there at a diagonal , you should still have II considerable tree massing . I don 't know where you want to pick out the kind of trees that are in there . I can 't read it . Rick Sathre: Mr . Chairman , I 'm Rick Sathre from Sathre-Berquist . The I earlier plan that some of you saw last time we were here , the road was shifted a little bit farther east through this area right in here . I chose finally this alternative after looking at about 3 or 4 others because this I allowed us to save some 16 to 30 inch oaks right in this area that are west of the existing Ortenblat driveway . Also saving some significant trees , although they aren 't oaks on the west side of the road . Picking this particular alignment gave us trees on both sides whereas if we pushed it I Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 27 farther west or east we lost everything on one side or the other . This seems to protect the largest trees the best . FarmakeE : Was one of those options when you went to the east , there 's sort of a natural gap between those two clumps of trees where you move it farther to the east so it 's on the east side of where those oaks are you would nip some of that wetland up in the northwest corner? Rick Sathre : Here 's the existing driveway . That 's where that opening is? Farmakes : Well yeah . It comes at a different angle but . 1 Rick Sathre: Okay . Well it- isn 't wide enough for the road so if we came out here , then we 'd fill into the Class A wetland . Farmakes: But you could angle it and fill in that one corner up there to minimize the loss of those trees? If the angle was this direction rather than the present direction of the road? Rick Sathre : If we moved the entrance farther east and did impact the wetland , you 'd still have , it 's back here where the trees are significant . II So just moving the entrance east didn 't help necessarily . Olsen: I think he 's talking . Rick Sathre : Maybe I don 't understand . Terry Forbord: Mr . Chair , Terry Forbord of Lundgren Bros . . I know when .� you 're looking at one dimension on a map , even for those of us who do this day in and day out , it 's very difficult to try to understand the dynamics of moving something even one foot east or west . The other thing that one needs to take into perspective when they 're just looking at these lines and wondering , is this where it 's going to be is something called grading limits . Okay , so when you 're looking at those lines , that isn 't the only , area that will be impacted . The grading limits that it takes to make it all fit together and the engineer can probably explain this from a City 's perspective , the grading limits can change depending on where you put the road . If we move that road further to the east , the impact wouldn 't just II be on what you see in that one dimension because you may have to grade 50-60 feet each direction beyond the right-of-way in order just to make it work because of the topography . So when we selected , like Rick said and I think he was fairly modest when he said we 've looked at three different concepts because we worked with the City staff seeing their concepts and then our concepts and we went back and forth . Got the wetland people involved . I mean every expert that was available got involved in the design of these sensitive areas and the roads . But we also had to take into effect the grading limits of the right-of-way . How far on both sides of the road were we going to have to cut dirt or move dirt . The spot that you see right now , right where it is toda , has the absolute minimal impact of any alternative for that particular lo•_ z:tion. Whether it be trees, wetlands , wildlife , whatever . Farmakes: Paul , did you look at these other proposals that they 're talking about? 1 II Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1O91 - Page 28 IIKrauss : We in fact sat around a table sketching out a variety of things at several meetings , yeah . IFarmakes : Okay , because as far as the_ grading goes , the angle that I 'm talking about really relates to Lot 14 and whether or not there is a Lot 14 . The angle isn 't that much different than the present road that goes in II there now . It 's slightly more to the east . I 'm not an engineer . I don 't build roads . I Olsen: Do you want me to show what I think you 're talking about is to bring the road or do you want to come over and do it? But you 're talking about bringing the road through here instead? I Farmakes : Well just either that or angling it up and nipping a bit of the wetland . IOlsen: Find then what you 're saying is that they would lose Lot 14 . Farmakes : I ' ll get into discussing Lot 14 in a minute . But it would be II Lot 14 , that is correct . I think we 've maybe covered that enough . My^ concern is that maybe when this does come before the City Council that that 's looked at . I 'd like to touch quickly on this road issue . On page 20 . Has the safety , has this come before the Safety Commission at all or Ihave they commented on any of this? Olsen: We got comments back from the Building Inspector and then also from Ithe Fire Marshall . They had no comments specifically . v Farmakes : ' You don 't see this , this isn 't really a thru street of any kind . It 's just internal traffic and you feel that this would be , without a street that this would be a safe issue? Olsen: Well that 's why we 're doing the compromise to try it . To try and I see if we can because it really was a difficult situation because we really wanted to save the wetlands and the trees but also provide the closed street . So we 're comfortable that the transition would work . ' I Farmakes : The sidewalk would be 6 feet on both sides? Olsen: No , just one side . IFarmakes: Which side would this be? The north side? I Olsen : We were proposing that it be on the wetland side . That 's mostly where people would be wanting to walk . IBatzli : I don 't think people would use them though . I don 't think people would go onto the street , onto the sidewalk , back onto the sidewalk kind of a thing . I Olsen: If we make it like an easy transition . We kind of were thinking just a little ramp up , ramp down . . . I Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 29 Batzli : I just think of like in Eden Prairie . A lot of times you see 1 people walking down the street and the sidewalk 's right there . I don 't knee: if they 'd use it . Olsen: You want to provide it just in case . Krauss: We may be guilty of trying to be over creative on this but we clearly wanted to be sensitive to not plowing into , we needed to protect the wetland . We didn 't want to plow into the hill with the oaks on it and there 's only so much room to put the road and then we looked at revising ' our standards which the PUD ordinance encourages you to do . But we 're • being asked to break some new ground here and there 's a limit to how far • *we 're comfortable in going and we developed this. compromise out of it . It 's clear to me in looking at planning literature from around the country II that a lot of places are looking at reducing right-of-way and street width for the same reasons that we 're considering it here tonight . What 's not clear to me is the standard that we should use and I think the engineering department has indicated that they 're going to check with other communities and see what they 're going with . You know it takes a while for the ordinances to catch up w.ith what some of Other communities are doing and we 'd like to see what is safe . We do have a tight curve here compounding the narrowness of the street . We think it can be done safely or else we wouldn 't propose it . But we wanted to have all the safeguards we could built into this and the sidewalk was part of that . FarmaFes: If the sidewalk was deleted , did you take that into consideration when you were looking at that? In other words would you approve it or do you have real safety concerns if that was deleted? Krauss : We 'd really have to take a look at this . I 'll be honest with you Commissioner Farmakes . This is something that we had a conference call with the City Manager and ourselves sitting around a conference table late II Wednesday afternoon with the developer 's engineer trying to work out something that we could agree on that met the goals that we felt we needed II to meet . What you see in front of you is the net result of that . Farmakes : I 'm going to reserve an opinion on that until we get further 11 information on it . The next thing I want to touch on is the lots . I 've been really impressed with Lundgren development and their developments . I think they 've done a really nice job . Signage , landscaping , the whole thing . I do have some concerns that again when this goes to City Council II that they 're really looking at what this really is . Particularly in these areas where they show the wetland . Often it 's the case in the wetland you see a huge lot there and really it 's not quite so huge when it comes time ' to build on it . In looking at Lots 14-5 , if you look where the building pads are and you superimpose where the wetland is , and that 's Exhibit C and E , if you put those two together , it would seem to me and then look at the square footage that is on page 16 on the staff report here and look at those listings , they look pretty substantial when you look at lot area but when you subtract the wetland and you subtract the wetland' setback and you subtract the front setback on the lot , these lots are half or more in some II cases . And then compare them against Lots 1 , 2 , 3 . The existing home on 3 . Even 14 , 15 , 16 . These lots aren 't suffering a lot of loss through wetland habitat or they 're pretty much all buildable . It concerns me that ' 1 il Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1 91 - Page 30 II E thru 24 are So different . I understand that PUD , that 's what goes on but I think that these figures are a bit deceptive . That we should also have u'-at reall ; net buildable square footage of that lot is when they 're I comparing them against the other lots that are there because I think they look far different than what 's on here . The other lots that I have concern about would be Lot 13 , Lot 12 , and Lot 10 . Also those lots are having a " I fair amount of loss due to the proposal . I 'm also concerned about 7 and 6 . The access on the road . You said there 's somebody over there that wants the thru street through there . Is that the positioning of that street or . where it 's proposed? I Olsen: No . Like I said , in just our first shot at that we 've looked et , that they already do have access on Powers Blvd . that they could bring in Itheir own private drive and there 's some slope and topography there and trees that would be removed . Farmakes : It seems awfully narrow there . They 'd either have to share a I lot or put them both of them right together . I 'm concerned in particular about Lot 14 . I still feel that , typographical considerations aside , that the reason that that road 's going through so that building pad on 14 and I it 's just the corner there . I guess considering looking at these homes and the density of these homes , if you look at them on any part of the lower level or the south part , if there 's houses close together in the - Iarrangement for the typographical area , there 's not more than '3 or 4 of them in a row and then they change angle . When I look at 5 thru 14 , they 're sort of all on a crescent . They 're all , because of the typographical positioning all in a row . They seem awfully close together I to me compared to the rest of the development and I also understand that a PUD , taking use and consideration of the land that that 's what you do sometimes . I 'd like to see fewer homes in between there . Between 5 and I 14 . In particular 14 . If you eliminate 14 and move those apart a little bit , you can maybe get those a little bit more to conform . I don 't know about the economics of that but to me that 's a glaring standout there . I When we talked about , to go onto the next subject , when we talked a bit about the improvement of the wetland . I still have concerns about finding out information about how the wetland that 's on the lower half of this development is affected . The drainage ditch at- one time , it 's now filled I up , you guessed it being about 12 inches deep at the time it drained out the property . Is that correct? So it takes very little to drain that level down to the next wetland , is that correct? IFrank Svoboda : The ditch as it is today is about 6 inches shallower than it was originally . There 's about 6 inches of sediment on the bottom . That 's probably about 12 to 18 inches . IFarmakes : Okay , but at this point that 's more of a , it 's not draining out right now into the lower , it 's filled in? The drainage area . Has there Ibeen any discussion as to what , if anything that they talked hypothetically about putting a crop in . I 'm sure the DN isn 't going to allow that As far as improvement . If they approved th •water level on this thing , how is I that going to affect the wetland and the next slope down which is on the southeast of this property? Besides the road or Lake Lucy Road , are they going to be doing anything to change the nutrients in this issue that 's already there? Particularly if this land has already been cropped . There I I Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 31 IIis substantial amounts of nutrients there . How is that going to affect the lower wetland and in raising that water level , how that drains? Is that g: inc tc take the nutrients and the problems from there and put it down to the next one? Is there something that -can done about that? And if so , what would the DNR allow us to do? My comments then , to finish up on going back to page 21 . I would defer to the City on that as far as blocks view . ' That 's an aesthetic issue . This is a considerable distance from the highway . I 've seen the other development 's homes . They look pretty good from the back . I guess I don 't have as much concern about the blocking of the view . It will take a long time for those trees to get up to that state ' but I still would like to see some landscaping . Survivability is an issue . I 'd like to hear from the City on whether •or not that 's a confirm on that . Krauss: On boulevard trees along Lake Lucy? 1 Farmakes : That 's correct . That 'd be line ( a ) . They would like that deleted and next to it , the thing Terry handed out here . Comments that say II here , it says blocks view and low survivability . Krauss : We have asked the street superintendent , who admittedly isn 't a landscape expert but who 's familiar with what grows in his rights-of-way to take a look at that when he was looking at that drainage issue and he believed that it was wide enough to support some boulevard trees . He 's got a lot of intuitive feel for these things and I sort of trust his opinion . What we were talking about though is exactly what Commissioner 's Conrad and Erhart mentioned which is the boulevard trees with deciduous trees through there . Basically just to break it up a little bit . I Farmakes: I 'd like to see that stay in then , unless there 's legitimate information backing that up that we can 't put anything in there because II it 's not going to live . It would be a waste of money . On ( b ) , as far as the landscaping of the rear lots adjacent to Class A wetlands , I 'd still like to see that remain but I also understand that the sellability of these types of homes , these people are going to want to look out onto the lake . II They 're going to want to look out on the wetland . I guess as you said before , if there 's enough there to break it up . Olsen: Yeah , that was our intention . It wasn 't going to be a solid II screen . Just a little . Farmakes: So maybe a definition of what that is . Perhaps something that II is conprorniseable there . I 'd like to' see also ( e ) stay in there . I don 't think that 's excessive . However , since that 's not on the books , perhaps again that 's something up for discussion . A landscape berm and so on , I guess if , again I defer to the City 's opinion there on whether or not the II landscape only is going to affect that particularly in the winter . As far as line 3 , again I 'd like to hear from the DNR on that . I 'm not a wildlife expert and what constitutes a breeding season and how that will affect . I 'd like to get their opinion on that . That 's the end of my comments . Emmings: Thanks Jeff . Joan . I 1 II Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 32 Ahrens : I 'd like to first comment on Terry 's comments and then I had some general comments . As far as the 26 foot width of the street goes , I think Jat 's fine and I think putting .in a sidewalk is , I don 't want to expose ' the City to any liability here by not putting in a sidewalk but I don 't think people use them . I know that they 'd use them if they were only on it for a short time but I think it would look nice . The landscaping . Under ' ( a ) , the landscaping along Lake Lucy Road . I guess my only concern there is not to block the view of the wetland for everybody else . I don 't know what you had in mind there as far as what kind of landscaping goes but ' there 's other people that look at that wetland besides the people who are going to live in it and I think that shouldn 't be blocked from the road . ( b ) , I have no opinion about that . I ' ll defer to the City on that . ( c ) , ' I guess my understanding is that your intent there was to stabilize the land next to the wetland . That 's why you wanted some landscaping . Is that true? ' Olsen: Right . There 's some special grasses and stuff like MnDot will use and we were also going to look at if it is possible for like birch or willow but again it 's something that , it 's maybe just one . But that slope 's pretty steep so,that 's something we 'll be working on but at least the vegetation . Thick growth vegetation . We just want to see what they 're proposing and make sure that that was going to be adequate . That wouldn 't erode . Ahrens: Okay , ( e ) . We 've been talking about this requirement for some time now , months and we all think it 's a great idea and I don 't know , if we II don 't start here when are we going to start? I don 't see that as too big of a burden for Lundgren . And ( f ) , I 'm biased on this because that 's my little house up there across the street from this . IIEmmings : Well how does the homeowner feel? Let 's hear it . Ahrens: Well first of all , I 've heard lots of comments tonight that the IIroad has been moved east of where it 's original location was . Right? Rick Sathre : The angle coming in has been cocked so it 's just this lip here . The intersection hasn 't been moved farther east , no . Ahrens: But on your Exhibit , on your sheet #7 , it shows the existence of the old road alignment as compared to the existence of the new road I alignment and then new road alignment is actually west of the old road alignment . ' Rick Sathre: The absolute touchdown point on Lake Lucy Road moves very slightly west because the additional proposal showed a slope going actually into the Class A wetland a little bit . We shifted it over just enough to avoid that . I think you 're talking about this one aren 't you? Ahrens: Right . II Rick Sathre: The initial proposal had the slope coming down off of the road right-of-way into the very corner of the Class A wetland . We shifted the road from , the curve line from here over to there to get a little IIfarther away and then the angle coming in , you can see . I don 't know if 11 Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 33 you can understand this graphic . It 's very hard but the cross hatched 1 lines represent where the road was a month ago in our planning . This dark line is the newer road . New idea for the road and I guess what you see I looking at it , studying it , a couple things are different about it but one of them is that the headlights coming out the road would be pointed easterly until you got closer to the road . Ahrens: Okay , but once it 's at the road , I mean I can tell what 's west andll east here and once you 're at the road where the cars are stopped and ready to go out onto Lake Lucy Road , it 's actually further west than it was before . Rick Sathre: Yeah , the cars would actually stop probably 15 or 20 feet farther west . Ahrens: And if you look on sheet #6 , where the existing driveway is now . The Ortenblat driveway , that 's considerably east of where your proposed road is . Rick Sathre : Jo Ann , can I use your market for a moment? I 'll draw that driveway on here . Ahrens: Do you have your own Exhibit #6 because it 's on there already? Rick Sathre : That 's the tree survey map? Ahrens: Right . Tree survey and vegetation . 11 Rick Sathre : It was up here a while ago . This one . Is this the one? Ahrens: Right . i Rick Sathre : This is the existing driveway location . That would be about at the eastern edge of the permanent road . I Ahrens: Right . The eastern corner would be more accurate . And you know , Terry 's a very persuasive person and I can see that he persuaded most of the commission here that a berm isn 't needed there but I 'd invite any of you to back into that driveway at night and point your headlights out and you 'll see that this goes directly into our backdoor . That 's not an accurate depiction of where the house is compared to where the road is going to be . And there 's a big difference for us living there to have a dirt driveway there than to have a paved road with all these houses . I think there 's been landscaping , as far as evergreens go that , we planted 3 II evergreens there several years ago which was a big mistake because it 's real windy and real sunny there and I 'd like to talk to your landscape architects and see what they have to say about that but evergreens aren 't 1 going to make it there . So I think there should be a berm and I encourage the berm , that the City require that a b&"u be put in there and landscaped . As far as the removal of the trees go in that .roadway -too , are those going to be replaced? I Emmings: The question is whether or not there 's going to be replacement of the trees that are removed to put the road in on the west side . 