CC Packet 2006 01 23AGENDA
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
MONDAY, JANUARY 23, 2006
CHANHASSEN MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD
5:30 P.M. - CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION, FOUNTAIN CONFERENCE ROOM
Note: If the City Council does not complete the work session items in the time allotted, the
remaining items will be considered after the regular agenda.
A. ITEM DELETED (2005 MUSA Area: Discussion Regarding East/West Collector Road).
B. Consider Increase in Fire Relief Pension.
C. City Code Amendment Prohibiting Cooking and Fuel Storage on Decks and Patios of
Vertically Stacked Multi-Family Dwelling Units.
There will be an EDA Meeting Immediately Following the Work Session.
7:00 P.M. – REGULAR MEETING, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER (Pledge of Allegiance)
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
D. Invitation to February Festival.
CONSENT AGENDA
All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the city council and will
be considered as one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is
desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. City
council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item. Refer to the council packet for
each staff report.
1. a. Approval of Minutes:
- City Council Work Session Minutes dated January 9, 2006
- City Council Summary Minutes dated January 9, 2006
- City Council Verbatim Minutes dated January 9, 2006
Receive Commission Minutes:
- Planning Commission Summary Minutes dated January 3, 2006.
- Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes dated January 3, 2006.
- Park & Recreation Commission Summary Minutes dated December 20, 2005
- Park & Recreation Commission Verbatim Minutes dated December 20, 2005
b. 2006 Sealcoat Project 06-02: Authorize Preparation of Plans & Specifications.
c. West 78th Street Extension, Project No. 04-14: Approve Westwood Church
Reimbursement for Construction.
d. Frontier Third Addition: Approve Assignment of Development Contract.
e. John Henry Addition: Approve Development Contract Extension for Time of
Performance.
f. Approve Resolution Designating Yosemite Road as an MSA Route.
g. Chanhassen Lions Club: Approval of One-Day Temporary On-Sale Beer License
for February Festival, February 4.
h. City Code Amendment: Correction to Chapter 18 Previously Approved by the
City Council on January 9, 2006.
i. Approval of 2006 Key Financial Strategies.
j. City Code Amendment: Chapter 4, Fees Concerning Increasing Storm Water Use
Fees.
k. Old Village Hall Plaza: Approve Contract Additions Associated with ADA Ramp
Including Railing and Modifications to Back Stoop.
l. Approval of Pay Equity Report.
m. Chanhassen Electric Substation, Located East of the Gedney Pickle Plant and
North of Stoughton Avenue, Applicant: Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative:
Approval of a Conditional Use Permit with Variances and a Site Plan Review
Application to Construct a Local Electric Distribution Substation on Property
Zoned Industrial Office Park (IOP).
n. Christensen Subdivision, Northwest of 6710 Golden Court, Applicant: Robert
Christensen: Request to Subdivide Property into 2 Single-Family Lots with a
Variance to Allow Two Flag Lots.
LAW ENFORCEMENT/FIRE DEPARTMENT UPDATE
a. Sgt. Jim Olson, Carver County Sheriff's Department
b. Chief Gregg Geske, Chanhassen Fire Department
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
3. Donation to Fire Relief Fund, Bonnie Labatt.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
4. 2006 Street Improvement Project 06-01: Public Hearing.
5. Paul & Andrea Eidsness, 630 Carver Beach Road: Public Hearing on Metes & Bounds
Subdivision Request with a Variance for Right-of-Way.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None
NEW BUSINESS
6. Jacob’s Tavern, Located at the Southeast Corner of Highway 5 and Century Boulevard,
Applicant: Truman Howell Architects: Request for Site Plan Approval for a 6,808 sq. ft.
Restaurant Building on 2.02 Acres.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION
Correspondence Section
ADJOURNMENT
A copy of the staff report and supporting documentation being sent to the city council will be
available after 2:00 p.m. on Thursday. Please contact city hall at 952-227-1100 to verify that
your item has not been deleted from the agenda any time after 2:00 p.m. on Thursday.
GUIDELINES FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council Meeting. In the interest of open communications, the Chanhassen City
Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the public to address the City Council. That opportunity is provided
at every regular City Council meeting during Visitor Presentations.
1. Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor Presentations will be acknowledged by the Mayor.
When called upon to speak, state your name, address, and topic. All remarks shall be addressed to the
City Council as a whole, not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is not a member of the City
Council.
2. If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please designate a spokesperson
that can summarize the issue.
3. Limit your comments to five minutes. Additional time may be granted at the discretion of the Mayor. If
you have written comments, provide a copy to the Council.
4. During Visitor Presentations, the Council and staff listen to comments and will not engage in discussion.
Council members or the City Manager may ask questions of you in order to gain a thorough
understanding of your concern, suggestion or request.
5. Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature, directed at an individual
either by name or inference, will not be allowed. Personnel concerns should be directed to the City
Manager.
Members of the City Council and some staff members may gather at Houlihan’s Restaurant & Bar, 530 Pond Promenade in Chanhassen immediately
after the meeting for a purely social event. All members of the public are welcome.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
DATE: January 12, 2006
SUBJ: Consider Increase in Chanhassen Fire Department Relief
Association Pension
BACKGROUND
The City of Chanhassen has a 42-member on-call volunteer/paid Fire
Department (established in 1966). Volunteer firefighters often receive payments
due to the time commitment needed to perform the duties of a firefighter, such
as training, 24-hour on-call for service, and weekly meetings. In Chanhassen,
volunteers are compensated in two forms—an hourly rate of $8 for call-outs,
training, meetings, etc., and the Fire Relief Association Pension.
Currently a firefighter would be fully vested after 5 years of service. As an
example, a firefighter with 7 years of service would receive the following
pension:
7 years of service x $4,000 = $28,000 lump sum payment.
All current members are on a lump sum pay-out based upon their years of
service; however, we do still have 12 retired members receiving a monthly
annuity of $410 per month. The last time we increased the pension fund was in
2001 with a rate increase of 48.15% (see Attachment #1).
ACTION REQUIRED
Staff has met with representatives of the Fire Relief Board and has negotiated a
three year increase of 8.75% per year beginning in 2006, with the condition that
the funding ratio remains above 75% (see Attachment #2). Additionally, the
current retirees receiving a monthly annuity will receive a lump sum payment of
$430 per year for three years. These increases will help the Fire Department in
recruiting new firefighters and also help to retain our more experienced
firefighters.
One of the areas you need to pay attention to when considering a rate increase is
the funded ratio. Attachment #3 shows two forecasts of the pension fund’s
assets and liabilities. In both cases, the funding level never dips below 75%
Mayor & City Council
January 12, 2006
Page 2
C:\DOCUME~1\karene\LOCALS~1\Temp\Fire Pension Staff Report.doc
over the next three years. You will also notice that the City of Chanhassen does
not have to make a contribution, based on these assumptions, over the next three
year period. The funding source for the benefit increase would come from state
fire aid and investment earnings derived from the pension fund assets (see
Attachment #4 for the history of city contributions, state aid, and investment
income).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff would recommend that the Mayor and City Council approve an 8.75%
annual increase for 2006-2008 to the Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Relief
Association with the condition that the funding ratio remains above 75%, and a
lump sum payment of $430 per year for the years 2006-2008 to current retirees
receiving a monthly annuity. This item will be placed on the February 13th
agenda for action.