1 II Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 34 IIOlsen: That was part of all the additional landscaping that we were requesting . Specifically on that site or that location we have discussed I relandscaping like the ponding area . Like again right now it 's kind of an indentation with some poplars . To have some of that vegetation back but as far as replacement in that location , we have not specifically talked about that . IIAhrens: I liked Jeff 's comment about moving the road further east if that could be done at all . Closer to the actual alignment of the existing II driveway . However , again even if it was aligned closer to the existing driveway , there would still be a problem with the impact on our lot . It 's a big impact there and "1 don 't know if Lundgren has ever gone out there at night and done what I suggested . Shown your headlights up there . Mostly I because it 's a hill across the street and I don 't know what the grade is . What 's the grade going to be? IFolch: I don 't recall off hand . Rick Sathre : The road grade comes down to a low point . . . I believe we I showed a 6% slope coming down toward Lake Lucy Road but then we level off as you get right to the road so you don 't slide out onto the road . You 'd actually , as you approach the road you get pretty flat at Lake Lucy Road . Like the driveway is now . IAhrens: I 'm going to move off of that point . I could go on for a long time about that . When do you plan on raising the level of the wetland 2 II feet? When would that be done? Right away or would that be something that- would be done down the road? 11 Terry Forbord: Mr . Chairman , would you like me to address that question at this time? Emmings : I 'm sorry . If she asks you a question , go ahead and answer it . ITerry Forbord: Mr . -Chair , members of the Planning Commission , my name is Terry Forbord with Lundgren Bros . The precise time table of when that I would occur is unknown at this time . A lot of that will depend on when the final approvals come from the city . When the development agreements are prepared . When the funding is available and if we are in a construction season or if we are not in a construction season . So there 's obviously a II lot of factors that none of us know at this exact time when that would happen . So I can 't give you a date when it would occur . I Ahrens : The reason I 'm asking is because I 'd like to know what the , if you raise the level of the wetland it 's going to increase the circumference of the wetland and how does that impact on the setback that 's shown here? IDoes the setback get pushed? _ Terry Forbord: Mr . Chair , the chart that is shown and it has been submitted to you as a preservation zone and an upland wetland setback zones IIare utilizing the new ordinary high water mark that will be established as a result of the raising . II II Planning Commission Meeting I August 7 , 1991 - Page 35 Emmings: Okay , so all of the figures and all the drawings you 've presented II to us already have in place the wetland being 2 feet higher than it presently is? II Terry Forbord: Yes sir . Rick Sathre : The line that 's on the drawing as the edge of the wetland isn 't the water surface . It 's actually where the vegetation changes from wetland to upland . So it 's generally that line is up , I 'd say the . elevation is probably around 979 . II Emmings: Now wait a minute . Now you 're saying something different . ° Rick Sathre : I 'm saying something different than what Terry did . We 're II proposing to raise the water surface from 974 .5 to 976 .5 . Emmings: Okay , and what 's drawn on here? 1 Rick Sathre: That line is actually where the vegetation changes out on the ground which is a line that 's actually way up the slope . It varies in height because the vegetation doesn 't follow the contour . But that line is say 797 . . Emmings: So everyplace that line is higher? I Rick Sathre : It 's always higher than the water level is now or would be . Much higher . I Olsen: And we did discuss this and we did have them take that into account with the buffer . If it 's a 10 foot buffer it 'd be coming from the height , or the edge of the water after it 's raised 2 feet . So it does reflect everything being pushed out . Emmings: Well no , that 's not what he 's saying. He 's saying the change in the vegetation from aquatic to terrestrial to day . That 's what he just said . Rick Sathre : I can help you . I 'll try to help you . I don 't think I have I a graphic . These probably aren 't the same scale . Well they're fairly close enough . , Erhart: Rick? To ask a quick question . Is that the change in vegetation II today or as proposed? Rick Sathre: No . The water surface in the wetland right now, and this is 1 an approximation . This is the water right now. Something like that . If the DNR would allow us to , we 're proposing to raise that so , whoops that 's II not going to work . We would be creating a new water surface that would look , this is going to be hard . Maybe you can 't see all of them . Can you? It would spread out a little bit farther than it is now but the line on the wetland map , the line that we measure from is what Braun Intertec located II on the ground as the vegetation line and that 's uphill still farther . On the western shore isn 't that different because the slopes are steeper but on the east side , I know the wetland line right now is something like that II II 11 Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 36 so it 's upland quite a bit and it comes right through between the Walker Pond . In general there 's three different lines. IIEmmings: Okay thanks . . Olsen: The green line is going to be pushed out though and I thought 1 that 's what we asked for the plans to reflect . That when everything is pushed . When the water is raised , the vegetation is also going to be going out now . IIRick Sathre : I think the reed canary grass might migrate up the hill a little bit . IIOlsen: We can work on that one . Ahrens : So what are you going to do about that one? IOlsen: Well , what we want to have reflected is , the water level 's going to be raised up 2 feet . If that 's approved , that 's done . Then you 'll have , I we 'll determine the edge of the wetland and wherever that is and that 's not necessarily where the water is . Actual water edge is but then we ' ll be taking the buffer from that . So that 's what we want to have because if you II raise the water , then that also pushes out the emergent vegetation . The wetland vegetation which actually determines the edge of the wetland so it 's something we 've got to come to a conclusion actually where that is and then from where the edge of that wetland is and then that buffer strip IIgoing . So I don 't know that it 's much different from where it 's at . . . Batzli : So as a condition for example Jo Ann , let 's say I want to add an 11 amendment that we 're going to pound in monuments or markers . Since we don 't know where the vegetation is going to migrate up to , how do we know what our 10 or 25 foot buffer strip? IIAhrens: Also for the easements . Legal description . Emmings: You 'll end up measuring it from the other side . . . IBatzli : Well what would you like us to do is the question . II Krauss : We 're dealing with a DNR wetland where they establish a wetland edge and OHW . We 're going to know what that OHW 's going to be . Ahrens: At some point in time though . IIKrauss: No . We 're going to know that exactly . I don 't know if this was your earlier question . In terms of when this would happen . This would I happen as part of the development . •It 'd be a condition of it and it would occur at whatever time development occurs This fall dr -next spring or whatever . So what we 're going to do and what we have done is regulated the II setbacks relative to the new elevated water line . From the expanded wetland the setbacks would be measured from there . Now it 's true that the wetland vegetation would migrate uphill from there and we don 't know to what extent but we have an expectation that I 'm pretty sure it 's going to II II Planning Commission Meeting I August 7 , 1991 - Page 37 wind up in that additional conservation strip that we 're providing beyond II the wetland . Ahrens: How is that going to impact the wetland to the south? When you II raise the water level . Krauss: The outlet , the outflow and I guess I 'd defer somewhat to the City I Engineer or the applicant , but the . . ..flow leaving this water body should be no different post development than it is today . That 's what we try to juggle so that we 're not inducing any water flows or anything else that 's going to upset the balance downstream . By the way , this thing flows in two II directions . It 's kind of weird . The flow splits somehow . There 's an outlet underneath Lake Lucy Road . I Emmings: But that 's being shut off . To my understanding . Krauss: We 're still doing some final talking on that . In fact whether or II not you close off one entirely or just the elevation on both of them and let it continue flowing in two directions like it is now is going to be , we 're going. to ask the DNR that but I think our last discussion on it was that we should probably raise both of them and have it continue to flow in both directions . Emmings: Alright . I Olsen: We 're also trying to assure that water isn 't totally cut off from that wetland to the south either . We want to still have water entering so II that 's being provided for too . Ahrens: There was some discussion in here , in your staff report . I can 't remember where it is but concerning use of the neighborhood parks by the people who live in this development . I don 't know where I read it in here but they suggested that kids will be using the Curry Farms Park which is across the road . There will be kind of a crosswalk or something . Is that I going to be? Olsen: That was in the Park and Rec memo from Todd Hoffman and their II discussion . It was just something that _I think they 're recommending . They were commenting on that they would be looking at . Also that they would want that to be provided for . They didn't make it a specific II recommendation . Ahrens: I know it 's not part of this , part of your recommendations but I was just curious about that . Are the locations of the lot in the PUD proposal different from the location of the lots in subdivision proposal? II Krauss: How do you mean? We 've never formally reviewed a subdivision . I Ahrens: Well the one that we saw before. Krauss: You mean the one that carne in two weeks ago? I Ahrens: Yeah . Are these clustered more or anything? 1 II II Planning Commic- ion Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 38 II Krauss : Well see that was just an earlier version of the PUD concept . That basically was a PUD plan that was being presented to you 2 weeks ago . This plan is simply a refinement of that . The one you saw 2 weeks ago was IInot one that was designed to come in under normal RSF standards . Olsen. ;-gad the reduced front yard setbacks . Reduced right-of-way . IIAhrens : My last question , is Lundgren or the City going to do any community education for these people who live along a wetland? Do 's and don 'ts on living next to a wetland and what they 're supposed to do . I mean IIis there anything the City can do about that? Olsen : We didn 't again discuss anything specific with this project but in 1 general , with what had happened in the past . We talked about trying to use our newsletter to educate the public that those are wetlands and they are protecting what you can and cannot do . We have done that in the past and I Idon 't know that it 's been very successful . Ahrens: You 've done it in the past? 1 Olsen: We 've had some -In the newspaper articles and it 's never been anything . It wasn 't in the newsletter yet . We haven 't discussed anything specifically educating residents of this new subdivision . IIKrauss: . . .too that under the surface water utility program which is now kicking in , we 've got an article coming out in this newsletter . There will be periodic . . .to everybody in the city . Those kinds of educational IImaterials and programs are part and parcel of that project . Ahrens: I don 't have anything else . IIEmmings : I do . I don 't really , it 's hard to know where to start here . There are so many issues . It almost leaves me to the conclusion that this I hasn 't been worked on to the point where we 're ready to take action on it but the one thing , a lot of the comments that have been made strike me as being comments that relate to the fact that we 're still looking at this in =u- of ways as if it 's a regular single family subdivision as opposed to I a PUD . We 've kind of got our , this is kind of new for us and I think in a lot of ways we 've got the anchor of our boat stuck over in tr,e sinr. .:- family subdivision and it 's hard to get the anchor out But when I look at I it overall , when I look at the fact that we 're preserving 41% of this as open space , I think this probably is exactly what we 're trying or should be trying to do under the PUD ordinance . I think it is rightly done as a II PUD but I keep getting hung up . I was looking , as an example at Block 1 , Lot 13 which is advertised as a lot with 27 ,500 square feet . A lot width of 92 feet . A lot depth of 303 feet and that lot depth of 303 feet then , you look at what the wetland plus the buffer eats us , the depth drops to II 120 feet and the area drops to something just over 11 ,000 . But that 's where I think again my anchor 's stuck back in the single family subdivision and I don 't think we ought to be looking at it that way . We 've talked I about the comments that were made about houses . There being too many lots with houses appearing too close together . I think that one of the things we were trying to do in the PUD was to cluster . Get the houses together so II we do leave bigger areas of open space and I think this plan does that . II Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 59 Emmings: Or the road maybe should be widened . I don 't disagree with that . That 's something that I think needs attention from the City Engineer and the City Planning staff . What we really need there and that be presented II to the City Council . I don 't know what 26 feet looks like or feels like - when you 're out on it and if you 're a kid who 's biking , that 's a scarey - corner . Well that 's well done . PUBLIC HEARING: KRJ ASSOCIATES FOR AMERICANA COMMUNITY BANK , LOCATED ON OUTLOT A, MARKET SQUARE , PROPOERTY ZONED PUD AND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF WEST 78TH STREET AND MARKET BOULEVARD: A. REPLAT A PORTION OF OUTLOT A, MARKET SQUARE. , B. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 7,740 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING . Public Present: ' Name Address . ' Kim Jacobsen P .O . Box 635 , Long Lake , MN Bob Dittrick P .O . Box 755 , New Ulm , MN Randy Schultz 300 Main Street West , Sleepy Eye , MN 1 Emmings: In view of the lateness of the hour , unless there 's somebody that 's got a burning desire to have a staff report we ' ll skip it , assuming II that everybody 's read the staff report . Okay , what? Al-Jaff : I would like to add one condition please . I Emmings: You 're going to give it anyway . Go ahead. Al-Jaff : Just add one condition . Emmings: Oh , you want to add a condition? Where? Tell us the page number . Al-Jaff: Site plan approval . Emmings: So this would be number 6 on page 12? It would be number 6 under II Site Plan Review? Al-Jaff: Yes . The condition would read that the parking stalls located to II the south of the site be designated for employees only . Emmings: Read it again . _ , Al-Jaff : The parking stalls located to the south of the site be designated for employees only . The reason for this condition is to minimize conflict 11 between cars that are heading towards the drive thru and cars that are backing out of those parking stalls . 1 Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 60 1 Emmings: This is a public hearing and are there representatives of the applicant here who want to present something to us? II Kim Jacobsen: I 'm Kim Jacobsen from KRJ Associates . I 'm representing the Americana Bank . I ' ll be brief . I think what we 're looking at is we 've worked with staff very hard . We 've got a rendering behind us of what we II feel the building is going to look like . I think the major issues that we 've come up with have been mainly our cut from West 78th Street . I think that would be one issue that we would like to discuss and that 's our major- issue . Other than that I think that we 've gotten most things under control I through staff . They may tell us different but through the report there was not a whole lot that really stuck out at us . I Emmings : Maybe while you 're up there I 'll just ask you , staff seemed to be pretty strong in the report about wanting a little different roof line or dormers up there . What about that one? IIKim Jacobsen: Well , staff had not seen this sketch and I have not heard their latest response back . Earlier tonight I thought it was positive . I 'll turn it over to staff and ask them at this point . IEmmings : Well is that plan different than the ones , the other drawings that they 've seen . IIKim Jacobsen: They 've never seen a rendering colored and it has changed slightly . It has been modified . It 's now to it 's final design form at Ithis point so this is the first that they 've seen this sketch . Krauss : I think in the past we 've tried to get their rooflines to reflect the roof that 's typical in downtown Chanhassen . Our design studies that I are starting along corridor of TH 5 , we 're looking back into doing that . There is no agreed upon standard here . I guess I 'd really like to hear your comments . I would still prefer that the roof line was broken up a I little more . It 's not as massive a building as it was when our concerns were first raised so to an extent they 've been partially addressed . We don 't claim to be architects . We think we have some idea of design . I think it could probably be refined a little bit but I 'd like to see what IIyour reaction is . Emmings: Do you have an overhead of the site plan? Now on West 78th 1 Street , the road that comes down from West 78th Street that enters into this property , that 's not , there 's a road to the left of that , or to the west of that that services the shopping center . Is that right? IIKrauss: That is the main central drive aisle in the shopping center that you see there . Monterey which is a public street which borders the west side of the shopping center . IIEmmings: I 'm not thinking of Monterey . I couldn 't picture this . Okay , so the road that . That 's Monterey . Now the road that we're looking at is II going right down the side of that and that 's the only entrance into that whole property from 78th Street? IIKrauss: Correct . If I could have a pen . The internal driveway does I Planning Commission Meeting , August 7 , 1991 - Page 61 something like this . It comes to the main entrance over there . There 's a drive up that comes around in front of the shopping center . Comes back in over here and then there 's another access point up that way . I Emmings : Okay . Erhart : There 's no plan for a median cut now at that entrance? I Krauss : At the north side , no there is not . Erhart : So it 's a right in . If you 're coming this way you have to turn at ' Monterey? Krauss: Right . Or turn down on Market before you get there and make a ' decision . Emmings: Alright. , now as far as that being an issue , you got up here and II said that 's your major issue . What do you want there? Kim Jacobsen: Well , we'd love to have a full right/left turn coming out . I ' think what we 're willing to settle for right now is coming out and having a right turn out but we want to have a left turn median cut so the traffic going west on 78th can access the site directly . Emmings: Alright . And that 's the plan we have in front of us is wrong? Kim Jacobsen: Yes . , Emmings: And the staff side of that argument is? Folch: I guess if I could address that . This issue was , as you can see ' from your staff packets , was given to the firm of Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch to basically evaluate whether that was a possibility there . From their conclusion it was that yes , you could have a curb cut there and that it wouldn 't be a problem as far as cars stacking up eastbound on West 78th blocking that intersection . I 'm not an expert in traffic engineering . I do have a basic knowledge of it . My gut feeling is , looking at how close II you 're going to have . Ultimately you 're looking at signal lights at both Market and Kerber which are a 400 foot distance between the two . My gut feeling is , having a left turn there when they 're predicting ultimate II future traffic forecasts of 20 ,000 cars a day , that 's typical to like a CR 42 through Apple Valley and Burnsville . That 's going to be an awful bad location to have a left turn in . And this may be analogous to getting different opinions from different doctors . Things like that . I 've also talked to the engineer who designed the downtown system and he doesn 't think it 's a good idea either . Looking at the dimensions from a technical standpoint . Looking at the dimensions for that turn lane , typically ' they 're substandard when you 're designing urban situations but this one here is even further reduced in design . It 's really shoehorned •in there compared to the other left turn lanes throughout the rest of the downtown II area . It 's much lower in dimensions . And if you look at the concept of where the left turns are located east of Market through the downtown , this doesn 't seem consistent with the approach that's been used in the past . And that in a nutshell is where we have our concerns . 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 62 II Emmings : Now as far as the other conditions . I 'm sure it 's obvious to you J that I 'm trying to push this along but the last thing I want you to do is feel like we 're giving you a short thrift here so if there 's anything we're not talking about that 's important to you , just let me know okay? II Kim Jacobsen: Okay . Emmings: But as far as the rest of the conditions that are contained I within the staff report , do you have any problems with those? Would you like to address any of those? II Kim Jacobsen: I think as far as we care , most of those are pretty much workable . Emmings : As far as the signing . IIKim Jacobsen: Through the signing , everything else . We 've talked to staff . We 're ready to resolve it at this point . II Emmings: Okay . • Kim Jacobsen: I think one thing we should point out on West Z8th Street II that I think is a good point is right now , if you look at it and if you look at access from public safety . Safety vehicles . Emergency vehicles . It 's a tough center to get into . If you have a life threatening situation . II You 're coming down West 78th and now you 've got to bring your traffic down through Market back in for a fire truck and ambulance . I think that a. safety issue was there on West 78th that you need access . The center needs I access . The bottom line , the City owns part of that center . If- you can 't get customers to that center , if they 're going to drive by on West 78th and there 's 20 ,000 cars going by , that number I don 't agree with but I ' ll give it . They 're going to go somewhere else . And if- the City 's a partner in I the center , I would think you 'd want to get people there . The number one thing you do in a development is make it accessible . I don 't think Market Square right now is as accessible as it should be . So from our standpoint I we feel it imperative to keep number one , our customer coming in to the site . We also like it from a life and safety factor . That we do have protection if there is an accident . If there 's an accident in the center , ilit 's easily accessible and I don 't think it would be off of Market Blvd . . I think that the traffic , the number of turns the safety vehicles have to take , emergency vehicles are going to be prohibitive to get people in there . IEmmings: And the difference that they 're proposing is , just so this is clear in my mind . The road coming in off of West 78th was originally going I to be a right-in/right-out and the wrinkle that we 're adding here is we 're adding in a left turn into it for traffic going west on West 78th Street . II Krauss: Exactly so . That 's the change . I 'd also add too here that I don 't necessarily disagree with anything that the City Engineer 's raising . We 've talked about this quite a bit but there 's a lot of other things that also factor into this . First of all it should be clear that we would never 11 recommend a median cut for an individual property owner . II Planning Commission Meeting , August 7 , 1991 - Page 63 Emmings : That 's not what we 're talking about here . Krauss: No . This is a main drive aisle to the shopping center . It happens to access the bank but it also accesses the dry cleaners across the way and everything else . And the second thing is that there 's something of a design situation here that I think the Council needs to evaluate and even possibly the HRA because we 've asked Strgar-Roscoe to come up with a design of how this median would look accommodating the turn . We 're not sure how much of the landscaping we can save . Strgar seems to think we can save a fair amount of it but you clearly don 't have the median that you have right now so there 's a subjective design issue related to that as well . I don 't know . We just wanted to bring it to you with all the facts and concerns and have you and the City Council make that determination . I Emmings: Okay . Anything else you want to add right now? Kim Jacobsen: I think that's , the issues like you say . We are in ' agreement to work on them . I think we can work and resolve those with no problem . I think that we need a resolve on West 78th because it is important to this project . Emmings: Okay , thanks . • Kim Jacobsen : Thank you . ' Emmings : This is a public hearing . Is there anybody else here from the public who wants to comment on this or has any questions they want to ask at this time? Is there a motion to close the public hearing? Erhart moved , Emmings seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in ' favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Emmings: Joan , what do you think about West 78th Street? Ahrens: Well at the last second here I was confused . Staff is recommending a curb cut right? Krauss: We have recommended approval of the site plan as you see it . That incorporates the curb cut but we've called out that curb cut as an issue that you may want to evaluate . ' Emmings: When you say curb cut you 're talking about a median cut? Krauss: Median cut , yes . ' Ahrens: Median cut. My personal opinion is even with a median cut that street is , or the properties are inaccessible . The design of that 'Street I II think is terrible but aside from that no one asked me before they built it . Emmings: Well they thought you 'd want a berm somewhere . ' Ahrens: I did . I noticed a berm in here . I had a comment on that . There 's a berm right here in the landscaping . It doesn 't have a landscaped IPlanning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 64 II berm though but you 're going to be requiring a berm along the northeast and westerly portion of the site . I assume ,you mean a landscaped one . Thanks Ifor reminding me . Is that true? Al-Jaff : Yes it is . I Ahrens : I 'm goin;, to go along with the staff report on this . I 'm a bit confused about the issues concerning the architecture . I can 't tell if that 's what you were aiming at . Is this what you were aiming at? This II roof line in your recommendations? Al-Jaff : The building looked too massive as we were looking at it from the ' plans that were submitted originally . Batzli : Does this look less massive? IIFarmakes : Are you talking architecturally massive or more square feet? Krauss: No , architecturally . The massing relative to the corner . IFarmakes : Just straight slab . II Krauss: Yeah . I mean clearly we want to get away from just one straight roof . I think if you look across the street at the hotel you 'll see that the roof turns a couple of different ways . It has significant dormer type features that are built in it . I think there 's a cupola on top . I wasn 't II necessarily looking to replicate that but I guess we would have a preference that for lack of a better word , I don 't know if it 's accurate or not but those dormer features be somewhat larger . We were informed tonight I that the shingling on the roof that would be what we 're looking for , matches the hotel or possibly metal which sounds better to us but again , it 's a subjective evaluation at this point . I don 't have any specific design guidelines to base this on . ' Emmings : You kind of want your bank to look massive don 't you? IIKrauss: Secure . Ahrens: So this is closer to the design you had in mind? The dormers are ' the right size? Can you see it? Krauss: Yeah , I took a look at it before the meeting . I think we 'd prefer that they be somewhat more accentuated and that the roof line be broken up Ia little bit more if possible . Ahrens: Well , I 'd like to leave that up to the applicant to work out with I you because I can 't tell on that what that really looks like . I guess I don 't really have anything else . Emmings: Alright . Jeff? I Farmakes: I realize that a lot of this is subjective when you talk about architecture . I really don 't like this building but I 'm just going to make Ithese comments just from a personal level . It 's just another large slab II Planning Commission Meeting , August 7 , 1991 - Page 65 building in our city here , a gray monolith that to me tends to make this city look like an army camp . I still can 't figure out what that light gray . Granted it 's maybe in right now in the late 80 's and early 90 's but , too much of that is a bad thing . We 've already had some large oversized . buildings for our city already in gray . I 'd like you to look at that . I - agree that , maybe that 's nit picking but I 'm going to say it anyway . The issue of the building , what still bothers me is it 's still massive . II There 's very little window space in it . I would look at that building and I would not want to go in there . It 's very unfriendly to me . It looks like a , it 's either a skating rink or it just looks like something on the cheap . Emmings: Do you feel strongly about that? Farmakes : I 'm not going to dig my holes any lower . It 's subjective you know . We all have different colored houses and we all have different interior decoration but I guess I would go back and compare that with the II other bank in town and say that there 's a striking difference I guess here and I guess this looks , I guess that they 'd be investing the money somewhere else other than the building . The next comment I 'd like to make is on the signage . I agree with the staff in their comments . I think that the sign proposal is overkill . We talked about that before and I 'm glad that this is a PUD so I can bring it up . I particularly , I 'd like to see one sign on this building from the main entrance there on 78th because that 'd be more than enough . That there is other examples of business buildings where that takes place . I know the one that you 're referring to here in the report . I 'm not quite sure whether we ever decided if that was__ , a business building or if it was quasi-retail or what it was but considering the size and where that is , if they don 't access it from there , it 's going to be darn hard to miss that sign . But if you feel , I guess if it 's 3 feet on the other signage is appropriate . I 'd rather just see one is my personal druthers . I think that that does the job . In fact , if you 're not seeing that the Americana Bank from the parking lot in the back , so what? I mean you 've got to drive. by it to get out of there so . I like some of your comments going back to the issue of what you 're trying to do with this building . I 'm not sure , I guess I would ask you whether you feel that they 've come back and improved from what you 've asked them to do . I 'm getting the impression that perhaps you 're not 100% thrilled with this or am I getting the wrong impression? Krauss: Yeah , I think we have to emphasize that they have worked with us II quite a bit and the building design has changed quite a bit . It is significantly improved and we like the way that it picks up a lot of the architectural detailing on the shopping center which we 've encouraged it to ' do and this is a requirement to developing on that lot . So there 's a lot of elements on the building that I think are good and worthy . As far as the . . .goes , I mean we also noticed that the windows were small but I .don 't d know how well I can comment on those kinds of detailing . I mean I 'd be happy to if that 's the policy that we est`dish . Farmakes: But the lack of window space creates more mass on the building . I Krauss: It makes the building look bigger than it is . The windows are smaller and the ratio of the window to the building area is a lot different II I Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 66 11 than it is normally . Or appears to be anyway . Farmakes : Is the rest of the shopping center supposed to have the green Iroof and Gray paint? Krauss: They have green barrel roofs . In fact they picked up the detail II of the shopping center . You can see it around the back part of the or behind the bank building . They picked up the tile detailing that comes from there and the building materials are pretty similiar . II Farmakes : Well I 've only been on here since January but I think the City ought to look long and hard about painting the entire city of Chanhassen in . gray . I don 't know of any other precedent where the entire city is Ibasically painted one color . Emmings: Well Emerald City . IFarmakes: Well Emerald City but maybe you can talk a little bit to the design center at the U . I don 't know of any other place where conformity or it just lends to boredom and counter productive I think . But I 'll drop 1 it at that . That 's the end of my comments . Emmings: What about the road? Do you have any feeling about that up on IWest 78th Street? Farmakes : I really feel that the road issue is one for city staff and I 'll II back up whatever they want to do with that . I 'm not going to play street engi nF ,r . Emmings: So right now the position of staff on the median cut is to go II along with it? Krauss : That 's the recommendation with this site Plan , yes . But at the Isame time it has some reservations . Emmings: Yeah , and Charles has talked about his reservations . We understand that . IIFolch: I guess from my perspective , I can 't support the median cut . IAhrens: You 're not supporting it but they are? Emmings: And what we have in front of us , if we vote for it , we will be approving that median cut . Just so evreybody 's clear on that . Brian , how do you feel about the windows in this building? Batzli : Hum . 1 Emmings: Okay , Ladd . • IBatzli : I would really like to know if staff thinks that this site plan is well developed since I counted 11 things that they didn 't have or else we 're still working on . 10 foot right-of-way . Additional landscaping . Signage . Lights . Lighting plan . No grading plan . Canopy issues . I Planning Commission Meeting I August 7 , 1991 - Page 67 Architectural issues . Expansion issues . Roof screening . Turn lane 1 chances . Median cuts . Do you really think this is well developed? We kind of talked about this on the last one . Krauss: The kinds of conditions we have on this are standard conditions virtually with every site plan . Not having a grading plan at this point is no big deal because the site 's perfectly flat and we know how it 's supposed II to grade anyway . We want it before a building permit is issued . Things like that are minor detailing . Batzli : Alright . You 're comfortable with that then? I Krauss: Yes . Batzli : I think the new cut is groovy . I can dig it . I want it there . I don 't care about the stuff down the middle of the road anyway . It 's getting late . I think I would like to see , I don 't know how much has actually been done to the building to date and I ' ll rely on staff to continue to work with them to come up with something that 's acceptable to them . I think there maybe a couple of minor changes to the conditions but otherwise I think it looks pretty good . I 'm done . Emmings : Alright . Ladd . Conrad: Are there two entry spots off of Market into the shopping center? II Krauss: There is one . Wait . Before I say that , there 's . . .for trucks or I not? Olsen : In the back . , Krauss: Way in the back . But not off of Market . There 's one main entrance on Market. . Conrad: From a standpoint of running the shopping center , you 've got to have an entry off of 78th . You 've just got to . Emmings: Well there is one . 1 Conrad: A right-in/right-out . Emmings: Right . Conrad: Yeah. The question is , we force the folks going from the east going west down Market . Emmings: Or around back . Conrad: I guess I have to endorse the cut as the applicant has proposed it . If there 's just absolutely concrete evidence that well , Charles has said that engineering wise it 's not a smart move . Generally I would have just totally paid attention to that . I just really believe there should be an entrance from 78th to the shopping center . Not to the bank . To the shopping center . I Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 68 I Emmings : Or really to both . Because of the shopping center . Conrad: Yeah . I really don 't like the drive thru and that curve . That - total turn around . There 's some things here that just sort of bother me - design wise . You have the drive thru and then the cut back . Obviously they 'd like to get out on the road but I think staff 's point was well taken but geez , I don 't know . How are we solving that? The turning radius . ' Does the applicant have to go and buy more property to have that happen? - Al-Jaff: They 're making the building smaller . Depth wise and then they are acquiring an additional 10 feet I believe . I Kim Jacobsen: We aren 't acquiring anything . We would have additional footage when it 's replatted giving us 20 ,000 square feet . Give us a couple ' more feet north and south dimension just because of the shape of the site . Conrad : Okay . I don 't think I have , just generally and I 've never I commented on design before of a building . This building just doesn 't make me feel comfortable . In 10 years here I don 't think I 've ever commented on design . I- try to leave that out of government . This one bothers me . ' Could be the roof line . It just doesn 't seem like , this is the key II intersection of Chanhassen and it 's , as Jeff said , it 's not a real friendly building so I don 't know what it would take to make it warmer . I like the plaza out in front . I think that 's terrific . I 'm just not comfortable with the design of the building . Erhart : What 's the material in that exterior of the building? IIKim Jacobsen : We 've been dictated that we 're going to try to match whatever the shopping center has which is some sort of a dry . . .material . An arcylic stucco is the way they described it and I don 't know if they Ihave a decision . Erhart : Who 's dictating that? IKim Jacobsen : The PUD development . Emmings : Yeah , we did that . ilKim Jacobsen: That 's what the staff has worked us on . The gray color . . . The roof colors . All of that has been dictated through staff to us . rEmmings: We said that whatever went into the outlot , because it was , we sort of saw somebody corning in with a Dairy Queen I think and we said whatever 's going on that corner has got to be consistent with the shopping center . That kind of fear . Now this may have snuck around and hit us in the back of the head. IErhart : Well that 's what I think . I don 't think the building 's necessarily that ugly but I do agree with Jeff in that to drive everything to look the same is crazy . My feeling is , when you get right down to the surface material in this building has to be the same as the center has gone I Planning Commission Meeting I Aucust 7 , 1991 - Page 69 • beyond reason . • I Farmakes : That building almost , from that perspective or from where you come in , it 's going to be far more predominant than the actual center itself behind it . Emmings : Right . , Ahrens: Plus the center behind it looks like , is more attractive looking than the bank . , Farmakes: A Dairy Queen 's one thing but something that large in front of it , I don 't know if that was a good idea . Emmings: Well , we were scared of one thing I think . I 'don 't know that this is what happened but this is the way I remember thinking about it . We were sort of scared of the unknown there so we said let 's make sure that whatever goes there is consistent with what 's around it . I think that was as much to discourage McDonald 's or whatever from being there as anything else and it 's maybe gone too far . ' Erhart : So anyway , granite sheeting would be pretty good I think . Anyway , seriously though . Conrad: His little cut at humor . Erhart : I do really like the idea of using the Timberline roof . I think II that 's one place where we 've missed opportunities in the downtown . . . .not require wood shingles and a good compromise is the Timberline . It really has a nice effect when you talk about the big surface areas up there . Regarding the median cut , my opinion is if we aren 't willing to bulldoze the whole median out of downtown , we ought to put this curb cut in . Batzli : This is a start . That 's how I look at it . ' Erhart: It 's what I see as a start to what 's going to ultimately get done because the logic I have is someone coming that way who misses the intersection . He then has to turn left .at Monterey anyway . They 're going to stack up . If you at least provide two cuts , you get less stacking because some are going to turn in here and some are going to turn at Monterey because in either case you 're going to have , what you 're ultimately have is stacking someplace on there . So that 's that one. I agree , I think maybe Jeff , it seems to me like we have too many signs or II the signs are too big . Help me with what does it mean that signs on each , or 4 foot high wall mounted signs on each building elevation. What does that mean? Krauss: Well actually there 's three wall mounted signs and there was also II a monument sign proposed . Emmings: Two . , Krauss: One . f IIPlaning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 70 ilEmminga : There are two on the plan aren 't there? I Krauss : There 's one facing the .drive aisle and the shopping center . Emmings : I thought you were restricting them and cutting them down . I 'm sorry . I Ahrens: This only shows one in front of the building . Krauss: Wall mounted . You can 't see the other two elevations . IErhart: Are those two other ones , are those on entrances or just on the sides of buildings? II Krauss: One is on the drive thru and one is on the rear. door . • Erhart : My view of that would be , I don 't mind the large sign on the front II entrance of the building but the other two ought to be substantially smaller . That 's my opinion . And lastly is , does that exit road , once you go through the automatic teller , does that exit into the mass parking lot Ithen or do they actuall;c have to drive all the way up? Krauss : What we 're thinking on this is that you have the balance of Outlot A down here . . .over there . This lot is pretty constrained by the fact that you 've got Market on one side , the main entrance down here . There 's really no other place to provide entry to this lot so what we 're thinking of is here 's the exit lane and then at some point somebody 's going to build an IIentrance lane over there and then this would function as the exit lane for both the bank and whatever happens down to the south . I Erhart : Okay , but somehow traffic comes out of there and they 're going to have to drive through . They 're either going to drive through and go all the way down here or they 're going to have to go through up here . You 're forcing all this traffic in front of the shopping center . IKrauss : Yes . I Erhart : You made a big todo about not giving a right-in/right-out down here . IKrauss: Right . Erhart : Is that a wise thing to do? I Krauss: Well , if I could touch on that . We felt very strongly about it when the shopping center came in because we didn 't believe it would be safe at all to permit it . As time went on , we got much better traffic II information now than we had 2 years ago when we first approved this and we asked Strgar to take a look that . In your report there 's documentation that says when we put a signal light up here , which the Council and the HRa I are now looking at doing . When this thing is fully developed , the traffic is going to back up way down here and you will have no way to make a cut at .this point or up here without cutting across traffic that 's stalled on the other side . In addition , the ultimate development over here is a free Iright turn lane , two thru lanes and a left turn lane . What you 're going to I Planning Commission Meeting , August 7 , 1991 - Page 71 have over here is , this traffic as it comes around the corner is 11 accelerating . Some of it is slowing down to get into the shopping center . Some of this traffic may be turning at the same time and making a merged movement . It 's not really the place you want to throw in people turning - I back into traffic . Everybody 's looking in the wrong direction at that time . Erhart : You 've got the two thru lanes there going to a single lane? Krauss : Again , I said ultimately . Erhart : Oh , that 's when you take the median out? ' • Krauss : Well , that 's down the road . We think the median can stay if that 's desired but at the present time there 's only going to be this single lane . The HRA wanted us though to reserve the right-of-way and that 's why everything is shifting 10 feet to the south . Reserve the right-of-way so that if it 's determined in the future that you need two lanes east of Market Blvd . , that we have the physical ability to do that and don 't have II to buy a bank and tear it down . Erhart: Boy I 'll tell you , it 's just awful to put all those cars backing II up in front of the shopping center . You can 't bring it around the outside either because then how does it get . . . Krauss : Actually though , that 's the safer place to be . It 's an internal road basically and will have specific well defined egress points out onto Market and to Monterey and 78th Street . Erhart: I 'm just thinking about all the traffic and people trying to get in and out of the center with their cars . Krauss: Most of that should be focused , well the main entrance again is down here . In fact there 's two exit lanes down there and that 's where the people who are coming from Market are going, , Erhart : . . .that 's right . There 's parking over here yet . Okay . I was thinking that the shopping center was right here . Okay. Krauss : That 's the shopping center . The bank building is sitting up in here . Here 's the proposed curb cut . Here 's the main entrance and exit . Erhart: And where does the return traffic . . . Krauss: The drive by wraps around through here and then it comes over out II this way . Erhart: Okay . . .I think I 've got it . I Emmings: Are you done? I wonder if you t uld have proposed a different kind of bank with different kinds of materials if you hadn't been working under the restrictions you were working under and I wonder if we wouldn 't II like to see it . But I guess I pretty much agree with all the comments that have been made about the building . The windows are too small . The roof , if you 're going to keep the building like it is , it seems to me the roof II Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 72 ilought to have a little steeper pitch and there ought to be , those dormers ought to ho more pronounced as staff has said . I agree with those I comments . I think that taking into account the reasons that we wanted to put some restrictions on what happened- on that corner , some of those fears would be allayed by the fact that we know now that there 's a bank developing on that corner . If that would mean that you 'd want to make some II proposals for , I still think that the bank has to somehow fit in some of it 's design elements with the Country Suites across the street and the shopping center but if you want a different exterior materials or wanted to I change some things on there to make it , to address some of the concerns you 've heard -addressed up here about it appearing to be an unfriendly building or too massive or whatever , I think that you might do that . I II think that as far as West 78th Street goes , I absolutely agree there 's got to be a left turn lane there and that 's all the comments I 've got . Unless anybody 's got anything else , let 's see if there 's any motions . We 've got what? First one is site plan review , a subdivision and a PUD amendment . IBatzli : I move the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan Review #91-3 as shown on the site plan dated July 29 , 1991 subject to the I following conditions . 1 thru 5 as set forth in the staff report and the following modifications . The sentence that reads , eliminate the proposed building addition from the plans . Is that still shown here? IKrauss : It 's dashed in . Batzli : Okay . I would eliminate the word since and include the words , in I part because we would never be necessarily approving the proposed addition so I don 't want it to look like that 's the only reason we 're not approving it . And at the end of number 5 insert , and submit the same for - staff Iapproval . Ahrens: There 's a number 6 here . - 1 Emmings : Oh , you weren 't here . Batzli : No , I wasn 't here . IEmmings : What you would be moving if you had been here . il Batzli : Oh , and a new condition 6 that reads , parking stalls located to the south of the site shall be designated for employees only . Emmings: I 'll second the motion . Any discussion? IIBatzli moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan Review #91-3 as shown on the site plan dated July 29, . 1 1991 subject to the following conditions: _ 1 . The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site . Sign plans should be revised to eliminate the monument sign., 1 reduce the wall sign height to 3 feet and incorporate requested directional signs . I2 . Additional landscaping shall be provided along the north edge of the Planning Commission Meeting 1 August 7 , 1991 - Page 73 site as proposed in the staff report . The applicant shall provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in calculating the required financial guarantees . These guarantees must be posted prior to building permit issuance . Provide a plant schedule indicating the size and type of all plant materials for staff approval . 3 . The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and ' provide the necessary financial securities as required . If the West 78th Street curb cut is approved , the applicant shall be required to compensate the City for all costs related to its design and construction . 4 . Revise architectural plans as follows: - Incorporate dormers of increased size or other acceptable measures to enhance the design of the roof line . - Provide details of HVAC screening . - Incorporate the use of Timberline or similar quality shingles that ' provide an image of a cedar shake roof . - Provide details of building exterior treatment indicating consistency with shopping center construction . - Eliminate the proposed building addition from the plans in part because we would never be necessarily approving the proposed I addition. - Revise plans as necessary to ensure that a 25 foot setback is provided to all portions of the building , including the entrance canopy . 5 . Revise the plans as required to ensure that room is provided for safe turning movements for cars existing the drive-thru lanes and submit the same for staff approval . 