ATTACHMENTS
1. History of Chanhassen Pension Fund Increases.
2. Key Financial Cities Comparison and Proposed Rate Increases.
3. Forecasts of the Pension Funds with a 5% and 7% Return.
4. Revenues and Expenses by Source 1995-2004.
5. Chanhassen Fire Relief Association Investment Review.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal
DATE: August 19, 2005
SUBJ: Adoption of a City Code Amendment Prohibiting Fires or Cooking
Devices on Vertically Stacked, Multi-Family Balconies or Patios
Attached is a proposed City Code amendment that would prohibit fires or cooking
devices on balconies of vertically stacked multi-family dwellings, or within fifteen
feet of any building on the ground level. The buildings affected would be any
structure where there are two or more vertically stacked dwelling units, e.g. the
average apartment or condominium building. Twin homes and four, six or eight-unit
buildings such as Mission Hills, Arboretum Village, or townhouses in the Chaparral
area would not be affected. This amendment only affects dwelling units which are
stacked one on top of the other.
Even though the City and Fire Department have been fortunate not to have any
balcony-related fires, a number of cities in the metro area have had large apartment
fires that were determined to have started on balconies. Over the past few years, our
Fire Department has responded to grill fires, leaking LP tanks burning, deep fat fryer
fires and similar fires at single-family dwellings. These fires were quickly
discovered and occasionally extinguished by the homeowners.
Two weeks ago, a letter was sent to all apartment/condo owners/managers requesting
feedback on the proposed ordinance language. The only responses received were
from Summerwood of Chanhassen and Centennial Hill Apartments. Both are in
agreement with the ordinance and Summerwood has similar language in their lease
agreements. This ordinance language will give the Sheriff’s Department and Fire
Department the necessary authority to enforce and issue citations if warranted.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached City Code amendment
prohibiting fires or cooking devices on the balconies of vertically stacked multi-
family dwelling units, or within fifteen feet of any building on the ground level.
Approval requires a simple majority vote of those City Council members present.
ML/be
Attachment
g:\safety\ml\memogerhardt8-29-05
Invitation to February Festival
The City of Chanhassen is once again, proud to announce our winter special event, the 13th
Annual “February Festival.” This special event, out of a series of year long special events, is
being sponsored by the City of Chanhassen and the Chanhassen Chamber of Commerce in
cooperation with our local business community. February Festival will be held on Saturday,
February 4th. At this time, I invite all area residents, their families and friends, to join me on
Lake Ann. The event will begin at 12 noon including activities like skating, sledding and a
bonfire to warm yourself. S’mores kits will be sold by Boy Scout Troop #330 and the
Chanhassen Lions will offer hot food and concessions. The Ice Fishing contest will run from
1:00-3:00PM including $2500 in fish prizes and $4000 in door prizes. You can also play bingo
on the ice or search for the Friends of the Library medallion hiding somewhere in the city. The
person who finds the medallion receives a $1500 prize. Ice fishing and raffle tickets for the
event are $5 for adults and children. You may purchase as many tickets as you like. I look
forward to seeing everyone there.
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
JANUARY 9, 2006
Mayor Furlong called the work session to order at 5:35 p.m..
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilwoman Tjornhom, Councilman
Labatt, and Councilman Peterson
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Lundquist
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Justin Miller, Kate Aanenson, Paul Oehme, Jill Sinclair,
and Todd Hoffman
PCA ENVIRONMENTAL ASSISTANCE OPEN GRANT, WIND TURBINE.
Jill Sinclair presented a power point presentation, along with Marcus Zbinden and Ron Olsen
from the Environmental Commission outlining the grant application which is looking for
matching dollars. Peter Mohr was present representing the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum
who has agreed to partner with the City in providing a site to build the wind turbine. Todd
Gerhardt asked for clarification on the cost savings generated from a wind turbine. Ron Olsen
passed out a handout showing payback numbers. Councilman Peterson asked for clarification
on the Arboretum’s intent for use of the wind turbine and how much Arboretum and city staff
time will be involved with the project. He also asked if the Arboretum would go ahead with the
project without the City’s assistance. Mr. Mohr explained that they would not be interested
without city assistance, as there are numerous other projects the Arboretum can do now.
Councilman Peterson stated his feelings that the City has a lesser obligation to educate the public
and philosophically is unsure of using city dollars. Jill Sinclair walked through time and money
that would be asked for from the City and stated that no money has been budgeted for 2006.
Marcus Zbinden explained the county’s grant application process. Todd Gerhardt stated staff
can investigate other entities that have grant money available but that this item was being
brought before the council because of the preliminary grant application deadline of February 1,
2006. Councilman Labatt asked how the proposed wind turbine compared in size to the one at
Elk River. Councilwoman Tjornhom asked for clarification on the use and permanence of the
structure. Mayor Furlong stated the Arboretum is the most logical site, especially from a
learning standpoint, and felt it was a good idea to move forward with the process.
2006 KEY FINANCIAL STRATEGIES.
Todd Gerhardt thanked City Council and Justin Miller for their input and putting together the
format. He reviewed the priority rankings for 2006 and discussed items that will be brought
back to future work sessions. Mayor Furlong asked that the council concentrate on items ranked
with 1 and 2’s. Todd Gerhardt asked City Council members to comment on 3 or 4 rankings
where all other council members ranked items at 1 and 2. Councilman Labatt asked where the
new fire station site ranked. Todd Gerhardt explained that staff is always looking for
opportunities that become available and explained what staff is doing currently and what is
City Council Work Session – January 9, 2006
2
planned for 2006. Mayor Furlong asked staff to explain what the city is doing specifically to
educate the public regarding the city’s growth. Todd Gerhardt explained how staff will proceed
with the Key Financial Strategies in 2006.
Mayor Furlong adjourned the work session meeting at 6:30 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
JANUARY 9, 2006
Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.. The meeting was opened with the
Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman Labatt, Councilwoman
Tjornhom, Councilman Peterson and Councilman Lundquist
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Justin Miller, Kate Aanenson, Paul Oehme, Todd Hoffman
and Tom Knowles
PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS:
David Jansen Chanhassen Villager
Kurt Papke Planning Commission
Debbie Lloyd 7302 Laredo Drive
Janet Paulsen 7305 Laredo Drive
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mayor Furlong welcomed the people in the audience and
people watching at home and asked if there were any modifications to the published agenda.
There were none.