6. Parking stalls located to the south of the site shall be designated for " employees only . All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously . I Batzli : This really gets back to what you just said and giving the applicants direction on do they want to come back and look at something I/ else . I think we would be willing and the Council would probably be willing to look at that condition we put on the PUD contract for this particular outlot for the development and I don't know . We talked a little , bit about changing it and I didn 't really see any nodding heads or shaking heads back there as far as whether they would want to propose something new at this point . ' Emmings: I look at it this way . This is an aesthetic issue . It 's something we probably can get into trouble trying to dictate to some extent . I don 't know . I don 't know how much leeway we 've got and I don 't II 1 II Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 74 IIknow how much they bought into the plan . And if they want to take this plan to the City Council , I guess they 've got the right to do that . IEatzli : Oh sure I think so . I don 't know whether they looked at this . building and thought this is it . This is our building or if they thought- we really would rather do something a little bit differently . IIEmmings: We don 't want to go into that at midnight I don 't think , do you? Batzli : Well I don 't know . If it was a 2 or 3 word sentence from one of Ithem I 'd love to hear it . • Krauss: A couple comments . First of all we 're trying to expedite this for I the bank . The shopping center 's supposed to break ground in early September . The bank as I understood it is to open by a date certain under their State Charter . . . We were going to try and hussle this onto the Council meeting for actually next Monday if possible . If you 'd like them I to work on this further , we could still get on the second meeting in August and give them a little more time to work . Relative to the condition in the PUD agreement , my personal response is I 'd be hesitant to drop it . Whether I or not this design meets your standards , I think the provision 's a good one . I 'd ask you to keep in mind that there are four additional out building sites . Well three additional besides this one that you 're going to be looking at and we keep hearing rumors that Hardee 's and .places like I that are interested in it . I have been in meetings with Hardee 's where they tell you that this is the building 49-A with an orange roof and I want to be able to tell them to get lost when they do that . IFarmakes : Well is it possible to modify it rather than drop it? Putting limitations say on the size of the building . . . IIEmmings : You can leave it in there and you can give them some leeway to do what we wanted done . You can say , it has to be compatible with the other buildings there and what that means we can decide what that means . IFarmakes: Well compatible is different than conforming . I Krauss : Well I think compatible was the work that was used. Also , to the architects credit , whether or not they achieved their goal , they did set out in mind with the fact that this is a corner property and that there I should , you can 't make it look exactly like the shopping center but you 've got to recognize that you 've got Country Suites across the street and then there has to be some sort of transition . Again , I don 't know if they achieved it or not but that 's why they 're going with this kind of a roof IIwhich mixes in more with the hotel than the shopping center . Ahrens: You know Paul , to back up to the first thing you just said . II don 't think that whether or not we 're trying to expedite this to get it to the City Council should , I don 't think that should dictate any decision we should ever make . We live with these tuildings for 20-25 years . If we it 's ugly now , it 's going to be worse then . Ithink Emmings: Okay . Is there a motion on the subdivision? You didn 't get an answer to your question did you? I II Planning Commission Meeting I August 7 , 1991 - Page 75 Batzli : Well no . 11 Emmings: Why don 't you ask a specific question . Batzli : How would you guys feel about doing some more design on the building or don 't you want to? Do you want to stick with what you 've got and modify it slightly? ' Kim Jacobsen: We feel we 've taken a directive from staff . It 's our third design . i Ahrens: Do you like it? Kim Jacobsen: Staff 's input into it has been very strong . We like it . We , wouldn 't have presented it if we didn 't . We think it will be a lot nicer than you 're interpretting . It will be the nicest building in Chanhassen is our opinion . By far . Honestly I feel you ' ll be happy when it 's built . We II will work on some of the concerns but other than that to go back into a redesign at this point means we go back to Federal Regulators and work t hrough them also and that 's not within I think . . . So we have worked very diligently with staff . We have prolonged this meeting . We were on the agenda 2 weeks ago . Worked with staff again and we 're back at this point . So I guess our feelings are right now , we 'll sure do everything we can to work with some of the things you said . Work on windows . Work on dormers . II We 'd love to work on colors . But I think to go back and totally start over is tough . . . Batzli : And I appreciate you working with staff and I understand why that II direction was given . I guess we want to welcome you to Chanhassen . Not make you feel like you 're moving in and we don't like you from the start but it 's a question of looking at it and it's tough to tell from this drawing what it 's actually going to look like . You 're right and I hope that when it 's built we all look at it and say , this is the best thing in Chanhassen . I hope you 're right . Conrad: . . .downtown architectural standards are a big deal . Design is a big deal . We 're talking about , do we have any control? Yeah we do. We absolutely do . I think a lot of our reactions and like I said , a lot of our reactions were not real positive . It 's up to the applicant to persuade us that it 's for the good of Chanhassen so I don 't know that we should back down . On the other hand , well . I don't know that we should back down . I think it 's just a different looking design . It 's the first time I 've ever reacted to a building design in all those that I 've seen. Bob Dittrick: I think what we 've tried to do is to get to the design that I/ would be something acceptable to the City that would . . .center and the hotel . It makes it pretty tough to do . On the other hand , the staff did 11 indicate to us what Chanhassen wanted and that 's what we want to do. But. we want to say that staff has been very cooperative and we 've been trying to do the same for them. We think we have . Randy Schultz: I think the drawing might not do justice to what you 're seeing . We intend to , from the beginning , bring into town a very friendly . 1 Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 76 s IConrad: It 's to your advantage to do that obviously and we 'd like to think you are . I Bob Dittrick: . . .way off base here the way it 's sounding . There 's too many people saying hey , it isn 't that . That 's scarey for me . I Farmakes : Well , T 'm a potential customer so . I feel bad in a way that maybe what the attempt was here to do and protect back fired . Particularly I think because of a building of this scale . This is much larger than a I Hardee 's and I think we should maybe look long and hard about modifying that . I 'm not sure what that does legally to that whole position but buildings of this scale and size really affect a lot . The feeling of a city and the perception of driving in to town and that really , that street I there along there is going to be main street . I guess I. don 't feel good about the fact that maybe the restrictions we put here are part of the problem of making this sort of not fit anybody 's successful plans . IConrad: What would you do Jeff? You 're concerned with color but is there anything else that 's just . IIFarmakes: There 's a lot that you can do to a building facia wise without really chancing the gut of the building . There are a lot of things that can be done here and I feel uncomfortable to sit here and say what they I would be . I would rather that the architect maybe address the issues of how to approach that but I also feel that those restrictions are also corning from us . Restrictions of color and restrictions of you should look Ipartly like this building . Partly like that building . I don 't think , and I wasn 't here when you did the issue of the shopping center but we should really look long and hard at making things look the same because what you II get , if you 've ever been in an army barracks , everything 's painted the same color . All the buildings look the same and it 's not , it doesn 't make for successful city development . I don't think . It makes it look very boring and very restrictive . Unfriendly and very too corporate . I would hope I that if they don 't have enough leeway of coming back and working with staf on this , that maybe we could look at modifying that ordinance . Maybe we can give them more leeway or at least such an example that buildings of Ithat size could be changed or relooked at . Does that make sense? Emmings: Well yeah . I don 't know that we 'd want to change the restrictions that we put on that property Jeff but I think maybe we 'd want I to change it in this way and say that we 're looking for , - I don 't know . Somehow the buildings that creatively incorporate elements of the surrounding buildings but also presents a variety in their appearance . I Maybe make it so we don 't wind up just saying okay , we 'll take these three elements from here and these four from here and slam it together and live with what we 've got . IFarmakes: Particularly if you 've got a building that 's much taller than the rest of the development and you 've got more massive . That 's where your eye sight 's going to go . And when everything is the same . IEmmings: Nobody ever intended that but that 's the way it worked out in this case . I need a motion on the subdivision . I Planning Commission Meeting I August 7 , 1991 - Page 77 Erhart: Yeah , I 'll move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of 11 Subdivision #91-8 as shown on the plat dated July 29 , 1991 with the two conditions stated in the staff report . I Emmings: I ' ll second the motion . Is there any discussion? Erhart moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Subdivision #91-8 as shown on the plat dated July 29, 1991 with the following conditions: , 1 . Park and trail dedication fees shall be paid at time building permits are requested . 2 . Provide the following easements: a . Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of all I lots . b . A 10 ' x 30 ' utility easement located to the southeast corner of the bank building running in favor of NSP . c . The final plat for the entire Market Square shopping center must be submitted to staff for approval and filed with Carver County . The I plat needs to be revised , as does this requested lot division to accommodate the additional 10 feet of right-of-way along West 78th Street that is being required by the City . d . Cross access easements need to be provided over the south driveway and northern 30 feet of the newly created parcel located south of 11 the bank on Outlot A . All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Erhart: I ' ll move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the amendment to the PUD #89-2 as shown on the plans dated July 29 , 1991 . Emmings : I 'll second the motion . Is there any discussion? , Erhart moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend II approval of an amendment to PUD #89-2 as shown on the plans dated July 29, 1991 . All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Batzli : Actually on that last one . Shouldn 't that be with the changes reflected in the other motion? Emmings: What are you talking about? Batzli : I 'm talking about the PUD amendrn?nt . We made changes to this . Then we were recommending it as shown on the plans . Emmings: No , the amendment to the PUD. What have we done in amending the II PUD? 1 II Planning Commission Meeting August 7 , 1991 - Page 78 IIKrauss : What have you done? IEmmings : Yeah . Why do we have to amend the PUD? Krauss : Because the PUD shows a blank spot where the bank is supposed to be . IEmmings: Okay , and that 's all . Then as far as the rest of these items , the landscape ordinance we ' ll have to put on for next time . We 're not Igoing to do it tonight . Did somebody stay just for that? I apologize . Aanenson: No , it 's probably .better because 1 said the changes were shown ', in bold . You probably noticed. Emmings : No , they weren 't there . There 's no underlining either . IAaneneson : So I 'll go back for the next time . APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated IJuly 17 , 1991 were noted as is . CITY COUNCIL UPDATE: I Emmings: Then we 've got the report from the Director which we 've all read and enjoyed . Then we 've got sign ordinance amendment and that 's going to have to go onto our next agenda . We 've got news and blues which I thought Iwas very funny . That 's something I get because I 'm the Chairman . Ahrens: We didn 't get that . IConrad moved, Erhart seconded to adjourn the meeting. ' All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 12: 15 a .m . . ISubmitted by Paul Krauss Planning Director IPrepared by Nann Opheim I I I I II CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING UNIED11171.1ED JULY 23, 1991 Vice Chairman Andrews called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. . • MEMBERS PRESENT: Wendy Pemrick , Curt Robinson, Jim Andrews , Dave Koubsky and Jan Lash ' MEMBERS ABSENT: Dawne Erhart and Larry Schroers STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Coordinator and Jerry Ruegemer , Recreation Supervisor ' APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Lash moved, Koubsky seconded to approve the Minutes • of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting. dated June 24, 1991 as presented . All voted in favor and the motion carried. VISITOR PRESENTATION: ' Hoffman: Item 2, I anticipated that Mary Kay Schmidt of Shadowmere development would be here this evening. We had a conversation late in June . She had made a request or inquired about a potential park property within the Shadowmere development . At that I had asked her to write a letter to the Commission in that regard. That letter was sent to the city offices with Larry Schroers name on it so they forwarded it then to Larry who 's on vacation and did not retrieve the letter until this evening. I contacted her this evening but was unable to get a confirmation so she's not here . I believe the Commission can go ahead and review the request. II She has sent a letter and list of residents showing their wishes. The Commission can go ahead and review that and then make any recommendations as to how they would like staff to progress. We would like to research the history of the Shadowmere development and why parkland was not taken at II that time . It 's within the service areas of Carver Beach playground and Meadow Green Park and Chanhassen Pond Park at the current time but it is somewhat isolated by the configuration of the road which leads into that I area . Andrews: So is this something you need for us to move forward on today or would you want to put this on a future agenda? IIHoffman: Correct . I would just want some direction as to how you would like to further pursue it and put it on a future agenda and then again I ' can contact Miss Schmidt and have her in at a future meeting. Robinson: I think you said this was developed about 3 years ago. I think it 'd be interesting to go back at that time and see what reason we did not take parkland at that time . To go and buy that type of property now seems a little spendy. ILash: What 's the estimate for the lot cost there? Robinson: I think it 's two lots isn't it? IIHoffman: Two lots that are shown. Ballpark, $50,000.00 would probably be ballpark . • 11 Park and Pee Commission Meeting July 23 , 1991 - Page 3 Robinson: Yeah , you notice that one in the corner is ,there 's 95 foot of frontage there . I think that 's what they said . . Lash: Or a small swimming beach or whatever . I would agree with Curt 's comments in investigating why it wasn 't done in initially . Then after the 14th we 'll have more information . Maybe after the 14th you could contact the developer and see if you could sort of feel him out on his position . Hoffman: Sure . Lash: Personally I don 't see that we 've got $50 ,000 .00 to $100 ,000 .00 to spend on that . We need to have the background to let the residents know . Is there a specific date Jim that you think that we wanted to try to ' schedule this on the agenda? Andrews: This is set to go up , the Court review date is when , the 14th of August? Hoffman: As stated on here . rAndrews: Okay , why don 't we put this on the August agenda then for review and see what progress , if any has been made in Court . I think until the Court situation is done with , we 're going to make no progress on this at all . It has to be settled . I guess I personally , I feel that there might he a real opportunity here to sort of , I hate to call it arm twisting but I 'm sure that the developer could see the benefit of having parkland in this development . I would think that perhaps the land price could be reduced because of that mutual advantage of that park . So let 's put it on the agenda for next month . Do we need a motion for that? ' Hoffman: Yes . To go ahead and investigate it . Lash: Okay , I would move that we direct staff to investigate the history regarding this development of the park property and also to contact the developer , Jim Fenning in regard to the status of Lot 11 in Shadowmere . ' Robinson: I 'd second it . Lash: And that would go onto the August agenda . ' Lash moved, Robinson seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission direct staff to investigate the history pertaining to the Shadowmere development; contact the developer , Jim Fenning in regard to the status of I Lot 11 , Shadowmere; and to bring the item back on the August agenda. All voted in favor and the motion carried. SITE PLAN REVIEW: LUNDGREN BROS/ORTENBLAT/ERSBO. Hoffman : The location of the proposed development as shown is in the I vicinity of Powers Blvd . . .and across from Lake Lucy Road . Encircled by this dark boxed area . Just north of the Greenwood Shores neighborhood and just south of Curry Farms . The proposed layout of that particular development is in this configuration . There is a large wetland in this 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting 11 July 23 , 1991 - Page 4 area . . .up in this area of the development . Mr . Terry Forbord with Lundgren 1 Bros . is here . Give him an opportunity to speak if you wish . He 's here to answer questions that the Commission would have . Surrounding this development is classified for single family residential . The adjacent zoning currently includes Curry Farms again to the north , existing single family to the south and east and then some large unplatted land to the west . The property does currently lie within the service areas of the II Curry Farms Park directly across the street , Pheasant Hill Park which has yet to be developed and Carver Beach Playground. So it is served well by park property currently within the City . The trail plan identifies the on 11 street trail that exists along Lake Lucy Road . This trail abuts the northerly border of this subject property .. No trail links or loops are • identified in the Comprehensive Plan in relation to this particular piece of property . A trail connection to the south allowing access to Greenwood II Shores Park and Lake Ann Park would potentially be desireable because it allows a quick and easy access to get into both Greenwood Shores and the trail system down to Lake Ann. However , accommodating that would be I difficult due to the lack of a current easement there at Utica Terrace and Greenwood Shores area . So sufficient right-of-way via Lake Lucy Road is available to allow the future construction of an off street trail if that was deemed necessary as Lake Lucy became increasingly busy from the future il development in that particular area . It is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend the City Council accept full park and trail fees in lieu of parkland dedication and/or trail construction for the II Ortenblat and Ersbo subdivision due to the reasons I stated previously . Andrews: Terry , do you have anything more you 'd like to add about the _ II development? Terry Forbord: I 'm just here to answer any questions that anybody has. Andrews: Okay , are there? II Lash: I happen to live in Greenwood Shores so I 'm familiar with this and I II guess I 'm a little bit interested in the lots that will be backing directly up to Greenwood Shores on that cul-de-sac shown there . Is that , is it not swampy up in that area? I Terry Forbord: If I may, we have some exhibits over here unless they were removed in the last 48 hours . Lash: I 'm pretty sure from looking at this that 7 , 8, 9- and 10 would all I be pretty wet . But I 'm not up on the other end and I 'm not quite sure. And will that cul-de-sac then come out very close to Utica Terrace? I mean II am I looking at this straight? Terry Forbord: I 'll try to address all your questions. This is an aerial topography map . It was done for the City of Chanhassen I believe in the last 24 months the City did the entire city so they would have- aerial photos for topography . I 'll turn this around -so north will be up . This is Lake Lucy Road . This is the Ortenblat property. This is the Ersbo II property . Some of you may have been on the Park Commission long enough to remember the Ersbo plat . We are replatting that property . It 's kind of an unsightly plan . . . There are 6 or 7 wetlands on this property . Now II _ i 11 Park and Rec Cc„ ,Mission Meeting July 23 , 1991 - Page 5 Itypically when you have a piece of property with wetlands , they 're usually concentrated on one part of the property . This .is a very unusual assembly of land in that the wetland happen to be scattered here and there . Some of II them are very small . Some of them are probably just as small as the area we 're standing in . I mean just right in this area . But nonetheless . because of the vegetation , the type of vegetation . . .wetland certainly need II to be dealt with :F'ccordingly . There 's also steep slopes , vegetation and some larger wetlands , houses , things like that , roads which make it a real tough site to develop . . . .is certainly more challenging than others but II down in this area , you can see in this lighted area , I 'm going to switch exhibits here because this one is so difficult to see . I just wanted you to see that . Same direction . This is north . This is the subject property . This is the wetland down in the southeast corner and I believe Iyou were asking about this area? Lash: Well , I know that that area down there is very wet and I was Iwondering about around the cul-de-sac down there . That area . Terry Forbord: There is an existing wetland right here and there is an small little wetland right here and most of these wetlands , first of all II these wetlands were created by man. . . I know you . . .I won 't because it will open up a can of worms and I can talk about this for 3 hours and it doesn 't have anything to do with planning parks but we are mitigating the wetlands II so wetlands that have to be removed because of roadway right-of-way , we 'll be building new wetlands . And a lot of , we 've hired the top people in the region . Frank Svoboda who I believe is also being hired by the City of 1 Chanhassen to assist the City in their storm water management plan in protection of their own wetlands . . .Needless to say , all these wetlands are being taken into very careful consideration because it is sensitive . Any area that has any wetlands in Chanhassen certainly has more than . . . But on II the layobt and everything else has been , all those things that you just mentioned have been taken into consideration. Lash: So the cul-de-sac down in the bottom left hand corner , that would be close to Utica Terrace? U Terry Forbord: Utica Terrace actually . . .that shows where it is . This will probably be the best thing that I have here but there 's a hill right here . Utica Terrace is down in this area . Some of the residents from your neighborhood attended the informational meeting that I had and . . . They I expressed very clearly that they do not want to have any trails connected through their property . But I would imagine that there 's a couple lots in here . . .Utica Terrace I believe is a cul-de-sac that probably is somewhere Iright in there . Approximately. Does anybody else have any questions? Lash: My only other concern would be, and I realize that Curry Farms Park is just going to be on the other side of Lake Lucy Road but if I lived in I this development , I would not want my chi ] dren to cross Lake Lucy Road to get to a park alone . I don 't know if th::.'s something we want to , that 's more of a public safety thing I guess . ITerry Forbord: It 's a concern though that I think anybody would have . In any given situation . The other night I was at the City Council meeting there was a lot of discussion about roads and safety and it 's very apparent II Park and Rec Commission. Meeting It July 23 , 1991 - Page 6 that those same concerns are felt by everybody everywhere . So I think It those are the type of things that are always challenging whether it would be in this neighborhood or an existing neighborhood and it 's one that parent . . .to teach their children when riding on the street . Lash: I just don 't want that one to come back to haunt us in about 5 years when the people who live there are upset because their kids have to cross ' Lake Lucy Road to get to a park . Andrews : How many total lots are we plotting here? - Terry Forbord: There 's a total of 37 lots. Two of them have existing. tomes on them . This area is guided residential single family . It is the Land Use Guide Plan calls for that type of zoning. RSF zoning ranges from II a density of 1 .4 dwelling units per acre . In this particular proposal there 's 1 .24 dwelling units per acre so it 's the very lowest . Now even if you took the wetland out , it would be 1 .4 which is still low . . . Andrews: These are larger than average? Terry Forbord: The size required in the zoning district is 15 ,000 square feet minimum . The average lot size in here , if you incorporate all the lots , and 'two of them have homes