ORGANIZATIONAL ITEMS:
A. DESIGNATION OF OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER. Councilman Labatt moved,
Councilman Peterson seconded to appoint the Chanhassen Villager as the city’s official
newspaper. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
B. APPOINTMENT OF ACTING MAYOR. Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman
Peterson seconded to appoint Councilman Lundquist as Acting Mayor. All voted in favor
and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
C. APPOINTMENT OF FIRE CHIEF. Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman
Labatt seconded to reaffirm Mr. Greg Geske’s appointment as Fire Chief. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to approve the following
consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations:
a. Approval of Minutes:
-City Council Work Session Minutes dated December 12, 2005
-City Council Verbatim & Summary Minutes dated December 12, 2005
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
2
Receive Commission Minutes:
-Planning Commission Verbatim & Summary Minutes dated December 6, 2005
b. Approval of Amendment to the 2006 Meeting Schedule.
c. Amendment to Chapter 18 of City Code, Subdivision.
e. Enterprise Rent-a-Car: Request for Conditional Use Permit to Rent Automobiles at 227
West 79th Street (Located at Master Collision).
f. 2006 Street Improvement Project 06-01: Approval of Drainage and Utility Easement
Acquisition for Storm Pond Improvements.
g. Approve Joint Powers Agreement with Carver County/MnDot for TH 101 Corridor Study
South of Lyman Boulevard.
h. Accept $1,000 Donation to the Chanhassen Recreation Center from TCF Bank.
i. Resolution#2006-01: 2006 Street Improvement Project: Accept Feasibility Study and
Call for Public Hearing for Koehnen Area Street Reconstruction Project 06-01.
k. Resolution #2006-02: Arboretum Business Park 6th Addition, Project 03-08: Accept
Public Utilities.
l. TH 101 GAP Project 04-06: Approval of Land Purchase Agreement with Lake Susan
Apartments.
n. Resolution #2006-03: Approve Amended Resolution Adopting Assessment Roll for the
TH 312/212 Improvement Project Nos. 03-09-2, 04-05 & 04-06.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Joe Miller, along with Elizabeth Hoffman and Jan Hellbrick
from TCF National Bank presented the City with a check in the amount of $1,000 for the
Chanhassen Recreation Center.
D. AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 20 OF CITY CODE, ZONING. Deb Lloyd asked
staff to explain why they’re recommending changing the setback requirement from pipelines.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council approve
amendment to Chapter 20 of City Code, Zoning. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
3
O. KENTON & JULIA KELLY, 6539 GREY FOX CURVE: APPROVAL OF A
WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A DOCK.
Councilman Lundquist asked staff to explain how this application differs from other requests to
put docks through the wetlands on Lotus Lake. He also asked legal counsel if it is within the
City’s power and jurisdiction to prevent structures or further subdivision as a condition on that
wetland alteration permit.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council
approve a Wetland Alteration Permit to construct a dock at 6539 Grey Fox Curve for
Kenton and Julia Kelly. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote
of 5 to 0.
STONEFIELD, 1601 LYMAN BOULEVARD, PLOWSHARES DEVELOPMENT, LLC:
A. PUBLIC HEARING ON VACATION OF DRAINAGE & UTILITY EAEMENTS.
B. REQUEST FOR REZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT, A2
TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, RSF.
C. REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION INTO 30 LOTS, 1 OUTLOT AND PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY WITH VARIANCES.
Public Present:
Name Address
Mark Edman 1572 Bluebill Trail
Brent Hislop 1851 Lake Drive West #550
Curtis Neft Westwood Professional Services
Matt Amack 8633 Alisa Court
Craig J. Renir 8668 Flamingo Drive
Matt Goldstein Lundgren Bros. Construction
Steve Buan 8740 Flamingo Drive
Kate Aanenson presented the staff report and update from the Planning Commission. Mayor
Furlong opened the public hearing. Mark Edman, 1572 Bluebill Trail asked for more
clarification on the drainage pond. He also noted that he received notice that the meeting on
December 6th had been cancelled, so there was confusion as to whether or not that meeting was
held. Todd Hoffman reviewed the trail plan and how it impacts the drainage pond. Craig Renir,
8668 Flaming Drive asked for an explanation of why the berm and the trees needed to be
removed and the location of the new pond. Todd Gerhardt suggested holding an informational
meeting with the neighborhood to discuss ponding and drainage in the area. Chris Amack, 8633
Alisa Court also got a notice of meeting cancellation. His biggest concern was erosion.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The
public hearing was closed.
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
4
Mayor Furlong clarified the process that will occur between this approval and final plat.
Councilwoman Tjornhom asked for clarification on the temporary cul-de-sac. The applicant,
Brent Hislop stated he was available to answer questions. After council discussion the following
motions were made.
Resolution #2006-04: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to
approve a resolution vacating the existing storm water ponding easement, street, drainage
and utility easement and drainage and utility easement as defined on the attached vacation
description and contingent upon City Council approval of the final plat. All voted in favor
and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to approve Planning Case
#05-37 for Rezoning from Agricultural Estate District, A2 to Single Family Residential for
the Stonefield Subdivision as shown on plans stamped “Received November 18, 2005”. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to approve to approve the
preliminary plat for Subdivision Case #05-37 for Stonefield for 30 lots and 1 outlot with a
right-of-way width variance, as shown on the plans stamped ‘Received November 18, 2005’,
subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant will be required to meet the existing site runoff rates for 10-year and 100-year,
24-hour storm events. The proposed enlargement of the existing stormwater pond must be
designed to meet the City’s minimum standards and coordinated and approved by the City
Water Resources Coordinator.
2. The storm sewer must be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Storm sewer sizing
calculations and a full-size drainage map must be submitted with the final plat for staff
review and approval.
3. Drainage and utility easements must be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm
drainage system including ponds, drainage swales, and wetlands up to the 100-year flood
level.
4. Staff recommends that Type II silt fence, which is a heavy duty fence, be used adjacent to the
existing wetland, existing creek area, and around the proposed pond. In addition, tree
preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. Erosion control blankets
are recommended for all of the steep 3:1 slopes with an elevation change of eight feet or
more.
5. All plans must be signed by a registered Civil Engineer in the State of Minnesota.
6. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will have to be obtained, including but not
limited to the MPCA, NPDES, Watershed District, MN Department of Health, Carver
County and the Williams Pipe Line Company.
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
5
7. The developer must obtain written permission from the Williams Pipe Line Company to
perform the proposed grading within the easement. The developer is responsible for
complying with all conditions of the Williams Pipe Line Company and assumes full
responsibility for work performed within this easement.
8. On the utility plan:
a. Show all the proposed storm sewer pipe type, size and class.
b. Show the sanitary sewer pipe slope and class.
c. Show watermain pipe class (C900).
d. Add a storm sewer schedule.
e. Show the existing storm sewer between Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 within the center of the 20-
foot utility easement.
f. Show the stormwater manholes rim and invert elevations.
g. Add a note to remove the temporary pond outlet control structure.
h. The last street-accessible storm manhole discharging to the stormwater pond must be
manhole with sump.
i. Add a note: any connection to an existing structure must be core drilled.
j. Extend the storm sewer farther to the south along the proposed street.
k. Remove Lots 7 and 8 backyard storm sewer and add a storm sewer along the property
line between Lots 4 and 5 and between Lots 8 and 9 block 4.
9. On the grading plan:
a. Show Type II silt fence adjacent to wetland, pond, creeks, etc.
b. Show the benchmark used for the site survey.
c. Use class 5 storm sewer in the roadway; revise the note under general grading and
drainage notes accordingly.
d. Extend the swale between Lots 1 and 2, Block 4 farther to the east.
10. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered civil engineer
and a permit from the City's Building Department must be obtained. In addition,
encroachment agreements will be required for any retaining wall within a public easement.