on there now , would be 30 ,000 square feet . I think if you took those two existing homesteads out . One of them is fairly large . The Ersbo property . The Ersbo property , the only way and I II don 't know if those of you are familiar with the current plat of the Ersbo property but there 's just a cul-de-sac that comes in here . It 's platted . It 's of record . They can start building there as soon as they get a building permit if they would like to . It 's an unsightly plat that has no feel to it whatsoever and what we 've proposed to do , really we acquired it to protect ourselves because we didn 't want something to go in there that would hurt us . Plus the City , engineering and planning staff preferred to have a loop road that would go like this so there was a connection versus just two cul-de-sacs . But because . . .the Ersbo property , the only way that , he would do the transaction would be if he had a larger lot . So I think even if you took that out , you would find that these lots are probably 22 ,000-23 ,000 square feet average . We 're not trying to get as many lots in here as we could . If we wanted that , you 'd see more lots in here because we could do them and do the zoning regulations . Andrews: Any other questions or comments from this commission? Would somebody like to put forward a motion please? - Robinson: Yeah I 'd make a motion that we 'd recommend the City Council accept full park and trail fees in lieu of parkland dedication and/or trail " construction for this subdivision. Andrews: Do we have a second? Can I second it? Am I allowed to do that? II I 'll second the motion. Okay, any other discussion or questions or comments before we take a vote? Lash: I guess I 'm just not comfortable with the. I realize it's within the service area and usually I 'm not that greedy but I 'm afraid it 's going to come back and haunt us if we don't acquire something . • Park and Rec Com.,ission Meeting July 23 , 1991 - Page 7 Pemrick : That 's a lot of homes and a lot of potential . • Lash: l:hat do you think? I mean I know it was your recommendation that we not . Hoffman: Based on the number of homes which would go in there , we would be 1 able to acquire , ; f it was gone ahead and looked at , less than 2 acres of property . Acain then that would drain our financial means of gathering financial support for our park acquisition and development fund at that point and obviously it would reduce the number of lots in that development . For the developer and the owners of the property . It is across the street from , on Lake Lucy Road which is a major road . It 's a major thoroughfare . • .It 's a collector . It 's busy today . It will continue to get more busy . ' Curry Farms Park is just a stone 's throw away . It 's directly across the street . If parents are concerned about their children , their families crossing that street , this is a small enough loop road where potentially if they want to send them there , they could walk them to the road such as they do at a bus stop . Follow them across the street . That type of thing and return home . But again , in 37 homes it 's not as large as Curry Farms but again it is a good chunk of homes . There 's going to be many families there I and they 're going to be crossing the street to Lake Lucy if there is not a park there . I Robinson: Could there be signage or some kind of a traffic cpntrol put on Lake Lucy Road where they would be expected to cross which is at the entrance there I suppose? II Lash: And that was a concern with Pheasant Hills from the people who lived on the south side of Lake Lucy Road too was their kids crossing to get over to Pheasant Hills . And I don 't know the different options that are I available in the public safety area . If it 's something where they could put up a crosswalk and a flashing light or speed bumps . I don 't know what can happen . I think we 'd be kind of derelict in our responsibility to just II send this right through without giving that some thought because I think in the future it 's going to be a problem . Hoffman: WE would need to take a look at that and address that with the I Public Safety Commission and with the engineering department . What kind of signage would be able to go into that area . The accesses are directly across from Arlington Court which is a court . Devonshire Drive happens to ' end up in the middle of the lot line there are you can see so it 's not a direct crossing from either the public street as it 's labeled there either . Those egress points . IAndrews: Terry , you had a comment? Terry Forbord: Mr . Chairman, members of the Commission. I didn't prepare II a presentation for a number of reasons but I would like to keep a couple things in perspective on this particular piece of property. There 's a total of 30 acres . The upland area is probably close to about 21 acres , if I that . I know you 've heard these types of statements because and I 'm not telling you this . There 's no smoke in mirrors in this statement . If 2 acres were taken out of this piece of property to have some type of park , nobody would develop it . I would withdraw my application. The dynamics of Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 23, 19?1 - Page 8 I/ a piece of property like this , when you have 30 total acres , gross acres , where only 2/3 of it are useable because of the type of , there 's so many wet lEnc': cn the property , the dynamics , the reality of it is the fact that you couldn 't put a park there and make it work . And there are a number , I 'm sure there are other parcels in this City that have a similiar - circumstance . I know you all have studied the comprehensive plan and had- input in that . The Urban Service Area was just expanded to include all of the land westerly along Lake Lucy Road and a great more acres of land that is off Lake Lucy Road . There are some significant large parcels of property in those areas that will be developed sooner rather than later . It . seems more appropriate to me for this city to be able to have a park that II more people in the area could use . This piece of property will not develop if there 's a park on 'it . Not by Lundgren Bros . or .anybody just because the dynamics wouldn 't work and I think that the staff realizes that themselves because they deal with this stuff so often and I think that 's probably why they recommended that in lieu of a dedication of land , to be able to approve the plat and take the money and apply it to a park somewhere where II they can utilize it . Now the safety issue I think is an issue that needs to be dealt with whether there would be a park here or not . Or whether there was a park at Curry Farms or not . My personal belief is that even if there wasn 't a park in Curry Farms , that there 's going to need to be from all traffic safety standpoint some crosswalks on Lake Lucy Road for people to be able td cross . I mean that 's going to be a given . I would certainly think that as development occurs , and it will along Lake Lucy •Road , that II that method of allowing people to cross in a safe zone so to speak , would be implemented . Andrews: Can you read back the motion we have in front of us? 1 Hoffman: The motion was made to approve the Ortenblat/Ersbo subdivision recommending to City Council accept full park and trail fees in lieu of parkland dedication and trail construction . Andrews: Let 's call the vote. If it doesn't carry the vote , we 'll entertain a new motion . Robinson moved, Andrews seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that the City Council accept park and trail fees in lieu of parkland dedication and/or trail constriction'for the Ortenblat/Ersbo/ Lundren Bros. Subdivision. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Hoffman: To make one comment on the comment by Mr . Forbord. Staff does not make recommendations based on the presumed hardship of developers so that would not be a reason for us to make a recommendation. • Lash: Did you say that you would then contact Public Safety regarding this? Hoffman: Sure . We can run it through them to see as it moves through the II approval process what potential things we'can be taking a look at to potentially look to a crosswalk or some other type of safety signage . Lash: I would certainly like to see that be addressed before people have to come forward . 11 Park an Rec Commission Meeting IIJuly 2? , 1991 - Page 9 IIAndrew The other comment I 'd like to make too is that Lundgren Bros . does have an interest also in seeing a safe crosswalk because that enhances the value of their development so I 'm sure there will be ample pressure along Lz: Pc Lucy Road , both here and other areas where traffic is going to IIdevelop where we 're going to need traffic control . There 's no doubt about it . 1 Robinson: Yeah , is the property just to the west of this site undeveloped? Hoffman: It 's a large , unplatted single family home . 11 SITE PLAN REVIEW: AMERICANA BANK . . Hoffman: This is a PUD amendment . Planned Unit Development amendment to II replat a portion of Market Square PUD and for a site plan for a 7 ,740 square foot building , a bank on the property zoned PUD and located in the southwest corner of West 78th Street and Market Blvd . . The applicant again II is Americana Bank . The location is just . . .City Hall being in this location . The proposed bank being in the corner of the proposed supermarket and shopping mall location . This particular piece of property is an outlot for that entire parcel . The layout as you have in your IIpacket , this is the site of the bank . This is City Hall up in this location . 78th coming around and Market Blvd. going down with the bowling complex across the street . The present zoning of this property is PUD . 1 The adjacent zoning to the north is Office Industrial District . To the south is General Business . To the east is the Central Business District or our downtown and to the west again is the general business district . I Comprehensive plan identifies this property as lying within service areas of City Center Park . Acquisition of additional parkland from this parcel is not reasonable or desireable . The comprehensive trail plan does identify the property as lying within the downtown business district and as II in the remainder of the downtown , pedestrian walkways are to be installed . Walkways are currently depicted on the proposed plan as bituminous . However , all walkways in the downtown will be constructed of concrete and I both their architect and Americana Bank has agreed to that particular point . Again it 's very straight forward . The recommendation would be that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend the City Council accept full I park and trail fees as part of this development . The trail fee credit for construction of walkways is not deemed necessary as no credits have been given in any previous cases of development in the tax increment district . Businesses located in this district are to pay full development fees. IILash: Is the sidewalk also along Market? I Hoffman: As shown there , I believe it is. On the opposite side of the street it is in bituminous but it would be on the west side in concrete to lead down then in front of the supermarket and down to the bus shelter which is across the street . - II Lash: So concrete on Market or not? II Hoffman: Concrete on Market , correct . The trail which is just across the street is presently bituminous . II II Park and Pe.c Commission Meeting July' 23 , 1991 - Page 10 Andrews : P,ny other questions? Comments? Is there anybody here from the audience here to speak on this issue? Can we have a motion please? Lash: I recon:-.end that we accept full park and trail fees for the , what is it , Americana Bank . Pemrick: I 'll second it . Andrews: I was just wondering as a friendly amendment if we could specify that no credit be given for construction of concrete sidewalks as per other developments in the area . Is that okay? I Lash moved, Pemrick seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that the City Council accept full park and trail fees as part of II this development . A trail fee credit for constrution of walkways is not deemed necessary as no credits have been given in any previous cases of development in the tax increment district. All voted in favor and the motion carried. 1991 REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL . I Hoffman: Item 4 concerns the 1991 report to the City Council . I need to apologize . I believe this is probably what Don and Richard are here for . This was the original memo which you received at the meeting prior . I did change that memo and then upon leaving on vacation Karen finalized the packet and sent off my original memo . My new memo explained that this entire report of the 1991 report to the City Council is all part of the new , 1992 Ludget process and as such would be included in that process as we worked through it . It would just be premature formulating our report to the City Council concerning our 1991 activities until we get farther into ' this budget process . However , did you both just come out of that particular item or just out of general interest? General interest? Okay. And so if there 's any points that either Don or Richard would specifically II like to see addressed in our report to the City Council along with their 1992 budget requests , we can hear from them tonight . Otherwise the Commission will discuss this further . Because the next item we discussed or the sixth item when we discuss it , again our initial proposals for 1992 I budget requests . ' Andrews: Co this is going to be deferred then? , Hoffman: Correct . 1991 FOURTH OF JULY EVALUATION. , Ruegemer : In looking at the annual 4th of July Celebration, it 's in the interest of our department to come up with an informational tool in II bettering the celebration for the next year . In gathering information and as evaluation is compiled of the actual events and the overall celebration, I would like to take a look at that but first: I would like to thank all the " commission members that volunteered their time to make the celebration a very well received to the community and very nice celebration . We have had heard a lot of good comments about the celebration and everybody seemed to 1 11 Park and Pc c Commission Meeting IIJuly 23 , 1991 - Page 11 II enjoy themselves thoroughly . I 'd just like to recognize commissioners who were present in volunteering . I would like to thank them and I 'd also like to , I d:,n 't know if mentions here in the evaluation but I 'd also like to I recc. r:iz- the Rctar ,' for a fabulous job they did also in working the concessions up at the City Center Park . Lake Ann Park on Thursday and down by the beach and also during the ball tournament on Saturday . They were out there a number of hours and really did a very wonderful job . Everyone II was appreciative f concessions on the hot days that were along with the celebration itself so . And also I 'd like to briefly go through the evaluation and I 'd like comments or questions that any of the commissioners II would have just to feel free to talk about those . So in looking at these evaluations we go through each individual event and write down and look at things that we ourselves , the staff would .take a look at for next year in bettering those events and also comments that we hear from the public or 111 other staff members or anybody that really has any type of comment with the events . With that information we compile this information to take an overall look of the 4th of July celebration itself . How we can better it . II What type of things that we can do differently next time . Areas that we can improve . With this information we put it in the file and come next year as we 're looking back on this , we can get a better grasp of what we 're II doing as far as the setup and development of the 4th of July celebration . So at this time I 'd just like to open it up to the Commission members . Any questions or comments that they would have concerning the 4th of July celebration . IIAndrews: The comments I got back from neighbors were extremely positive . I think this event is just going to snowball each year as more and more II people come and experience and see how much fun it is . I think it was a lot of fun . I think a lot of people put in time . I wish I could thank them all . IRuegerr,e - : If I could just interject here for a minute . If there 's any specific event that a commissioner would like to comment on , your comments would he welcome . ILash: I guess the carnival games , you said they were very popular . Maybe an additional new game could be added. I guess I would go along with that . III think they are very popular . Andrews: Would there be any chance that we could obtain carnival rides of a little bit more advanced stage? They don't have to be that 200 foot IIFerris wheel but the ones we have now are these little cars that go in circles and they 're good for kids up about 4 or 5 years old can be modestly entertained but there 's not a lot for the 8 to 15 year old. I wonder if II there 's something we can look into or if that 's something we purposely avoid . . .reasons or what . I think we're drawing a big enough crowd now for this where we could probably attract a larger program of rides. IIHoffman: There 's been discussion among C- =:ff the entire time that Ive a been here that many of these town festiv � - _ go ahead and invite the carnival ride type of vendor into their festival and carry some liability II but most anything does in life . If it 's looked upon as' a favorable addition , we could certainly investigate it and see what type of , obviously that 's a pretty time of the season or year for those folks and you almost 1 Park and f-_c Commission Meeting July 23 , 1991 - Page 12 hays to step in line in which vendor we could get and how much it would be • but the--: obviously plenty of room just to go from the warming house north t !-,€ n spread them out along the grass . It would not have to be on con_ret_- or bituminous surface as in many communities . , Lash: One of the nice things about it now , I 'm not saying whether I like the idea or not because I have to kick it around a little bit but one of the nice things about it , my kids love it and they 're in the 8 to 15 year old rangc . They love the games and they love the music and they get to see their friends from school that they haven 't seen for a month . Another nice' thing that I 've heard from people is it 's a nice time . You can go up there II with your whole family . It 's not expensive and if we did have a lot of - rides up there , that gets to .be costly then when your kids are nagging you all night long to go on rides. So it 's one time you can go and do II something with your whole family and it doesn 't cost you $50 .00 . You can get by pretty cheap and my kids just love it . It 's almost one of the highlights cf their summer . They think that 's really a ball having a band . I heard one comment on the band and that was , it was a much better band last year . I would say next year to publicize in the Bulletin the rain out dates for the band . The fishing contest for the kids was great . I think they all , it does get crowded out on that pier and it was so icky that day II that there weren 't that many willing to go in the water to fish . I don 't know what -we can do about it but I see that was mentioned in here . Maybe there 'd be another option for kids . I don't know . It 's a good way to get rid of the bullheads . What was the biggest one? Hoffman: 2 pound , 6 ounce carp? Lash: Yeah . Good way to get rid of all that junk out of the lake . 11 Koubsky: I suppose my comment . I wasn 't able to attend because of some family scheduling but I do work with a lot of other people in the area who got out and saw fireworks on Minnetonka and got out at Eden Prairie and the word was that Chanhassen had the best fireworks in the area . So just a comment that was noted outside of our area that this was the place to see fireworks . Hoffman: Look out next year . , Andrews: Well it 's not only the fireworks themselves are good. We 've got an exceptionally good spot to show the fireworks . That 's what makes it II half the fun. You have a beautiful beach and it was a beautiful night for fireworks . Just ideal . Hoffman: I was curious to see how the parking was going so we drove around in the Cushman through the park and there was still parking available in the new section so it filled up nicely with that additional parking . In past years we went ahead and did overflow parking out on Field #3 but it wasn 't necessary . And then departing the park afterwards went fairly smoothly as well . I think it lasted about 20 minutes which isn't too bad . Lash: Well I thought it was great . It was a lot of fun. ' 1 Park ar Re: Cc- ission Meeting IIJuly 2. , 1 oc1 - Page 13 ' Hoffman: One comment that I 'd like to make is that an Lash does deserve the hl _ ;-i`ak•-)n volunteerism award . She was there at every turn of the stc7 and helped out just a tremendous amount . Without assistance we would have ha a much more difficult time pulling off. the entire event . I Lash: Thanks Todd . I 'll do the raffle again next year . I like that . IIRuegemer : That was fun wasn 't it? Lash: That was a good idea . Whoever came up with that . That was a good Ione . I think everybody liked that . Maybe we should set up a 'Bingo . Andrews: Did we liquidate our t-shirt inventory pretty good? I Hoffman: Fairly well . It was disappointing over past years . We 've never had that many t-shirts left over . We put them on sale and left them up in the lobby over the past 2 weeks . We 'll pull them in now and save them for ' next year for prizes and that type of thing . Lash : Were you selling them on the 4th down at Lake Ann too? IHoffman: Fold them at the entrance as they came into the park there . They 'r ; a nice souvenir . You can 't beat them but the public 's just not responding to it so potentially we may pull them out a year to the general Ipopulation for selling them but just have shirts for volunteers . Lash: Yeah , maybe we could have some of them as the raffle prizes too . I Ycu know that just brought to mind one thing . When we give those away as prizes next year . I mean it 's a nice prize except if you 're a size 16 and you ot a size S shirt , you can 't get really too fired up about that . ' Hoffman : Yeah , you 've got to give it to your little sister or brother if you even have one . The shirts aren 't an item to make money . They 're purely a promotional memorabilia type of item for the event . So we 'll need IIto evaluate those sales . Lash: They 're getting to be my whole summer wardrobe . I 've gotten 3 or 4 Iof them now . Andrews: Any other comments? IMayor Chmiel : I 'd like to commend staff on the job that they did . They just literally ran their legs off and did well . I think besides the enthusiasm . . . I 'd like to thank them and the Commission. . . IIHoffman: Thank you Don. II 1992 BUDGET , WORKSESSION. . Hoffman: Item number 6 is a worksession for the 1992 budget process-. At the June: 25th meeting we had an initial worksession . The results of that I discussion have been combined with a list tabulated by staff over the past 6 to 8 months . As things have come up we 've jotted those down and included them in this list . It 's very easy to use this list in conjunction with the 11 I Park and Pcc Commission Meeting July 2? , 1991 - Page 14 1991 park inventory to go ahead and see what currently is in our parks and what potentially is being proposed for 1992 . Developments and improvements to the F ,- k Eo we can kind of create that balance in both our old and new par which have here within. the city . Again this dialogue is preliminary but it 's a very vital step in the development of the capital improvement program as we get closer to that tirneframe where it needs to be firmed up . Having this in our vest pocket to go ahead and look back to is a very valuable tool . The dollar estimates for each of these individual items are not affixed at this time . Once we refine it somewhat then we ' ll go ahead and begin investigating with the commission the estimated dollar amounts for each one of these particular improvements and continue to refine it from there . A few additions prior to the start of the discussionll would be to Lake Ann Park . The omission of the conversion of Field #t2 to a Little League field . That was approved by the Commission and we 'll need toll go ahead and budget some dollars for that . My intent is to go ahead and perform that project in house with our own staff and then as well to make use of volunteers from the parents . I 've heard to date there 's a consortium of about 10 parents who are willing to work on this particular project so we 'll take advantage of those folks as well . Then again on Lake Ann Park , 3 canoes are listed there . 