11. The underlying property has not been assessed for sewer or water improvements. The 2005
trunk hookup charge is $1,458.00 per unit for sanitary sewer and $2,955.00 per unit for
watermain and the SAC fee is $1,525.00 per unit. All of these charges are based on the
number of SAC units assigned by the Metropolitan Council. Sanitary sewer and watermain
hookup fees will be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit
issuance.
12. All disturbed areas must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to
minimize erosion.
13. Any off-site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner.
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
6
14. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will
be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes.
15. The developer is responsible for 100% of the cost and construction of the lift station and
forcemain and any associated costs.
16. All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City’s
latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant is also required to
enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in
the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and
the conditions of final plat approval.
17. Add a “dead-end road” sign at the cul-de-sac.
18. On the plat, show all existing and proposed street names.
19. Add City Detail Plate Nos. 1001, 1002, 1004, 1005, 1006, 1009, 2001, 2101, 2109, 2110,
2201, 2204, 3101, 3102, 3104, 3106, 3107, 3108, 3109, 5200, 5203, 5204, 5206, 5214, 5215,
5216, 5217, 5221, 5232, 5234, 5240, 5241, 5300, 5301, 5302, 5302A and 5313.
20. Show the street lights and a stop sign on the plans.
21. Submit public utility plans and profile for staff review.
22. City Forester’s Conditions:
a. A minimum of two overstory trees shall be required in the front yard of each lot.
b. The developer shall be responsible for installing all landscape materials proposed in rear
and side yard areas.
c. Tree preservation fence shall be installed at the edge of the grading limits prior to any
construction.
d. Tree preservation on site shall be according to tree preservation plans dated 10/14/05.
Any trees removed in excess of proposed tree preservation plans will be replaced at a
ratio of 2:1 diameter inches.
23. In the absence of parkland dedication, it is recommended that Stonefield pay full park
dedication fees at the rate in force upon final platting. At today’s rate, these fees would total
$120,000 (30 lots x $4,000). Additionally, the applicant is required to construct the
neighborhood asphalt trail connector to the property line as depicted on their preliminary
plan submittals.
24. Water Resource Coordinator’s Conditions:
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
7
a. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be
maintained around Wetland D. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and
staked in accordance with the City’s wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland
buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and shall pay
the City $20 per sign.
b. All structures shall maintain a setback of at least 40 feet from the wetland buffer edge.
c. The applicant shall work with the City’s consultant to accommodate regional and site-
specific storm water needs.
d. The approximate location and extent of drain tile shall be shown on the plans. The
applicant shall provide details as to whether the tile line will be removed, abandoned in
place or remain. If the tile is to remain, the flow from the tile shall be accommodated in
the design of the storm water management plan.
e. The applicant shall provide rate control and storm water treatment to reduce off-site
impacts. To provide a low-gradient means for controlling rate and volume, the applicant
shall consider cooperating with the City to construct a wetland in the rear portions of any
number of Lots 1-8, Block 3. In the event that the applicant is interested in pursuing
wetland construction for banking purposes, this planning shall be integrated with the
City’s consultant’s storm water infrastructure planning.
f. Drainage and utility easements (minimum 20 feet in width) shall be provided over all
existing wetlands, storm water infrastructure and storm water ponds.
g. The developer asserts that, due to the steep grade in the southern portion of the property,
custom grading would not save any additional trees. In addition, the developer maintains
that the slope of the road and the location of the retaining wall make custom grading lots
impractical. If the developer demonstrates to the satisfaction of staff that custom grading
for their typical house pad would not result in additional significant tree preservation,
mass grading of this area may be approved.
h. The existing outlet structure of Pond A shall be removed and replaced in accordance with
the City’s standard detail. A stable emergency overflow (EOF) shall be provided for the
pond.
i. The portion of the silt fence that runs from the pipeline easement through Lot 7, Block 3
shall be moved upslope to the west by 30 to 60 feet to more clearly define the grading
limits. The area of property between the silt fence and the gully and property line shall
be seeded and mulched to control weeds and get a desirable cover crop in areas that were
recently farmed.
j. A temporary basin shall be constructed in the vicinity of Lots 6 and 7, Block 3. The
temporary sediment basin shall be installed prior to disturbing upslope area. A
temporary perforated riser and stable emergency overflow (EOF) for the basin shall be
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
8
installed; details shall be included in the plan. The basin shall be properly sized for the
watershed area, according to NPDES requirements (i.e. The basins must provide storage
below the outlet pipe for a calculated volume of runoff from a 2-year, 24-hour storm
from each acre drained to the basin, except that in no case shall the basin provide less
than 1,800 cubic feet of storage below the outlet pipe from each acre drained to the
basin).
k. Chanhassen Type 2 silt fence shall be provided for the perimeter of the site up to Lot 10,
Block 3. From there, Type 1 may be used. Silt fence shall be shown on the plans around
Lots 1 and 2, Block 1.
l. Curbside inlet controls are needed; Wimco type or ESS type (or approved similar
protection) inlet controls shall be used. Curbside inlet protection shall be provided for
existing inlets adjacent to the site exit on Osprey Lane. City standard inlet protection
details 5302 and 5302A shall be included in the plans. The proposed rear yard catch
basin protection shall be revised; Wimco type, ESS type or equal must be used. The
proposed silt fence shall be installed with additional rock around Chanhassen type 1 silt
fence.
m. The plans shall be revised to show energy dissipation for the flared end section on Lot 7,
Block 3.
n. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All
exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year
round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames:
Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can
Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area
10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.)
Flatter than 10:1 21 days
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any
exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a
curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or
other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water.
o. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and
street sweeping as-needed.
p. In order to fund the maintenance and expansion of the BC-P4.10 storm water pond and
construction of additional capacity, the costs will be allocated among the benefiting
properties. The total cost of materials and construction will be divided by the number of
acres in the resulting subwatershed. The City will be responsible for the acres
contributing from land already developed, park land and land to be developed in the
future (e.g., the Bongard parcel). The developer will be responsible for the acres
contributing from their development. If, for any reason, the regional storm water facility
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
9
is not constructed, the developer will be responsible for providing storm water quality
and quantity management on the subject property and paying Surface Water
Management connection charges in accordance with City Code. At this time, the
estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is
$65,364.
q. In conjunction with the BC-P4.10 storm water ponding project, land in addition to the
land shown in Outlot A may be required. At this time, the estimated amount of land is
approximately 0.5 acres. The developer and the City will seek to agree upon the terms of
the use of land for ponding should additional land be required. The developer, if required,
shall provide additional land for ponding.
25. Fire Marshall Conditions:
a. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must be
either removed from site or chipped.
b. Fire apparatus access roads and water supply for fire protection is required to be
installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the
time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided.
A fire apparatus access road shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed
load of fire apparatus and shall be serviced so as to provide all weather driving
capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire Code Section 503.2.3.
c. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections once construction of the
new roadway allows passage of vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota Fire Code Section
501.4.
d. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees,
shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure
that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to
Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1.
e. Fire hydrant spacing is acceptable.
f. Submit proposed street names to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire
Marshal for review and approval.
26. Building Official Conditions:
a. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before
building permits will be issued.
b. Demolition permits must be obtained prior to demolishing any structures on the site.
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
10
c. The developer must submit a list of proposed street names for review and approval prior
to final plat of the property.
d. Retaining walls more than four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and
a building permit must be obtained prior to construction.
e. Separate sewer and water services must be provided each lot.
f. Existing wells and on-site sewage treatment systems on the site must be abandoned in
accordance with State Law and City Code.
27. The retaining walls shall be maintained by a Homeowners Association.
28. The City shall not be responsible for maintenance of storm water infrastructure on Lots 7, 8,
and 9, Block 3.”
29. In the event that the regional pond project is not constructed, the applicant has proposed
the installation of a second outlet structure on Pond A. In that event the existing outlet
structure that is failing must also be replaced. The cost of a new outlet structure to
replace the existing failing structure would be borne by the City, but the replacement
would be done by the applicant.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
GALPIN CROSSING, NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF
HIGHWAY 5 & GALPIN BOULEVARD, RICH RAGATZ: REQUEST FOR
RECONSIDERATION OF CONCEPT PUD FOR A 10 UNIT TWIN HOME PROJECT
AND A 66,000 SQ. FT. OFFICE DEVELOPMENT.
Roger Knutson explained the council’s options for reconsideration of this item. Kate Aanenson
presented an update on the request from the applicant, Epic Development. Rich Ragatz with
Epic Development gave his reasons for asking for reconsideration of setbacks, number of
buildings, and waiting for completion of the retail market study. After council discussion it was
decided not to reconsider the item. No motion was needed.
ORCHARD GREEN, 2611 & 2621 ORCHARD LANE, PETER KNAEBLE: REQUEST
FOR SUBDIVISION REVIEW FOR 4 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.
Public Present:
Name Address
Steve Lynch 5225 Park Avenue
Matt Pavek 7110 Plymouth Avenue No, Golden Valley
John Dragseth 2600 Forest Avenue
Jacqueline A. Dorsey 311 So. Water Street, Northfield
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
11
Kate Aanenson presented the staff report and Planning Commission update on this item. Matt
Pavek with Terra Engineering stated they concur with the staff report and would be available for
questions. Mayor Furlong opened the meeting for public comment. John Dragseth, 2600 Forest
Avenue addressed procedure regarding condition 22 which addresses a property line dispute.
He asked that the City Council approve the preliminary plat as submitted to the Planning
Commission which included condition 22. Jacqueline Dorsey, 311 South Water Street,
Northfield representing the land owners Sandra and Dwayne Johnson addressed the issues of
Torrens property and condition 22. After council discussion the following motion was made.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council
approve preliminary plat for Planning Case 05-42, Orchard Green for 4 single family lots
as shown on the plans prepared by Terra Engineering and stamped “Received November
4, 2005”, subject to the following conditions:
1. Applicant shall submit a landscaping plan showing 19 trees as replacement plantings. Plan
shall specify size, species, and locations.
2. All areas outside of grading limits shall be protected by tree preservation fencing. Fencing
shall be installed prior to grading and excavation for homes on each lot. Any trees shown as
preserved that are removed or damaged shall be replaced at a rate of 2:1 diameter inches.
3. The water and sanitary hook-ups for lot 2 must be moved to the driveway in order to preserve
the 12” maple.
4. The developer must obtain all permits necessary to remove the existing homes.
5. The grading plan must be revised as follows:
a. All proposed contours must tie in to existing contours, particularly the 992’, 990’ and
988’ contours on the west side of Lot 1; and the 996’, 994’ and 992’ contours on the east
side of Lot 3.
b. Staff recommends that the low floor elevations for Lots 1 and 2 be lowered one foot to
achieve an 8 foot walkout. Staff recommends that steps be installed in the garage on Lots
3 and 4 to achieve an 8 foot walkout.
c. A drainage breakpoint elevation must be shown northeast of the building pad corner on
Lot 3.
6. Hydrology calculations must be submitted and shall include pre- and post-development
volume and peak discharge rates for the 2, 10 and 100 year rainfall events.
7. Any proposed retaining wall over four feet high requires a building permit and must be
designed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota.
8. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will
be required to supply the City with a detailed haul route and traffic control plan.
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
12
9. The developer must acquire a Work in Right of Way Permit from the Engineering
Department before commencing work in the right of way and shall submit a financial
security to ensure that Orchard Lane and Forest Avenue are properly restored after the
services have been installed.
10. The developer shall pay the $29,298.00 trunk and lateral water and sewer fees in cash with
the final plat or assess them to the lots within the proposed development. The lateral
connection charges can be assessed at 8% for 8 years. The trunk hookup charges can be
assessed at 8% for 4 years.
11. Detailed grading, drainage, tree removal and erosion control plans must be submitted with
the building permit for each lot.
12. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited
to the MPCA and the Watershed District.
13. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All
exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round,
according to the following table of slopes and time frames:
Type of Slope
Time
(maximum time an area can remain unvegetated
when area is not actively being worked)
Steeper than 3:1 7 Days
10:1 to 3:1 14 Days
Flatter than 10:1 21 Days
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed
soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter
system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man
made systems that discharge to a surface water.
14. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street
sweeping as-needed.
15. The plans shall be revised to show the location(s) of the rock construction entrance(s).
16. The plans shall be revised to expand the drainage and utility easement in a straight line from
the point where the 978 elevation intersects the east lot line of Lot 4, Block 1, to where the
978 elevation intersects the 20’ sanitary sewer easement at the southern edge of Lot 4, Block
1. Standard drainage & utility easements shall be dedicated in all other locations.
17. Based on the proposed developed area of approximately 2.02 acres, the water quality fees
associated with this project are $2,208; the water quantity fees are approximately $5,464. At
this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat
recording, is $7,672.
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
13
18. In the absence of parkland dedication, it is recommended that Orchard Green pay full park
dedication fees at the rate in force upon final platting. At today’s rate, these fees would total
$16,000 (4 lots x $4,000).
19. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any existing structures.
20. Provide a cleanout on the sewer service for Lot 3.
21. Final grading plans and soil reports must be submitted to the Inspections Division before
building permits will be issued.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
BLUFF CREEK TWIN HOMES, SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LYMAN BOULEVARD &
HIGHWAY 101, MARTIN SCHUTROP: REQUEST FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENT TO INCORPORATE THE PROPERTY IN THE 2000 MUSA;
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BLUFF CREEK
OVERLAY DISTRICT; AND SUBDIVISION WITH VARIANCES FOR AN 18 UNIT
TWIN HOME DEVELOPMENT, 2 OUTLOTS AND PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY.
Kate Aanenson presented the staff report and Planning Commission update on this item.
Councilman Lundquist asked for clarification on the current MUSA boundary and pedestrian
access to Bandimere Park. Councilwoman Tjornhom also stated a concern with the trail going to
Bandimere Park. Councilman Peterson asked for clarification on the elevation drawings. Mayor
Furlong stated a concern with the proximity of the cul-de-sac to 101, and access control from the
site onto Lyman. The applicant, Martin Schutrop stated he was available to answer questions.