2 as rental canoes and then one is kind of a chase boat . Anytime we get into that boat , recreational vehicle rental type of business , we need to have a chase boat for people who end up on the other side of the lake and don 't have the gumption to get back across the wind . I would propose to change that to 2 canoes for rental and" a small rowboat which is much easier to handle in the case of a potential problem . It 's easier to , not as potential for tipping and that type of thing when you Lorder up to another boat . Then as well , this entire arena of recreational vehicles there 's the paddleboats , canoes , the watertryks which are unbelieveably popular . Jim may as well get into sailboats . What 's the other ones? The surfboards with the . Andrews: Windsurfers . , Hoffman: Yes , thank you . But there 's another one as well which are 11 unbelieveably popular . The small kayaks where they 're about 8 feel long for 1 person and children as well as adults just love them . You get in and use a kayak paddle . Double edged kayak paddle including half a dozen of those kayaks which come fairly reasonable and would be rented on a fairly II consistent basis would be desireable as--well . Those would be the only changes . Jim , go ahead and run through this in whatever fashion you like with the commission and we 'll go ahead and take notes. ' Andrews: I guess what I 'd like to do, if it 'd be okay . To me one of the things we tried to do last year and carry forth into this year and hopefully into next year is we were looking at some prioritizing of Lake Ann and City Center Parks as being areas that we wanted to really try to complete . I don't know if anybody disagrees with that but I guess with that in mind . Jan , if you don't mind , why don't we start with you and II we 'll work it down the commission here. Items that you feel are important or items that you feel would be as high a priority . We 'll try to weed it out that way . , Lash: How about if we just did it one park at a time? 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 23 , 19 91 - Page 15 Andrews: One park at a time? That 's fine . Let 's do that . Lash : That would maybe be a little faster . Andrews: Okay . Why don 't we skip right to Bandimere? Well I think we can skip Bandimere Heights Park . Park sign I think is an obvious item . We 're going to do that for all parks . Hoffman: Right . We 're just picking up the ones that are left without a ' sign . The things occurring at Bandimere Community Park are such things as closing up of the well . Disconnecting the utilities from the buildings which are there . Our parks maintenance in conjunction with the fire department has taken down the barn . It was a severe safety hazard . ' They 've taken down that and boarded up the building and will be using that for training and that type of thing until such time as we start active development in the area . ' Andrews : The farm house is gone already or will be gone? Hoffman: The farm house is boarded up . Will be used for fire training . Smoke runs . That type of thing . Andrews: I know at some point there was some interest in preservation. I ' don 't recall what that was but it 's certainly an unsafe building as it stands . Okay . I think we could move to Carver Beach Park as our first park . I guess it says play area corrections . If you could fill us in Todd on just a bit more detail there . Hoffman : Carver Beach , this is the beach location on the south side . The slide there is very steep pitch . It 's a substandard slide installation . I We would go ahead and correct that and then there 's no resilient surfacing or pea rock at that particular play structure . It 's just a very small play structure but it still indeed needs border wood and rock surfacing in that location . Then as well a potential . Lash: Is this the one down by the beach? I Hoffman: Correct . Right down by the beach. Just below the parking lot which the Boy Scouts constructed in that location. I Andrews: Is there anybody that has any additions or deletions for Carver Beach Playground? Lash: As far as the spring animals go , do you have a real good feel for age range over in that area because those are for pretty little kids. Hoffman: There 's a couple daycares in the area and other than that Carver ' Beach is really a mixed neighborhood. It 's not a brand new neighborhood which is attracting just the young familits . There was the addition- to the play structure added this year . The spring animals would be added just to I add extra excitement to the particular play area . The swingset is , it 's old . It 's still useful but it's not worth dumping in a lot of money to buy new brackets and new swing belts and that type of thing . We could probably limp along in that particular swing there for another year . Just continue 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 23 , 1991 - Page 16 to re-evaluate it on a year to year basis . I Andrews : I believe what I 'm hearing is we have. no deletions or additions for that . Chanhassen Estates , park sign . Why don 't we move to Chanhassen ' Hills Park . Lash: I look at that as somewhat a priority . Not that we can do all of , it . What would be the next phase? Hoffman: Again , Chan Hills is a perfect example that you 're indeed correct . We can 't accomplish all of those but initial phase development there included the play structure . The first phase of the play structure and the volleyball court and" it was not included in the 1991 capital improvement program so it potentially should be included in 1992 . But it's 11 for the Commission to wrestle with . Lash: What do you think would be the next logical? , Hoffman: Eallfield construction because it has a major impact . Visual imapct and as well it 's less expensive than some of the other areas there. The play area addition would be nice . You start to weigh it because it does cost a little bit more money . They already do have play equipment . Do they need additional equipment? Construction of the tennis court and the basketball court is a major undertaking . $35 ,000 .00 depending on , $25 ,000 .00 to $35 ,000 .00 , depending on if we look at a single court , double " court or combination thereof of the basketball . Installation of trees. I believe it would be very beneficial in these parks , which I call cornfield 11 parks which were planted in corn 2 to 3 years ago , to go ahead and invest some dollars in 2 to 3 inch caliper trees to be planted in specific areas around the play structure and those types of things so we can get some diversity in our tree cover in a fairly short order and as well provide some shade for those particular areas . I believe that is important . Then again the park sign for identification . • Lash: Just as a thought .as far as a basketball court on these things go. I When we 're putting in the little parking lot and stuff , would it be totally unsafe to just stick a basketball hoop up at the end of the parking lot so I when there 's no cars there , kids could shoot baskets? Hoffman: We denied that in two other instances. Rice Marsh Lake Park and Curry Farms Park . , Lash: You can 't do that? Andrews: 'I would think it 's a liability issue . That 'd be just really , risky . Hoffman: You 're advocating or constructing a parking location and then as well saying it 's available for play by children which is a conflict of interest . Pemrick: I 've had a comment from two homeowners in Chanhassen Hills Park II saying they would like to see the next play area addition so for the record I think we should make note of that . f Park and Rec Cc• nission Meeting 11 July 23 , 1991 - ?age 17 II Andrews : I 'm kind of an ogre up here I guess . I look at we always come back with these huge , huge, budgets that we can 't possibly finance so we have to start cutting . To me what would make sense would be to put the ballfield in and do the site grade work for the tennis court and basketball 11 court . Grade it out but don 't install . And go ahead and put the trees in after the grading 's done so those have a chance to get going and you don 't have to come back in with heavy equipment to do the grading later . I guess I would feel that the courts themselves would be deferred and although there 's a desire the playground equipment , I 'm confident with some of these other large projects we 've got going . Especially Lake Ann . We 're I going to be really hurting for money this year to bring some of these projects to completion . So I would say that should wait and that would free up some funding for other projects that we put a high priority on . IILash: I would agree with that . Totally . I think if we looked at the park sign , the trees and a ballfield for 1992 , playground for 1993 and then somewhere down the line after that the tennis court and basketball court . IIAndrews: That 's what I 'm thinking . I guess I 'm optimistic that with the MUSA expansion we 're going to see some cashflow changes here too hopefully , next year in particular -but I would hope that that 's going to create some funding rather than more land . That 's what we 're going to need because we 'll have to go back and re-invest in some of these parks that we 've had to leave go for so long . ILash : Do you think that that sounds reasonable? Just your initial reaction as far as money for next year? IHoffman: Yes . Maybe a good point to discuss a little bit farther . What some of the forecasts for our revenues and expenditures are . I believe we discusEed the last meeting , or the meeting before that revenues are they 're I above last year but they 're still behind our anticipated revenues . It 's not due to single family homes . It 's due to the industrial commercial lag in development which we 're currently seeing . We have such things as the I supermarket and shopping mall coming through , we 're going to see a big boost which we did in some of the years of '88- '89 and '90 . Those type of years . So we are somewhat behind. We are going to see a reduced budget . I We had about $175 ,000 .00 to work with . Initial reactions are we 're going to be closer to the somewhere just over $100 ,000 .00 for 1992 . Depending on what we take a look at . How we close and again where the economy goes from today 's date . So we 're going to be somewhat more restrictive . Again with the Lake Ann shelter , with all the other projects that were hanging on the table and we went ahead and initiated those projects . . .next year plan accordingly but again we 're still in good shape to continue development of our parks . Koubsky: That 's my approach. Like the Chanhassen Hills Park and the totlot or additional play areas. I think it 's important to at least give everybody in town something. Everybody a phase I and other lots -don 't have a phase I and money should be direct:; to empty parkland. Even if it comes to ballfield construction or even adding , I 'd like to see movement 1 ahead on each of the facilities . But I think it 's very important that that park area that doesn 't have anything on it should at least move ahead and get something on it . I Park _:nd P:_ c Commission. Meeting July 23 , 19?1 - Page 18 Lash: You 're (Doing to come back with figures right? I Hoffman Correct . Lash: So then we 'll have to chop it some more anyway . , Andrews: We had our big wish list . Now we 're going to get our small wish list and then we 'll go to reality after that . Hoffman: This list however compared to last year 's is somewhat reduced already . Last year we started real high . , • Andrews: But you just talked about a 75% cut in funding . I mean that 's really going to cut it down to the bare bones . I also have a concern about " our capital fund . I think we 've hit into that heavy and I don 't want to see anymore deterioration on it . Hoffman: Correct , and we have reserves left in there for Minnewashta I parkland and those types of things . Robinson : But I think this is the right process . To start with a real wish list and keep narrowing it down . Andrews : Well you have to to help you prioritize . Okay , legs move on to Chanhassen Pond Park . Kerber Boulevard enhancement . Is that a significant cost project? Hoffman: No , that would include , as you walk along the trailway which is ` , almost a boulevard trailway , to incorporate a couple of picnic tables with a cement slab underneath them for securement so that area can be enjoyed . Andrews : That sounds like perhaps an internal project that 's going to just " sort of appear magically? Hoffman: Correct . And -with the purchase of a couple picnic tables . ' Andrews : Let 's leave that one as is I think . Lash: I wouldn't classify that as a real high priority. Andrews : No . i Lash: It 's going to cost that much to start with if we have to start chopping . Andrews: City Center Park . Koubsky: I guess I have .a comment on here . Being with the playground committee , we did pick out a very nice playground set for that addition . The problem was that was brought up at the last meeting , was a little more funds were used for the development of the area than originally anticipated " and what we had ended up for the play equipment was nice but it wasn 't nearly the amount we would have liked to have spent on it . I think if there was one area that we needed to add play equipment this might be the I Park and Rec Con.dission Meeting July 23 , 19"'1 - Page 19 one . Just from the useage it would get compared with a ne ighborhood lot . It is a school . However it is a park and I think all the kids there are going to almost overuse this equipment , ' I think it will probably be presentec,' . . .Todd with the final plan we had -approved for the Commission 's approval? Hoffman: Correct Again , I apologize . It was not included on the agenda ' this evening . I did bring the plan to present during Commission presentations to the Commission . If they 'd like me then to follow up and include the entire package for review in administrative packet at another . time , I 'll go ahead and do that . The time line , it was the commission 's wish to go ahead and review that prior to approval but the time line in this project was just unbelieveably crunched and we were going day to day and hour to hour to get this part of the project completed so we could accomplish this part . Calling meetings 3 days in advance and that type of thing to get all these particular portions of the project approved . So I 'll have a chance this evening to present the board to you concerning that west area playground . My other comment is I included in the administrative packet for this evening's meeting a news article on the slide 100 feet long connecting different play areas which is a joint ' project between the City of Chaska and the School District . I just included an asterick near the funding portion , the last paragraph of that showing the funding there . The school was much more favorable in funding that particular project . In fact it 's an exact flip flop . They funded ' about how much we did on this particular project for Chan EleThentary and the school district funded the . . .that location . So it has been the history of development of City Center Park to be about an even 50/50 split between ' the School District and City . The School District is not able to accomplish that this go around . However , the Commission and Council was happy to go ahead and initiate the project . However , it would be my II opinion that we should be looking to the school district to pick up some of this tab in the future as well . Lash: At the last meeting •I think I recall you said that you had some cost 11 savings by having staff do certain things . Has that already been spent now? I Hoffman: The cost savings? The cost savings were incorporated into there so we could accomplish the project . There were such things as pulling out the line . Painting and now the school 's agreed to do that. Reducing the border wood from a redwood edging border which we use on our play 1 structures down to a green treated pine material . Lash: So I think there was something like $15 ,000 .00 or something. Has. IIthat now been used by more play equipment? Hoffman: Correct . The total figure for play equipment on the west side is I $10 ,000.00. For the purchase of actual play equipment . The remainder of that went towards land development and those drainage improvements-and those type of things . We had to scrape and scrounge for it to come up with that $10 ,000 .00 . IIL"ash: Even with the $15 ,000 .00 savings , you only spent $10,000.00 in equipment? Park and Pe: Co-mission Meeting I July 23 , 1991 - Page 20 IIHoffman: Well the savings were not potentially savings but cost reductions ' in the overall project to get that back down . . Lash : We don 't get much for $10 ,000 .00 . I Hoffman : We ' ll go over that this evening . Lash: I work in the same building with the administrators and II superintendent and we 're like this . But when I read that in that article that just made me sick to think that they gave the Jonathan School II $75 ,000 .00 for play equipment and would give us nothing . Hoffman: $2 ,000 .00 was what we ended up with . Lash : Sometime when I see him and he looks like he 's in a good mood or II something , I 'm going to approach him and just ask him what the deal is . Andrews: I hate to be ungracious but I feel that was a real slap . A real I major slap . That 's sort of like well , we 'll give it where we have to but where we don 't , well let 's see how much we can get from Chanhassen . I II could see maybe a $2 ,000 .00 , $3 ,000 .00 , $4 ,000 .00 difference but that 's incredible . It makes me somewhat angry to think that that 's , you know I think we have a very desireable project with a lot of benefit . I feel like that just wasn 't right . 1 • Lash: I 'd just like to know where they got the $75 ,000 .00 to do it . I mean I 've been at School Board meetings and you go in there and ask for something and there 's never any money . I mean it 's like everywhere else . There 's never any money for anything that you want to get and then they got $75 ,000 .00 for play equipment . ilHoffman: The money was , in my opinion or my impression land locked for that new school project so it was tied into that . The new school funding package . I Lash: That was part of the referendum. Do you think it was built into the referendum cost? • II Hoffman: I don 't have any. Andrews: For me personally the play equipment is a higher priority than II the hockey improvement at this point . I feel like if we- had to defer another year with our hockey rinks and the condition they are and our warming house , the condition it is in, we could do that . I just keep looking down at Lake Ann and I see a huge project there and most of that to II me looks like if we don 't try to do it all at one time , that we're really not doing the right thing . II Lash: Also the warming house improvements, what else needs to be done to that? Hoffman: The warming house is to a point where it 's not worth making a . ' major investment but if something comes up on an annual basis that needs some attention , you know a $500.00 item or less. That type of thing . It II 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 23 , 19?1 - Page 21 was the new furnace was installed . The shingling of the building this fall . The foundation is beginning to rot up from the bottom and 'it 's a building which will need attention in the not too distant future but we just need to patchwork it now to get by . The hockey rink replacement again is an item which was incorporated into the whole City Center Park - improvement project but was taken out of the 1991 improvement package because of funding . The rinks are the only two hockey rinks within the city of Chanhassen . They 're the only two hockey rinks that we offer . They 're used for practices and pick-up games . They 're not used for official games because of the access to the community center and other indoor ice sheets within the area . So it 's a difficult position because again they are our only two rinks . :ews Andr ' ' I d just like to re-emphasize that to me the Lake Ann Park is the priority . It 's our showpiece . It 's going to require a huge amount of money to get it going and I guess I feel like if we 've got a functional hockey rink and a functional warming house there , let 's make it go one more year and try to divert that money to Lake Ann and provide all the necessary additional items that are going to be needed to get that up and running next year and hopefully by doing that , yes we 'll have incurred a lot of expenses but perhaps we 'll have enhanced the revenue generating ability of Lake Ann too to help pay back some of those expenditures . For what it 's worth . tKoubsky : when this says hockey rink replacement , was that the realignment of those Todd? Hoffman: No , just the replacement in their current position. The realignment then would incorporate removal of the poles and re-installation and the re-wiring . Koubsky : Have they got new boards? I Hoffman: The hockey rink replacement would include the dismantling of the present boards and either constructing new from scratch or purchasing a package . I Lash: So if we don 't have any money in there we won 't have any hockey rinks at all? I Hoffman: No . They 'll continue to be maintained in their present and repaired and maintained and used in their present state . I Andrews: Is there anybody here that would like to speak against deleting the hockey rink replacement and warming house improvements at this point? Then let 's cut that for budgetary purposes. I mean keep the notes handy . but let 's see where that leads us . Lash: Postpone that for 1993? I Andrews : Postpone that for later . Okay , let 's skip to Herman Field Park . Oh pardon me . Is there anybody that wanted to speak against additional play equipment for City Center Park . Alright , now we can move on . Herman Field Park would be the next one that has significant activity. I Park and Re o Commission Meeting July , 1991 - Page 22 Lash : Can back up to Curry Farms? I Andrews : Sure , park sign . Lash: Yeah , but did they get something this year? Did we spend any money 11 there this year? Hoffman: S10 ,000 .00 was budgeted in 1991 . Play area expansion is just j being finished up this week . They 're going to be subcutting the trail , the extension of the bituminous walkway within the next week and putting in a ballfield . So the walkway is going to be advantageous since in the spring II that area is so wet at times that we 're only going to put the aggregate at .an even level with the grade. there and then apply that bituminous on top of that so when it receives a large amount of rain you should be able to walk the walkway there and make use of the park . Out there today talked to two III different neighbors and they 're very happy with the activity that 's going on there . Glad to see that the trailway was going to go in there . The II kids Big Wheels and tykes and bikes and walks around the parkway . Excited about the new play equipment and looking forward to the ballfield as well . Lash: So you feel they 'll be content next year? , Hoffman: . Yes . Andrews: Herman Field. , Lash: You had a rough estimate of about $50 ,000 .00 didn 't you for this? ' Hoffman : Herman Field is receiving $50 ,000 .00 in improvements with the access road in 1991 . Pre-construction meeting is being held early next week . Initiation of that project was held up due to Wetland Alteration II Permit process which we needed to go through. So that $50,000.00 includes the construction of that roadway and the grading of the open area of the park . Restoration of that area and as well blacktopping and asphalting of the roadway and then the parking lot . Then come next spring , it 's going to be a road with a parking lot and a barren field so that 's where we need to pick up in 1992 . Andrews: I would think a ballfield would be a natural with the grade work out there . Do you agree with that Todd? Hoffman: Sure . ' Andrews: I think we get our most efficient thing for a buck by doing it right at the same time . Lash: Do you think that we could trim it to the play area , picnic tables and ballfield construction for next year and hold off on the trail and ,. boardwalk? • Robinson: Yeah . That boardwalk has got to be costly doesn't it? Andrews: I 'm not convinced that 's a great idea anyway . • 1 Park and Pec Cori nission Meeting July 2? , 1991 - Page 23 Lash: I think it 's a necessity . We talked about it at the last meeting . It 's ss you can get the trail through the wetland . ' Hoffman: It 's a split issue . It 's fairly short but it is expensive material . Same material which the swimming raft is made out of at Lake Ann . It 's the best there is in the industry and if you fool around with wood and styrofoar , you replace it in 3 years . It 's really a split issue here because the park all along has been spoken of as a natural area to get away . To take a walk . That type of thing . The superdeck floating boardwalk and the trail construction were included as *alternates in this ' year 's contract . There was not enough money to go ahead and take those into consideration but they 're very highly ranked by the neighborhood in the surveys which were taken in that area : So if we went that way , it shys II away from what we traditionally think of as initial phases in development of the park . II Andrews: What 's the nearest ballfield that is available to that neighborhood? Hoffman: Across the highway at Minnetonka Intermediate . IAndrews : So quite a ways then really . ' Hoffman: They 're isolated. Lash: Maybe what we could do is , either do the trail and the boardwalk or the play area , picnic tables and ballfield construction . IIHoffman: The trail construction is , it 's really a no cost item . I seriously doubt we 'd have to rent any equipment . We have equipment which I can handle that . It would just be a matter of staff time to accomplish that . But if you construct the trail and it deadends at the wetland area , you need to purchase the boardwalk to get across . IILash: Could that be an Eagle Scout project? Or not? Hoffman: Again , then we would need to revert back to the wood construction I and it would cost us $4 ,000 .00-$5 ,000 .00 in material and we would need to replace it at some point in the future . I Andrews: But you 're saying the neighbors near there expressed a definite preference for trails rather than a play area? IHoffman: It was a high priority but again, they 'd like to see it all done . Lash: Maybe what we could do is , like I said either one or the other but get input from the residents before we actually start anything as to which I they would rather see in there first . Tell them we can do one or the other but not both next year . I Andrews: It is a unique park in that it could be one of our few wild Parks where there is a walking trail and that could present something different to the whole city . I mean most of our parks are the totlot , the ballfield , the tennis courts and the basketball hoops and like you say , it 's a 11 Park and Rec Commission. Meeting July 23 , . 