Mayor Furlong opened the meeting for public comment. Debbie Lloyd, 7302 Laredo Drive
asked for justification of the 20 foot setback for Lots 1 and 2 versus 30 and asked for a parking
provision within the development. After council discussion the following motions were made.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council
approve the following items subject to the revised Findings of Fact:
A. Resolution #2006-05: The City Council approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment
incorporating the property in the current Metropolitan Urban Services Area (MUSA)
subject to review and approval by the Metropolitan Council.
B. Approval of the Concept and Preliminary Planned Unit Development rezoning the
property from A2, Agricultural Estate District to PUD-R, Planned Unit Development-
Residential incorporating the development design standards contained in the staff report.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
C. Approval of the preliminary plat creating 18 lots, two outlots and right-of-way for
public streets with a variances for the public street right-of-way width and the use of
private streets to access lots 8, 9, 12, 13, 16 and 17, plans prepared by Ryan Engineering,
dated October 28, 2005, subject to the following conditions:
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
14
1. A sidewalk connection on the south side of the street from the internal street cul-de-sac to the
intersection of Lyman Boulevard shall be provided.
2. The development shall pay full park fees in effect at the time of final plat approval.
3. Applicant shall resubmit for city approval a landscaping plan that includes 84 trees. At least
one tree is required in each front yard. Common areas must be sodded and provided with
irrigation. Native plantings will be required along the southern edge of the development
parallel to the wetland. These plantings shall be species selected from the Bluff Creek
Management Plan planting list.
4. Applicant shall meet the minimum number and types of plantings required for the
bufferyards.
5. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees,
shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that
fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to
Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1.
6. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections once construction of the new
roadway allows passage of vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota Fire Code Section 501.4.
7. Fire apparatus access roads and water supply for fire protection is required to be installed.
Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of
construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided.
8. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of
fire apparatus and shall be serviced so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities.
Pursuant to Minnesota Fire Code Section 503.2.3.
9. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be
removed from site or chipped.
10. Submit street names to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for
review and approval.
11. Two additional fire hydrants will be required; one at the intersection of Lyman Boulevard
and the new proposed road, and one in the area of Lot 13/14.
12. A minimum 16.5 foot buffer strip shall be maintained from the delineated edge of the
wetland. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the
City’s wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the
direction of City staff, before construction begins and shall pay the City $20 per sign.
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
15
13. A drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated over all of Outlot B. The developer may
dedicate Outlot B to the City.
14. All structures shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer.
15. All structures shall meet a 40 foot structural setback from the Primary Corridor boundary of
the Bluff Creek Overlay District as required by Chanhassen City Code. In addition, no
grading shall occur within the first 20 feet of the Primary Corridor. The plans shall be
revised to eliminate grading within 20 feet of the Primary Corridor.
16. The plans shall be revised to include the City of Chanhassen’s standard detail 5300 for silt
fence. Type 2 silt fence shall be used along the southern grading limits and at the normal
water level of the pond. Type 1 silt fence shall be used elsewhere. Silt fence shall be
installed around the storm water pond at the pond’s normal water level until surrounding
areas have adequate vegetative erosion control established.
17. The plans shall be revised to include City of Chanhassen standard detail 5302A for Wimco or
similar catch basin inlet protection.
18. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year
round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames:
Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can
Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area
10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.)
Flatter than 10:1 21 days
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed
soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter
system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man
made systems that discharge to a surface water.
19. All erosion and sediment control measures shall be installed and maintained in accordance with
City, Carver County Water Resource Management Area and MPCA permit requirements.
20. A SWPPP should be developed by Ryan Engineering for the site which would encompass an
erosion and sediment control plan. The SWPPP is needed prior to applying for the NPDES
permit.
21. Erosion control blanket is needed for the slopes NE of lot 18 and the southern slopes from about
the 912 / 910 proposed contours to the bottom of the slope within 14 days of final grade.
22. Energy dissipation at the FES inlet to the permanent storm water pond is needed. A detail is
needed.
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
16
23. The proposed storm water basin must be used as a temporary sediment trap during construction
and must be excavated in the initial construction phases of the development. A temporary
diversion berm should be constructed to divert runoff from lots 18 to 11 into the pond. This
should be included in the SWPPP.
24. A temporary outlet and / or a temporary stabilized EOF for the temporary basin is needed.
25. Inlet controls are needed for the CB’s within 24 hours of installation. A detail is needed;
Chanhassen city specifications are Wimco type inlet control or equal.
26. The silt fence as proposed is running up and down the slope along the west and east boundaries
of the site. The silt fence must be installed with J-hooks to effectively provide sediment control
and not concentrate runoff to the south.
27. A concrete washout area is needed in the SWPPP; silt fence, sump area and rock driveway
should be used and could be located in Outlot A.
28. A permanent outlet structure is needed for the permanent storm water basin in the southwest
corner of the pond. Detail is needed.
29. A stable emergency over flow (EOF) is needed for the permanent storm water basin. Riprap or
a turf reinforcement mate (TRM) could be used and specifications and detail area needed.
30. The contractor shall inspect daily all erosion control measures and perform maintenance on
BMPs as needed or required.
31. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat
recording, is $21,857.
32. The final plans must include the following revisions:
a. Existing contours within 100 feet of the proposed development must be shown on the
plan.
b. Note the top and bottom of wall elevations for all retaining walls.
c. Note the location and elevation of the emergency overflow on the east end of the cul de
sac.
d. A full-size drainage area map must be submitted.
e. A five-foot wide concrete sidewalk must be constructed on one side of the street.
f. Show the proposed street light layout.
g. A stop sign must be installed at the intersection at Lyman Boulevard.
h. All plan sheets must be signed by an Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota.
33. If import or export of material is required for the development of this property, the applicant
must submit a detailed haul route to the City.
34. The existing well and septic system must be properly removed/abandoned.
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
17
35. The developer must field verify the sewer and watermain stub locations and elevations. If
the stubs have not been installed the developer shall directional bore the utilities under
Lyman Boulevard. All costs and permits associated with this work would be the developer’s
responsibility.
36. Public utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's
latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and
specifications must be submitted at time of final plat and shall include all required
information.
37. The applicant is required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the
necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee
installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval.
38. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g.,
Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES
Phase II Construction Site Permit), Department of Health, MCES, Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers, Minnesota Department of
Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval.
39. Access and maintenance agreements shall be recorded against the benefiting properties for
the private streets.
40. Buildings over 8,500 sq. ft. in size must be protected with an automatic fire protection
system. The State of Minnesota is in the process of revising Chapter 1306 of the Minnesota
State Building Code regarding fire protection systems. It is not yet entirely clear how these
changes will affect residential construction. It is important that the developer meet with the
Inspections Division prior to final design to determine what ramifications, if any, the new
requirements will have on the project.
41. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. Existing
utilities and on-site sewage treatment systems must be abandoned in accordance applicable
regulations.
42. A final grading plan and soils report must be to the Inspections Division before permits can
be issued.
43. Retaining walls over four high must be designed by a professional engineer and cannot be
constructed until a building permit is obtained.
44. The applicant shall create a Homeowners Association to take responsibility of the retaining
walls and maintain them.
45. Walls and projections within 3 feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire-
resistive construction.
City Council Summary – January 9, 2006
18
46. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by
the Building Official.”