991 - Page 24 cornfield 3 years ago and now it 's a park . I think Jan maybe has a good idea . We 've. got x number of dollars . Maybe we get a little bit better input and it 's going to be either or . Not both situation . So I guess I feel , why don 't we group the first two items together and the last 3 items together and get a figure on those two- as a group and see if you can come back to us with that and see what we come up with as an estimate there . Hoffman: We 'll take a look at that . The play area , if it's a small ' initial phase , can end up in like the $8 ,000 .00 range . Ballfield construction is again accomplished by park maintenance staff and includes the purchase of the aggregrate . Purchase of the bases . Purchase of the backstop . So it takes. some dollars . It takes a considerable amount of staff time as well . So again , as we look through this we not only have to look at , we 're severely maximizing the use of our park maintenance personnel this year in installing equipment and doing park improvement projects at well as park maintenance projects and the phone calls are going to begin to increase as we get closer to the end of the summer and residents are not seeing their particular playground installed and that type of thing . So we need to look at both aspects . Both our available resources and dollars and our available resources in work force as well . Koubsky : As far as a questionnaire approach Todd , last year did you guys I do something similar where you had kind of a list of wants and solicited the local public opinion for what they 'd like to see? • Hoffman: The list is compiled through the knowledge of the Commission and staff from the public comment heard in the past so there 's not a general solicitation from the public to go ahead and receive . Andrews : We did that survey though . What was it 3 years ago? 2 years ago? ' Hoffman: Yes . - Andrews: And it 's pretty predictable . I mean the basic survey is you want everything . Then. it 's just a matter of well because you can 't have everything , what are the things you really want . And it does seem to boil down to the play areas are always high . Then the ballfields . Multiple use II ballfields . But I look at Herman Field here again as kind of a unique wild area . Perhaps this might be an opportunity for us as a commission to present an alternative type of park . ' Hoffman: That 's how it initially was presented and then again , the- neighbors liked that idea but we don't have a play area . We don't have a 11 ballfield so we went for the mix . Lash: And as far as ballfield, that was basically just an open area where they could play catch . _ I Andrews: We can provide that without doing anything. Lash: Yeah but so then do you think the ballfield construction could be lumped with the trail construction more or do you think the other breakdown is better? 1 Park nJ Pee Co... ,fission Meeting Jul' 2`3 , 1c'1 Page 25 F.cf-cm:. n: (.gain , as Jim was just eluding to , like the Pheasant Hills survey state ' , the,- don 't necessarily want formalized ballfield right off the bang so the t llflEld construction we could relabel that and just say open field ' a,--H a,--H it y eu l :i F _- done in this year 's contract . Leave out the $2 ,000 .00 in material that it would take to construct- the formalized ballfield . Andrews: Do you recall what the superdeck estimates were? They were fairly high? Hoffman: They were fairly high I believe . I guess in the $8 ,000 .00 range . $6 ,000 .00 to $8 ,000 .00 range . • Lash: So that would be comparable to playground equipment? ' Robinson : I thought it 'd be more than that . Pemrick: I did too . I thought we were looking at $30 ,000 .00 or ' $40 ,000 .00 . Robinson : So did I . 1 Hoffman : No . 110 ,000 .00 would be a cap . I Andrews: I 'm leaning towards the idea of emphasizing the wild aspects of this park as being quite different from most of our other city parks . Having that be the funding priority but I still think it would be a good idea to look at this as an either or basis and maybe get a little more I feedback . If there was a strong neighborhood opinion that if we have a choice between a wild trail or a totlot and a ballfield for our kids , we 'd rather take our wild kids to the totlot than take a hike in a wild park . IKoubsky : I agree . Lash: Eut maybe the open field would kind of be , it could go with either one if that 's not a big cost item . Andrews: And that 's going to be done anyway now this year so we 'll have a flat area . Lash: Oh , did you say you 're going to do that this year? IHoffman: The ballfield area will be constructed , or open field area will be constructed in a level manner and seeded . IRobinson: Maybe it 'd be helpful Todd if we could see the 1991 items that are either planned or are completed. And maybe we could then also time phase these if we can 't do it next year . Instead of just looking at 1992 , I push it out and say we 're going to do this part in 1992 and this pert in 1993 and this part of 1994 and kind of make it a long range plan or at least a 3 year plan . ' IHoffman: The next go around we can go ahead and take a look at the 5 year layout that is incorporated in your park improvement , capital improvement budget . 1 Park and R_c Commission Meeting July 23 , 1 91 - Page 26 Robin_on : I think that would be helpful . I Andrews : Let 's move on to Lake Ann . I think we 've rehashed that one eneu„', . Tod-j , you made a comment about the sailboats like I guess I 'll surprise you and say let 's not jump into that too quick . I think the chase boat aspect and the organizational aspect of trying to put on a sailing program is more than you 'd want to do all in the first year . Looking at II this lengthy list here of items , that 's got to be a lot of money . I guess the one comment I have and I don 't know what the ordinance is on Lake Ann . If we would be allowed to have a gas powered motor so in the event of a rescue situation , we don 't have a dead battery . I guess I look at electric ' motors are quiet but when they 're out juice , they 're out of juice . You aren 't going to move . At least with a gat powered motor you can make the rescue if you 've got to make it . ' • Hoffman: You 're correct . I thought on both items , either one is going to have to be removed from the boat and stored securely in the building . We 1 can go ahead and take a look at the particular ordinances on a gas powered boat . Lash: The DNR uses a motor with gas . ' Hoffman : 1 don 't foresee that there would be a problem with it . • Lash: But if it 's a real emergency and you have to go into the store room 1 and get the motor and take it out and strap it on the boat , you 're going to be dead . • Hoffman: Yeah , you 'd want to do that each shift . In the morning you would prepare the boat . Either put the trolling motor and battery in or the outboard motor . 1 Andrews: You wouldn 't need a very large motor . I mean a 5 horse ought to be plenty . Lash: I thought when we talked about food we kind of had it boiled down to just cold things and snacks and stuff so do we really need to have a microwave? Hoffman: It 's included just for discussion . If you want to do the microwaveable hot dog , sandwiches , that type of thing or if you would like to see that incorporated at a future date if demand is there . That type of thing . Andrews: I 'd like to see it left . I guess I feel a little fancier for product sales . You 're looking at $150 .00-$200 .00 for a commercial grade microwave . Lash: Yeah but then you 've got to start buying the food and if people don 't buy the food , then we 're using up food that you 're buying that nobody 's . I just don't know if there 's going to be a demand for it and I don 't think we 'll know that until we 've done this for a little while to see ' if people come up and say . what do you mean no hotdogs? No hot pretzels . No whatever they want and I wouldn't want to be stuck with a bunch of food Park an-.1 Pea Commission Meeting July 2a , 1 9S1 Page 27 IIthat : sn 't going to move because that kind of stuff you can 't keep for a long time as opposed to like bagged popcorn or chips or some of those kind of thine- last a little bit longer . IKoubsky : We kind of discussed just having bagged treats and cold pop . I Lash: Yeah . Just kind of simiple to start with and then go with whoever 's working there , if they get a handle for what people are requesting . Take it from there . I Koubsky: Yeah , I think it 's okay to move slow into the concession aspect in this thing . I Lash: And as far as the rental boats , I guess I 'd like to keep it to the pretty basic things that the average person knows how to use and not get into some of the things that you mentioned I 've never heard of before . IAndrews: Do you know what the difference between paddle boats and water trikes are? IHoffman : The paddle boat? Andrews: The paddle boat and the water trikes? IHoffman : Paddle boats , those boats where people sit in there and paddle them . The water trikes are , you take a regular trike . Enlarge it . Put on I huge wheels and then the back tires spin . Where you have water trikes and paddle boats , the water trikes go first . Andrews : Yeah , I guess I feel like we 're offering or attempting to offer Itoo many selections as far as types of boats . Lash: The water trikes seats one person? IHoffman: Two people . Andrews: You said water trikes go faster than paddle boats? I Hoffman: Yes . But then again they appeal to the different groups . The kids can take those water trikes . Right now an elderly person would much I rather perfer a paddle boat . The paddle boats are going to go out for a number of reasons . Recreation . A person's going to go out and read a book and cast a line in . Water trikes are for real active type of recreation . ILash: How are you going to control the number using those things? Hoffman: The access dock will be there with the equipment chained to the I dock or else brought up in the shore area there which will be incor.porated. When they check them out they check out , he people are there at the- rental counter . They check out their two life ,;:skets . Whatever they need for I their equipment and the boat is unlocked and off they go . A friend swims up to it and jumps on out in the lake , then you have a potential problem . I Park and Re c Commission Meeting July 23 , ' O;'' - Page 28 And-c:._ : I want to make one comment . This has to do with Lake Phalen which is where I 've seen their rental operation . From what I can remember , they der: 't rent canoes and I think there 's probably two reasons for that . One i_ t' : t you do have to have .some knowledge of how to paddle a canoe in ordcr to do properly . To return it back to where you need to- go . I think a paddle boat or a water trike , I think anybody can master that very quickly . I think the other thing is capsizing and rescues . I would think that canoes just are much more likely to be capsized either accidentally or perhaps on purpose by people looking at a hot day to have some fun and I think that 's going to create a lot more demand for us to go out and get the swamped canoe . Drag it back in. Pick them out of the water . It 's not that I 'm against canoes but I think from a rental standpoint , it could be all bigger headache than they 're worth. I think also a lot of people , they do own canoes but very few people would own a water bike or a water trike . They could perhaps have more of a desire to rent something like that . Lash : about the storage aspect of those things? Hoffman: •tc•ra`e of these , the building that is currently at Lake Ann , the tin shelter , is beyond it 's capacity and Dale Gregory would be proposing a second maintenance building . Pole barn building at Lake Ann in his 1992 budget request . The building which is currently there . . .you should go ahead and purchase the equipment just to fill out the purpose and the intent that building as a rental center . Concession center so the equipment is necessary but again , canoes . You 're going to want to ask the people if they 've ever canoed . If the person taking up the rear has ever steered a canoe or paddled a canoe . Life jackets are going to be required. That type of thing . And again you do lose control of those people . ' They 're cn the other side of the lake and they want to take a life jacket off and take a swim . Those types of things . Robinson: I would agree with you Todd . I think we should have a little variety to start with and see what goes . Pemrick: I 'd agree with that . Andrews : Should we get some estimates back as is and work from there? Hoffman: Sure . Andrews: The microwave I sort of see where yeah, there 's a concern with hotdogs not selling but to be quite honest , I can 't imagine a park not being able to move a few dozen hotdogs every day regardless of what the weather conditions are like. And I look at the difference between buying a microwave or not buying a microwave . If we decide not to sell hotdogs it 's t not a very big factor in the big scheme of things . Hoffman: The refrigerator will be there and the vendor-, the food vendor who is chosen will vend all these particular items so you can order . respective amounts and increase the order' or reduce the order by a weekly basis . That type of thing . Robinson: Was some of this covered in the building Todd, like the water and electrical hook-up? 1 Park and Pee Cor ission Meeting IIJuly 23 , 1001 - Page 29 I Hoffman: Water and Electrical hook-ups of the ballfield concession buildir:; were net covered . That would include , this is for the separate building up through the ballfield . We are running water and electrical service ri ht L>' that building and it makes good sense to go ahead and hook I it up . - Andrews : There 's another opportunity , if we 're not selling hotdogs at the I pavillion , take t em down to the concession stand and believe me they 'll sell down there during a baligame . Even if it means bringing hotdogs in portable coolers . I 'm sure we 'll get use out of it . IRobinson: I think it would help to get some dollars attached to this . Boy , some of these are really expensive and some of them are . ILash: But some of them are just necessities . Andrews : The way I look at this whole budgetary process is , it 's going to I be Lake Ann and then whatever 's left over . How far will it go is kind of the way I look at this . I think with some dollar figures here , will give us a Letter idea how big of a pile of money are we going to put into Lake I Ann . If it 's just too .:lisproportionate , we 're going to have to cut back there . spread it around a little bit . Koubsky : I Guess I see Lake Ann as important and I wouldn 't disagree with I that but if`we 're at that limited of a budget , I would also hate to put all my money _r `, ore park . It 's a big city . There 's a lot of new development . There 's a lot of new areas . People don 't always recreate Idown at Lake Ann Park and I think we need to keep into consideration the entire city . It 's an important project but I hate to start getting pigeon holed and start putting all my money , limited funds into one location where I there 's other locations that obviously need work . So I 'm not saying I 'm against any improvements to Lake Ann but I don 't feel that Lake Ann is the number one priority and everything is second hand . I think we need to go on it as a systematic method and before we reach decisions , figure out what Ieverybody else needs and where our budget lies . . Lash: I agree with that Dave . Even as far as setting this up for next Iyear . The building is going to be there . The building is going to be nice . There 's essentials we have to have . The lifeguard equipment . The first aid equipment . Really personally I don't think any of the other I things are that necessary for the very first year . I mean with construction schedules and I know we want to try and have it done at the beginning of the season but if you look at history , boy there 's a lot of projects that don 't get done on time and we pigeon hole all our money to buy the rental Ithings and food things and all that and then it doesn 't get going right away, and I 'm down across from Lake Ann beach a lot of days during the week and a lot of days there 's hardly anybody over at that beach during the week II so I kind of hate to sink all of our money into supplying concessions and rental things for the weekends and that ': . hat it 's going to boil down to . I think . I Hoffman: Again , when we attach some dollar figures you 'll be able to get a better handle on it . The things such as the dock for the rental boats , I 've tossed around. There 's been discussions of the lifeguards , are the II I Park fl_: Ccr.-rission Meeting July <:r. _ )� 1 Page �7 a docks which are currently in the swimming area necessary? They 're there . Children ldren jump off of , lifeguards guard off of them but in many beaches there 's no c'._ c k` . We could use one of those docks for this rental dock . A nd ews : SDrr7J cities remove the docks because they don 't want them there I for people to get caught underneath and not be useable . Hoffman : Correct . correct , and again we are going to be working with a somewhat reduced budget and I 'll be able to bring in a better figure back later on in the fall but we 've accomplished and are in the process of accomplishing a tremendous amount of capital improvement in 1991 . Those parks which received those improvements are not going to be able to , don 't II • need to see improvements in /992 so the ratio of what we 're going to get done is going to be about the same in 1992 . ' Andrews : 1Jhy don 't we try to get a lot more detail in particular on the concesei.cn are: of Lake Ann and the boat items . I guess those are the two items that I look at as , if we had to cut some corners , that 's where we could cut it from . Lash: Frog, the first year anyway . _ 1 Andrews : -Yeah . I somewhat agree with Jan that the first year the public knowled'ee cf what 's there isn 't going to be fully achieved and I don 't want" to have T1E ,CC3 .0O worth of boats sitting there that nobody even knows are there . Lash: Well and that will really be , you 're liable to , even if we have thel money , thst will be a good trial year to just get feedback from people . You 're Cuing to get calls and people are going to say , well why don't we have hotdogs down here or why don 't you have canoes or why don 't you have sailboats and you 'd maybe get a good feel for what we really should . Hoffman : And why do you have a rental area and not rent anything? Andrews: If that 's the worst complaint we have , that 's not too bad . Lash : Oh , I didn 't even see the page 4 . 1 Andrews: The back page , yeah. Can we move on to Lake Susan Park? Lash: Yeah . Aeration system? What is that? ' Hoffman: To aerate the lake . To preserve the fishery in the winter . The lake freezes out partially or significantly about every third year . With the boat access and the park development , the DNR is beginning to stock walleye and bass in Lake Susan once again and to try to preserve that , an aeration system in Lake Susan had been requested by the public . Any lake_ II within the City of Chanhassen, Lake Susan is the most suitable for an aeration system . Again , there 's grant opportunities available for that through the same grant program which the DNR fishing pier out at Lake Ann was acquired . Through the Corps grant program so it 's included because it would be necessary to preserve that fishery in any sense of form . Otherwise they continue to stock it and it gets winter killed, etc. . I ParK arc Rec hec - , July 2? , 1991 - Page 31 11 Pemrick : What 's a track ride? Hoffman: Track ride is about an $800 .00 item to finish the play area . With the budget that was available for the expansion this year , it could not ac =ommock.to that piece . IPemrick : That 's turning into a nice play area . We go there quite a bit . Lash: Like a lone bar overhead and you get on one side and hang onto the ring and you can slide down . Pemrick: Oh fun . Andrews: A ziploid . Lash: Well we have an archery range . We almost have to get the targets . I put that as a priority . Otherwise that 's kind of a waste . Andrews: I don 't see a lot there that can be eliminated at this point . What are we looking at pavillion improvements? What were the things we were looking at there? Do you recall? Hoffman : Pavillion improvements include evaluating the condition of the fixtures in the bathrooms and those types of things . They were installed 9 years ago ' and they're just going to be starting to be used extensively this year so are we going to run into some problems and are they going to need . Andrews : That 's kind of a monitor rather than necessary a definite budget item? We talked too about vandalism and lighting . Have we done anything to change that for this year or for next year? Hoffman: The lighting of the? IAndrews: The lighting of the pavillion area . Wasn 't that vandalized repeatedly during construction? IHoffman: Yeah , during the construction period when there was lack of activity and a lot of broken glass and that type of thing . There is a safety light on the south side of the building and then parking lot lights IL on the north side . Andrews: Activity in itself should reduce that I would think . Is there I anybody that has any specific additions or deletions for Lake Susan? Okay , let 's move on . I Hoffman: Excuse me Jim. Just one note on the trail link to Chanhassen Hills . The piece of property , Outlot E which is necessary to construct that has not been deeded to the City as of yet . That is an important trail I link because Chanhassen Hills relies on that to access Lake Susan Community Park . Joe Miller , the developer of Lake Susan Hills West , we could ask them to deed that over and they would probably not have a .problem with that . What they 're waiting for is once they go ahead and go into that IIaddition of their housing development , then they require to deed it over I I Park and Rec. Commission Meeting July 23 , 1991 - Page 32 hut not prior to that time . So that is just one question mark on that one item . ' Andrew. : Meadow Green , that seems pretty straight forward . Lash: Do these trees come from- the tree farm? ' Hoffman: Trees will be removed out of the tree farm this fall and placed in the parks . Again , Meadow Green Park is somewhat of an older park but continues to be fairly barren out there in the middle of a maturing neighborhood . The installation of some $400 .00 , $300 .00-$400 .00 , 2 to 3 inch caliper trees . 2 or 3 or 4 of those in strategic locations would help" the appearance and future look and feel of that park location . But then - they are going to be augmented fairly strongly this fall in many park locations by the tree farm . Andrews: Let 's move on . Minnewashta Heights . Lash: Is this the one the lady was in a few meetings ago? ' Hoffman: Correct . Pemrick : Those are the improvements? ' • Hoffman: This year we included the installation of the border, wood and the pea gravel and then next year looking to some sort of potential expansion . $4 ,000 .00-$5 ,000 .00-$6 ,000.00 . Andrews: Let 's leave that in . I think we 've kind of committed ourselves II on that one . Minnewashta Park , funding reserve . Hoffman: The fund reserve is currently at $100 ,000 .00 . As recent activity ' shows , $100 ,000 .00 isn 't going to get us that far and if we have the capability to increase that reserve , the demand is there . The need is there . I 'm not so certain that an extra $50 ,000 .00 is there but we continue looking at it . ' Andrews: I see this as a bit of a priority partly because of what Terry said from Lundgren that there 's going to be a big increase •in development I on the western , going towards the west . • I feel it 's important that we do try to hide some funds . Being in a specific reserve or anywhere but just looking at how we can have some money available so when those western parts ' are really going to need to have some active development.. Lash: If we 're looking at $100 ,000.00 budget and we want to put half of it in the reserve for that? We 're not going to be able to do anything else . I I think it 's a priority yeah but I just can't imagine that we can put $50 ,000 .00 into it . Andrews:. Well I agree with that . You can't put half of our eggs into that . Koubsky: We should put something . It might even be $5 ,000.00 but I think II something . 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 23 , 1991 - Page 34 Hoffman: The comment I received from some of the residents was something ' that would potentially class that park up 20-30-40 years from now . We 'd do some boulevard tree planting along the road bisecting the park from the tennis court up to Pleasant View and to plant that along there so in 20 years the park has some integrity . Some class by having those boulevard trees in that particular location . Andrews: That could be done . I guess I don 't look at that as a big ' priority to me . You look at the whole neighborhood there is basically a bulldoze it down and stick the houses in and plant trees so yes . If we 're going to put in trees , now would be the time so they would be at the right size with the other trees but I look at all along that boulevard there , there are no houses real close at this point yet . Hoffman: Just for the park . Andrews: I guess the way I look at it , if staff has time , if you 've got some trees , go ahead and stick them in the ground but I don't see that as ' something I 'd want to designate money to. I really don 't . I 'm only speaking for myself . Hoffman: The quote I fall back on is , the best time to plant, a tree was 20 years ago . The second best time is today . Lash: If we get them from the tree farm are they free? ' Hoffman : Correct . Lash: It 's just city staff time to do it . - Hoffman: Until they get so large that our tree mover cannot move them . ' Andrews: If we 've got staff time I 'd say do it . Otherwise , I don 't see a funding requirement there . As far as the parking area goes , I don 't think we 're going to address that are we? It 's not a crisis but if it 's more of ' a convenient situation on only a rare basis when they 've got two soccer practices going at the same time . ' Hoffman: There are areas much worse off. Rice Marsh Lake and Carver Beach are much worse off . I Andrews: Pheasant Hills . I anticipate some pretty heavy neighborhood pressure on that park on an ongoing basis . I think we can look at the progression of things . I think grading and surfacing would be a responsible goal for next year . I know I made the comment when the neighborhood group that this isn't the kind of thing that appears over night but it 's something if we could make some progress on it next year and then go into the totlot and the balifield the year after . I think that makes some sense . Lash: That gets pretty expensive though doesn't it? Hoffman: We 'll take a look at doing that one . Again it 's my statement really on staff time . It 's something we can accomplish a great bulk of it - Park a 7 J •- k Loi:,missi c)II PSI C.t 1 j i�g July 2? , 1991 - Page 33 I Hoffman: Again , the $50 ,000 .00 in reserve would not necessarily need to be a portion of the general capital improvement program . We can take a look at our overall bank budget at the end of , as we get closer to this and see what type of reserves we have in there . We also have $100 ,000 .00 reserve which is set aside for matching grants so when we have the opportunity to take advantage of a LAWCON grant . Presently we have $200 ,000 .00 in reserve " and our present capital improvement budget balance is somewhere in the neighborhood of $550 ,000 .00 . That 's going to take some stiff hits with all the activity that is going on and it 's going to reduce it fairly significantly so I 'll bring back some more defined figures for you later on ' in the year . Andrews: Why don 't we look at this as an update item rather than a dollar - II • figure item . North Lotus Lake . That 's my area . I don 't see any of my •neighbors here so I can speak freely . I still feel that we have an adequate play area there now , to be honest . Especially if the swingset , is !' that going to appear? • Hoffman: Correct . ' Andrews: I think we could be okay there if we needed to be and defer any expansion again . As far as installation of trees , there are some up near the play area and to be honest , I think the rest of the park would be best left open . It gets a tremendous amount of field play . Soccer or football or frisbee or whatever it is . I think we could pretty much leave it as is . I think the only need I 've seen lately is parking . That park. has become more than just a neighborhood park with Little League games and soccer games and soccer practices and so forth that the parking area near the totlot or whatever . That 's typically overflowing and they 're parking all ' up and down the street and Fox Hollow and on the grass which is so I don 't know if that 's something we 'd want to budget but it certainly is an ongoing problem . If that means we have to expand the parking area or perhaps widen . Fox Hollow to accommodate off street parking . There are portions of that II road that are barely wider than a car so it 's . Hoffman: It 's interesting to note that problem or that parking takes place " there . It 's the largest parking lot in a neighborhood park . Andrews: But it 's more than a neighborhood park though too . It really does draw in outside activity and it is a very nice park and that 's part of 11 the reason why . It 's got a very good soccer field or ballfield. Lash: Well games are scheduled there. ' Andrews: Yeah. It mows in a lot of people and the tennis courts are busy every night . Usually with several groups waiting so I think we can get by I without any equipment changes. I think we can get by without the trees to be honest . Lash: How about if we just got a few tree farm? ' Andrews: It 's sort of where would they go? There are some up near the picnic area already that were .put in last year , ' 1 r. an_ _ meeting July 23 , 1S'91 - Page 36 I Andrews : I e ree . That 's one that needs some help . There 's not a lot ' other accessible sites near there . Hoffman: It not only serves the Estates now but also Hidden Valley which is just ac largo as the Estates development right next door . Robinson: Where is Chan Estate Mini-Park? That 's up by DataSery then? Hoffman: Correct . Robinson: I see . I got the two mixed up . • Hoffman : Just past McDonald 's on the right hand side . It 's a little known park but we definitely need to bring it into our system . We own it . Lash : Where 's that? Hoffman: There 's a swingset there and a sandbox currently . Ruegemer : West of DataServ . Hoffman: If you drive by McDonald 's on Lake Drive East going towards DataServ . You get a block past McDonald 's . It 's off to the right . • There 's 14rge trees , arborvitaes all the way around it so it 's hidden• from view but if you get into it , it 's a beautiful large expanse . There 's a double swingset currently there and a grill and picnic tables. in the one corner so employees of DataSery can come over there on the lunch hour and sit in that area would be nice and then eventually expansion of play ' equipment or something like that . Lash: How long has that been there? ' Hoffman : A number of years . Andrews: Didn 't know we had it . South Lotus . Curbing access road . ' Robinson: Where is the access road into that? Hoffman: This is the boat access . - 111 Andrews: Okay , we talked about the problem with boats getting off into the grass and talked about widening the pull up ramp out of the water too . Robinson : That 's been done . ' Hoffman: That was widened and a portion of curb was put in. Not only does it look very nice but it also inhibits the car pulling off the side of the road . So if you get a chance , when you drive down there , take a look at it . The curbing would be , it 'd be real advantageous to complete that . If I it 's not a high visibility project, but it 's something we can potentially take a look at . ' Andrews: That 's sort of a preventative maintenance too. If you put the curbing in , you cut down the erosion which would really lead to big money park arty' Rec Commission Meeting , July 22 , 19^1 - Page 35 in house with both the park maintenance and street maintenance folks such as we did at North Lotus Lake . That was the grading was completed in house . Otherwise you 're looking at the contract for Herman Field is $50 ,000 .00 . We 're getting asphalting and road work and site preparation so in order to accomplish that big of a grading project we need to rent equipment but that 's not nearly as expensive as hiring a contractor . Lash: So even if they couldn 't get at it until fall . Hoffman : We just need to keep those residents informed . Take a look at our staff work load for 1992 and make an objective decision on whether or not we could accomplish that in house because we are limited in time and employees and that 's one reason we contract out . We can 't accomplish everything by ourselves . Andrews: Any other comments on Pheasant Hills? I see nothing for Power Hill and Prairie Knoll . Koubsky : I don 't think Power Hill has any development around that does it I Todd? Hoffman: Just reaching , That phase has just been approved with Flamingo ' Hill Road which , or whatever it is goes up in that area so development is occurring . My opinion on Lake Susan Hills West is that we put in a pretty big hunk into Sunset Ridge Park and should try to nuture that one along to get a pretty much established park in that central location and then to look down to future years to pick up Power Hill and Prairie Knoll . It 's an unusual situation in that there 's a multitude of parks in that particular location and when it 's eventually all developed , they 're going to have fine facilities . Prairie Knoll is in the opposite side of Powers Blvd . and that ' neighborhood with the construction of the bridge which will eventually go in this year to , they have easy access to Lake Susan Community Park as Well . Lash: So really , ultimately Prairie Knoll isn 't going to have anything on it anyway is it? Hoffman: Open field and the master plan calls for an open field , sliding area . That type of thing . A trail connection from Dove Court out to the I trail on Powers Blvd . and then a small play structure . Andrews : Let 's move on to Rice Marsh. It was rennovation replacement work . Was that what that was? ' Hoffman: Rice Marsh Lake , play area expansion . Removal of the swingset and that type of thing . They 've received numerous requests on a consistent basis since we took that action to remove that equipment and install a hard ' surface basketball court . To go ahead and see some additional play equipment put back in there . - Lash: That really does need it . As lonc" s we 're having scheduled games over there , there 's got to be something . 1 Park an Rec Commissioi Meeting July 23 , 1991 - Page 38 I Lash : So how much has been done so far? ' Hoffman : The grading at this point . It 's a slow process . You have many backyards which abut the park and some of those folks have sodded all the we to their lot lines . Some have sodded a little past . Some have not ' sodded up to it so they 've needed to locate all of the lot corners and the play areas prior to grading that so they 're in the grading process right . now . They will be finished grading it . Seeding and then when they 're out there grading they 'll subcut for the ballfield . Get the aggregate in there and subcut for the volleyball . Install the sand . Prior to that , finish grading and Feeding . . . install the play structure . It 's going to be similar ' I to the situation which we had at Curry Farms where that play structure went in and it was a barren seeded field but the play structure will be in fairly close proximity to the asphalt trail so residents will be able to walk down the asphalt trail . Traverse the next 50-75 feet across the ' seeded , barren ground . Hop into the play area and be able to make use of it this fall and then next year when that grass is growing . Lash : So that 's all been ordered? Hoffman: Correct . Play area 's here . The backstop is here . The reason it is not slated in 1992 proposed improvements . We 've really been on an every other ; Ear basis for these new park locations . Received $19 ,000 .00 worth of funding this year . Fairly large amount . • ' Koubsky: I think there 's one thing they would need is probably trees because that 's a soybean field . I think with the playground facility and the ballfield , that can probably get into 1992 but it is barren . There 's ' no shade . There 's nothing so if we could . Hoffman: I do concur with Dave however in that that 's a large area and ' it 's getting bigger quickly . When you drive by you say boy , 2 1/2 years ago . . .getting larger by the day . Koubsky : Yeah , Joe Miller seems to be the preferred builder that I 've seen in the area . Hoffman: And again , we 're going to go ahead and offer the playground ' totlot program there next year . It was slated for this year but with no equipment and not even any sense of it being a park , we moved it over to the community park at Lake Susan . Lash: So you could throw some tree farm trees over there too?, Hoffman: Correct . ' Andrews: Okay , park rule signs . 50 signs provides us with, it 's more than 1 per park I assume . Is that some extras? ' Hoffman: About 36 locations for signs which include every park as well as parks that have dual access points and .so;ine additional signs. ' Andrews: We 're talking about metal signs for these? Pai k and Rcc Commission Meeting July 1991 - age 37 if that Ever pot away from us so that perhaps could be another one of those mystical staff projects again . ' Koub_ y : Is that bituminous or concrete? Hoffman: Concrete . Contracted- with a- local contractor . ' Andrews: That would be basically the finishing touch for that part of the project then? ' Hoffman: Correct . Take a look at if the project is , basically the improvement project is basically complete . We will be pulling in through II the street department one last step in that the grade of the hill just as you go down on the right hand side of the .access road is so severe from the initial development that you cannot mow it . It has to grow up in weeds and be trimmed down with a weed . . .that type of thing so they have excess fill ' and they 'll be dropping that in and grading that area out and restoring it so that will be the final phase of this year 's improvement project there . Robinson: No tennis courts in there . Andrews : Next is park rule signs . We 've already talked about that , was that last meeting .we talked about the rules? Koubsky: You missed one there . Andress: Oh , Sunset Ridge Park . Excuse me . Koubsky : That 's mine . That 's a big area over there . I don 't know if any of you ha;vc been there but really that 's the only park that would service I Powers . Ycu know crossing Powers Drive is a lot like crossing Lake Lucy . I guess there are some things scheduled on that 's been real slow because of the weather and the schedule . There was a totlot and volleyball this year? Hoffman: Volleyball , finish grading , seeding and construction of the ballfield . ' Koubsky: And the ballfield this year? Hoffman: Correct . Koubsky: So that will be a big improvement . I guess I 'd put , well I don 't know if we can afford it next year but I guess I 'd keep my eye just when we ' can . I am a hockey rink fan and we only have the two . I 'd like to see a hockey rink go in there when we can afford it and then another one . . .to provide the City with another sport . Currently they have to go elsewhere II for it . Hoffman: We do need to go ahead and wait for the development of the access " road which comes in off of the other side of McGlynn Road . Currently we couldn't access it for plowing or flooding , that type of thing where you 'd need to drive down those little trails which we would break rapidly with a water truck . I • 1 1 Park any Rcc_ Commission Meeting July 22 , 1991 - Page 40 I an eas€rnt to use it to bring it down into Chaska . . . They 're a larger 1 question mark than Eden Prairie . 4,ndrELJ:: L€ t 's try to get a ballpark on that one and see what . . .come back a third tim3 around and see what . . . ' COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATION. ' Lash : I 'm just going to complain again . The dock at Greenwood Shores is way out . It 's over my head . It was today . I couldn 't , before I dragged the garbage cans in . I can 't they 're out so deep now . So I don 't know ' what we can do about it but . It could end up being a liability if somebody 's swimming along and you smack into the post out in the water because you have no idea it 'p out there . Hoffman: The dock . . Pemrick : It 's under water? Lash: Yes . Hoffman: If it 's the same individuals that have done it in the past , in ' talking to the resident that called and informed me that he had talked to those individuals parents and the problem had subsided for a while . It 's back so we ' ll take some measures with Public Safety in calling those folks ' and sitting down and having some conversations . Lash: I mean you don 't know for sure who 's doing it . ' Hoffman: No , you don 't . Lash: We know there was a . Hoffman: We just need to make some inquiries because they 've gone ahead , the residents in the neighborhood have pulled that dock out of there a number of times . Staff has pulled it out of there at least 3 times and staked the thing down and paddlelocked it to the shore and they must be pulling the pole or cutting the chain or something . Lash: Somebody suggested that if we were to put the chain through the wheels , then the wheels wouldn 't be able to go . IHoffman: They 'd have to lift it . Lash: Yeah , and who would do that . So maybe that would be an option too. I mean you hate to have to take it out just because there 's a couple of little creeps out there who think it 's fun to take it out . ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION. ' Andrews: We talked briefly about the slide already haven't we Todd? Very briefly . Park and Red Commission Meeting July 23 , 1991 - Page 39 Hoffman: The poly plate . It will be a relfectorized sign but poly plat material which is indestructible basically . You can 't bend it . You can 't cut it . Can hardly mar it . It 's a wonderful material and most parks are using it . Andrews : Trails , aggregate for the south railroad trail . Do you have any I idea what we 're looking at for dollars at that? Real ballpark on that? Hoffman: I can 't even venture a guess at this time . We need to take a look at volumes and that type of thing . Aggregate which was purchased , it 's cheap but it 's going to be immense . Andrews : On a tight budget I look at this as a large project that 's not going to benefit a lot of people . To start with at least . Pemrick: I think we should find out too when the two that we connect with , ' Eden Prairie and is it Victoria or Chaska? Hoffman: Chaska . ' Pemrick: When are they going to have their 's completed? Hoffman : They want to know the same of us . Eden Prairie is going to move I forward I believe in 1992 . They 're taking a lot of heat as well from the residents and the horse constituents and those types of people would like to see some activity . Their basic opinion which is very true , you have a good opportunity to spend some dollars and get a pretty big investment in value . Whereas if you had to start from scratch , you 'd never be able to accomplish it . Robinson: But is it useable without the aggregate on it? Hoffman: The ballast which is on there ; I wouldn 't want to walk on it . ' Lash: There 's real big rocks . The horses couldn 't walk on it . Hoffman: 8 to 10 inches of railroad ballast . ' Robinson: Then I guess I would agree . For what we 're getting there . Lash: But wouldn 't this come out of our trail fund budget? Hoffman: Park acquisition and development really should be labeled park acquisition and development and trail development . Pemrick: I 'd like to see that proceed. There 's a real demand for that , I from what I 've heard from different people and if we have the added value of connecting with Eden Prairie and Chaska , that 'd be a wonderful trail . Hoffman: Chaska is questionable right now. The length which the Hennepin II County Rail Authority has purchased goes • st across TH 212 where you take the big loop going down into Chaska and t. ,en there 's the railroad overpass . Just beyond that ends in Chanhassen and Chaska is just beyond . So Chaska I is still unclear what they 're doing with it . If they 're going to acquire July 23 , 1991 - Page 42 Koubsky : And in doing that , we did have other options to go with that . We may have gotten a few more items on there but they weren 't nearly as exciting . They're all the 24 , 40 inch thing . They didn 't have any 72 inch slides or anything big that we thought was needed at the school . We 'd just like to stress that Phase 2 is going to be fairly important for the amount ' of kids that are going to be using this . Whether the school participates or not . This is probably going to be the most used piece of equipment in the city . Lash: Did you say that the old swings are staying in? Koubsky : Yes . You can see Jan in the corner there 's a little better plan - ' map . In the red corner of the print . • Lash: What 's the kind of triangle looking . Hoffman: . . .relocated slides , swings , tether ball , four square and basketball . ' Lash: Just those things alone because that.'s where the big kids go for recess . 4th and 5th graders go out there so just the tether ball and the basketball and stuff is going to be real popular . Hoffman : . . .four decks and horizontal bars and two slides and two 7 inch decks over vertical ladders . ' Lash : Well I 'd certainly be in favor for next year if we 're going to allocate money and at least get Phase 2 . ' Andrews : I guess I feel like no matter how futile , it never hurts to try the partners . 50/50 or match or whatever you want to call it . Just to try to shake loose every dollar we can from them and I 'm sure they 'll try to do ' the same thing with us . It 's a bit of brinkmanship here . Who 's going to fight first? But I agree . I 'm glad the approach that was taken was , I 'd rather do it a little bit smaller and do it right rather than just spread it out and not do it right . Even if we have to spread it out for 2 or 3 ' years I think it will be well worth the initial posterity . Lash : Thanks for taking that out and Larry . IAndrews: Any other items? ' Lash moved, Koubsky seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m. . Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Recreation Coordinator IPrepared by Nann Opheim • 1 • July 23 , 1991 - Page 41 }-of • - • - •• . ' _ • - - ' - _ let you know what 's going on down there at the new school . I 'm following up on some of the pressure that Mr . Lambert is receiving in Eden Prairie . They copied us on their letter to their director . Andrews : I guess this a comment on this slide . This kind of bothers me- II still . I think and I 'm sure Todd you probably have already done some of this but I think a discreet comment about what we feel is a quality project here in our area might be appropriate . I don 't think we need to say it 's not fair or it isn't right but I do think we have a very worthwhile project 11 here in City Center . Perhaps with just a comment or two perhaps we could shake loose some more dollars and some additional interest on the School Board . Lash: You know another thought on that is , now that Kathleen Macy has gone from Chan to be Director of Administrator Services , we may have an ally there . Andrews: Any other items that need to be discussed? Hoffman: Just a brief staff presentation on the City Center Park west playground configuration . . . The school gymnasium is in this area . The present swingset is right here as you walk out from the back door . . . Then there 's the overhead monkey bars over here . That 's going to be reincorporated . . . Proposals which were thought . . . Phase 1 would be this piece right down in the south. Phase 2 is called out in this configuration !' and Phes - 3 . As you can see , Phase 1 is small but potential for Phase 2 and Phase 3 are very exciting because the next time you bring in a phase , you start out with this small little corner but then Phase 2 incorporates the rest of the entire area . . .north and south . Phase 1 is $10 ,000 .00 . The , entire- project is approximately $50 ,000.00 in todays dollars . Being Phase 2 and Phase 3 being about $20 ,000 .00 worth of equipment . Pemrick : Combined? I Koubsky: Each. Hoffman: $50 ,000 .00 total . . . Lash: Boy it 'd be nice if we could get the District to give us $10 ,000 .00. ' Koubsky: Go halves . Hoffman: Again , I don 't want to be blunt . I don 't feel real . . .financial I contributions . The APT committed $8 ,000 .00 . . .school district as a last ditch effort . I called Kathleen at home and said. . . But again, everything will be there . All you have to do is buy $20 ,000 .00 worth of equipment and ' then . . . The border will be there . The pea rock will be there. . .so it 's not going to be boring on this site . . .other pieces of play equipment that are currently there . The contract was jL' t. awarded last night for the handicapped equipment and that incorporat_ f all three phases . So that 's a II huge addition on the north side with the tennis courts being refurbished this year . . . - 1