47. That the developer provides trail access to the southwest corner of 101 and Lyman.
48. That the developer revises drawings to adhere to the 5 foot setback requirements.
49. The developer shall install a 16 inch watermain along 101 and loop the watermain within the
project to this watermain. The city will reimburse the developer for the costs of oversizing
the pipe for the 16 inch watermain.
D. Approval of Conditional Use Permit to develop within the Bluff Creek Overlay District
subject to the following conditions:
1. No grading is allowed within the first 20 feet of the Primary Corridor boundary.
2. All structures must meet a 40 foot structural setback from the Primary Corridor boundary.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: Mayor Furlong invited council members to attend a meeting
relating to emergency preparedness within the county being held at Carver County on Saturday,
January 14, 2006.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: Todd Gerhardt updated the council on the building
permit valuation summary. He also noted that the Chamber of Commerce has selected the City
as a finalist as the Business of the Year recipient and provided an update on a carbon monoxide
scare at a residential home which occurred on Christmas Eve.
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to adjourn the meeting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 8:55
p.m..
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 9, 2006
Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.. The meeting was opened with the
Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman Labatt, Councilwoman
Tjornhom, Councilman Peterson and Councilman Lundquist
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Justin Miller, Kate Aanenson, Paul Oehme, Todd Hoffman
and Tom Knowles
PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS:
David Jansen Chanhassen Villager
Kurt Papke Planning Commission
Debbie Lloyd 7302 Laredo Drive
Janet Paulsen 7305 Laredo Drive
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Mayor Furlong: Thank you and good evening to everybody here joining us in the Council
Chambers as well as those watching us at home. We’re glad that you joined us. I’d like to wish
everybody a happy new year as well. Hope that their holidays went well. This is our first
meeting of the calendar year and as such there are a few organizational items that are necessary
for us to address so at this time, first I would ask if there are any modifications or changes to the
agenda that was distributed with the council packet? If there aren’t, then without objection we’ll
proceed with that agenda.
ORGANIZATIONAL ITEMS:
A. DESIGNATION OF OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER.
Mayor Furlong: The City will use this newspaper for communicating with our residents and
other interested parties with regard to our activities. Staff has recommended the Chanhassen
Villager be appointed as the official newspaper. I guess at this time I would ask if there’s any
questions for staff on this item. At all. Or any discussion. If not, is there a motion to adopt
staff’s recommendation?
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to appoint the Chanhassen
Villager as the city’s official newspaper. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
2
B. APPOINTMENT OF ACTING MAYOR.
Mayor Furlong: This is a person, member of the City Council who will run council meetings,
stand in at ceremonies and execute other official documents in the mayor’s absence. We’ll open
up the floor for nominations for acting mayor.
Councilman Labatt: Mayor, I would nominate Councilman Brian Lundquist.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Is there a second?
Councilman Peterson: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Second. Any other nominations? Seeing none we’ll close nominations without
objection.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to appoint Councilman
Lundquist as Acting Mayor. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a
vote of 5 to 0.
C. APPOINTMENT OF FIRE CHIEF.
Mayor Furlong: The fire department elected Greg Geske to another 2 year term as our fire chief
in December of last year. Last month. Staff’s recommending that the council reaffirm Mr.
Geske’s appointment as Fire Chief. Is there a motion to that effect?
Councilman Lundquist: So moved.
Councilman Labatt: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Made and seconded. Any discussion on that? Very good, Mr.
Geske did a great job and we look forward to 2 more years of his service to this city as chief.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to reaffirm Mr. Greg Geske’s
appointment as Fire Chief. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a
vote of 5 to 0.
CONSENT AGENDA:
Debbie Lloyd: Debbie Lloyd, 7302 Laredo Drive. I’d like to remove Chapter 20, the discussion
specifically on the setback. 20 feet from any gas pipeline easement. I’d like to understand the
vote on that issue. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. That was 2(d) I believe, is that correct Ms. Lloyd? It was Chapter 20?
Debbie Lloyd: Yes.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
3
Mayor Furlong: Okay, that’s item 2(d). We’ll also bring that up after visitor presentations.
Without objection. Any other items?
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to approve the following
consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations:
a. Approval of Minutes:
-City Council Work Session Minutes dated December 12, 2005
-City Council Verbatim & Summary Minutes dated December 12, 2005
Receive Commission Minutes:
-Planning Commission Verbatim & Summary Minutes dated December 6, 2005
b. Approval of Amendment to the 2006 Meeting Schedule.
c. Amendment to Chapter 18 of City Code, Subdivision.
e. Enterprise Rent-a-Car: Request for Conditional Use Permit to Rent Automobiles at 227
West 79th Street (Located at Master Collision).
f. 2006 Street Improvement Project 06-01: Approval of Drainage and Utility Easement
Acquisition for Storm Pond Improvements.
g. Approve Joint Powers Agreement with Carver County/MnDot for TH 101 Corridor Study
South of Lyman Boulevard.
h. Accept $1,000 Donation to the Chanhassen Recreation Center from TCF Bank.
i. Resolution#2006-01: 2006 Street Improvement Project: Accept Feasibility Study and
Call for Public Hearing for Koehnen Area Street Reconstruction Project 06-01.
k. Resolution #2006-02: Arboretum Business Park 6th Addition, Project 03-08: Accept
Public Utilities.
l. TH 101 GAP Project 04-06: Approval of Land Purchase Agreement with Lake Susan
Apartments.
n. Resolution #2006-03: Approve Amended Resolution Adopting Assessment Roll for the
TH 312/212 Improvement Project Nos. 03-09-2, 04-05 & 04-06.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
Deb Lloyd: Tonight you’ll be addressing Planning Case 05-36, the Bluff Creek Twin Homes.
The PUD-R. I just wanted to point out one thing.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
4
Mayor Furlong: Can I ask you, are you going to, maybe we can bring it up when that item
comes up on the agenda if you’d prefer.
Deb Lloyd: Certainly. Yes, I’d be prepared then. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, is there anyone else who’d like to address the council on visitor
presentations. If not, this evening with our just passed consent agenda one of the items was the
acceptance of a donation offered by TCF Bank of $1,000 for our Chanhassen Recreation Center.
That motion prevailed with our passing of the consent agenda and this evening Ms. Elizabeth
Hoffman and Mr. Joe Miller are here with the TCF Bank so I would invite them forward at this
time.
Joe Miller: Hi, good evening City Council members. My name is Joe Miller. I’m a
representative of TCF National Bank. We’re excited to add our second convenient location in
Chanhassen, just up the road on 7900 Market Boulevard. As part of our tradition we do like to
make a donation with each new branch we open and on behalf of TCF we want to make $1,000
donation to the Chanhassen Rec Center. This is also Jan Hellbrick who is an assistance manager
at that location over there.
Mayor Furlong: Well we thank TCF Bank for their donation to our rec center. We’re proud of
our rec center and I know that money is going to be well used to expand some of their offerings
out there so again, thank you very much for that. At this point we’ll pick up a couple of the
items that were pulled off our consent agenda. We’ll start in order that they were listed on the
agenda.
D. AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 20 OF CITY CODE, ZONING.
Mayor Furlong: So we’ll pick up item 1(d) which is relating to the Chapter 20. Is Ms. Lloyd
still here? Okay, if you’d like to come back forward and state your questions. This is on
Chapter 20. You had a question on the setback requirement or clarification.
Deb Lloyd: Do I need to reintroduce myself?
Mayor Furlong: That’s fine.
Deb Lloyd: Okay. You know the internet is a marvelous tool today that allows you to research a
lot of topics and it’s very, I think the setback from easements for pipelines and other hazardous
materials is a very interesting topic. In the staff report it suggests that there’s a 50 foot setback
that is suggested in Washington and I’m just curious, we’re going to a 20 foot setback. And we
have some setbacks that are presently, was it 65 feet?
Kate Aanenson: I’ll answer all these when you get done.
Deb Lloyd: Yeah, you have the information in front of you, so I’d just like to know why we’re
deviating so much. Granted there will be homes that would be non-conforming to a new
standard or other structures that would be, but that’s such a significant deviation and there is
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
5
some risk, although perhaps the chances of a gas explosion are minimal. There is risk associated
with that. So I’d just like to understand why we’re going from a 20 foot, or we’re going to a 20
foot from a recommended 50 and we have an array as high as 65 presently. That’s all. I’d just
like to hear the council’s discussion on the item.
Mayor Furlong: Well I guess I would ask Ms. Aanenson, maybe you could, I know this issue
was brought up before the Planning Commission too so maybe you could address it.
Kate Aanenson: The reason that it was precipitated at the Planning Commission is, we have the
Williams Pipeline that runs through the City of Chanhassen. However the easement was secured
is depending, you know the easement itself varies depending on how it was secured. Sometimes
they were given 50 feet. Sometimes less. Right now there is no standard setback from a
pipeline. In researching this item with the city attorney, it’s stated in State Code is a city can
adopt their own standard for this, so in looking at modeling what other cities have, and what we
currently have. If you look in the staff report it ranges from 12 to 46 feet and it’s kind of
development driven so we want to have a uniform practice. The other thing to consider is the
pipe itself may not always be centered in the easement so sometimes it’s punitive. It may be in
excess of 70 feet, depending if the 55 foot easement so we really took a look at the depth. We
considered that. The depth of the utility itself. Again this is for high transmission. When you
look at the issue, part of the ordinance on page 2 of what we put together for the staff, it doesn’t
say that it’s the transmission pipeline. If you look at the ordinance it clearly states it’s for the
transmission so what we’re looking at this is really put in place for the Williams Pipeline. So
based on what we currently have in place, which is a significant number of subdivisions that are
in place and that ordinance, we felt like in looking at what’s coming in in the future and the
zoning associated with that, we felt that 20 foot seemed like an adequate setback. And again we
have nothing right now. It’s a 0 setback requirement so that’s where we’re moving to. To 20.
Mayor Furlong: And I guess for clarification, it also speaks to the no buildings were located
within the easement.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct, but you could build right up to it and that’s what we’re trying to
do is give even a little bit better buffer so, you have to outside the easement, which is true with
any city easement. You just can’t go into it if it meets setback so this would go above and
beyond that.
Mayor Furlong: Mr. Knutson, any comments or thoughts on the question?
Roger Knutson: Kate and I have discussed this extensively a month or so ago and it seems
reasonable to me. That’s 40 feet of additional land that cannot be developed so you have to look
at what safety requires and give people reasonable use of their property, and right now additional
40 feet of property will be able to be used for development. And we think that provides good
protection based on what we know.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any questions for staff on this issue or anything else with
regard to Chapter 20?
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
6
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Kate, what did we use as a tool beforehand?
Kate Aanenson: We didn’t have one. It was really up to the developer depending on what they
did. Some of them, based on the type of development were able to provide a little bit greater
setback. But right now you, you were allowed to build up to the easement. Again, sometimes
the easement was 65 feet so you had kind of a built in buffer if it was centered, but it’s not
always the pipeline isn’t always centered in the easement. So really this is giving us an
additional buffer, and that was our goal. We found in some circumstances when the pipeline’s
not centered, that we had some concern about putting single family next to that. And the state
law does allow us to do our own ordinance above and beyond that and that’s the research we
found out working with the city attorney.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any discussion on this matter? My sense is, having heard
this and the information in the report, that staff gave it thoughtful consideration. Came up with a
compromise and for that reason I think I was comfortable originally going in so once, still am. Is
there any other discussion on this? If not, is there a motion to adopt item 2(d).
Councilman Lundquist: Motion to approve.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilman Labatt: Second.
Councilman Peterson: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion? I’m sorry, that’s item 1(d)
off the consent agenda. Not 2(d).
Councilman Lundquist: 2(d).
Mayor Furlong: It is 2(d)? I was right. I thought I was wrong but I was right. We have a
motion in front of us that’s been made and seconded.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council approve
amendment to Chapter 20 of City Code, Zoning. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
O. KENTON & JULIA KELLY, 6539 GREY FOX CURVE: APPROVAL OF A
WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A DOCK.
Councilman Lundquist: Kate, walk me through as we’ve gone through a couple of these, this
one’s been going on for a long time but recently how this one differs from the other ones that
other applicants have been in with these docks through the wetlands on Lotus Lake.
Kate Aanenson: Well this one is unique in the fact that they’re acquired an outlot to assemble
with their property to secure dock rights. They’re all unique, every time you do one. You know
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
7
typically the one we most recently looked at prior to this didn’t have riparian rights. While this
is an outlot, it clearly has riparian rights. It’s the fact that it was kind of what precipitated this is
the staff’s belief that that outlot was, the…provide just open space and not be used as a structure.
The one we most recently looked at, the City Council, that one, you couldn’t get to the depth to
make that work so it didn’t meet all the standards of a dock, while this one is on an outlot. It can
meet the dock standards just as the impact to mitigate that for the, because it’s going through the
wetland. It can meet the depth on all that. And I think at the end of the day the goal with the
wetland alteration permit, what we’re trying to prevent is them selling off additional property
and allowing somebody else to get a dock, and through the wetland alteration permit, which is
our goal is not to have additional docks. So that’s really, through a few years of negotiations,
that’s the ultimate goal is not to have additional docks on that outlot and that’s what the wetland
alteration permit will give us.
Councilman Lundquist: Roger, that’s within our power and jurisdiction to prevent structures or
further subdivision or put that as a condition on that wetland alteration permit?
Roger Knutson: Mayor and council members, yes it is because if we didn’t, without that
condition they could sell off that outlot and someone could use it for a stand alone dock. That’d
be in violation of our zoning ordinance. Docks are allowed as an accessory to a principle
dwelling. You can’t just by a lot and just put a dock on, unless you qualify as a recreational
beachlot, which is a whole different animal.
Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Okay, that’s all I had. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, any other questions on this item? If not, is there a motion?
Councilman Lundquist: Motion to approve.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion?
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council
approve a Wetland Alteration Permit to construct a dock at 6539 Grey Fox Curve for
Kenton and Julia Kelly. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote
of 5 to 0.
STONEFIELD, 1601 LYMAN BOULEVARD, PLOWSHARES DEVELOPMENT, LLC:
A. PUBLIC HEARING ON VACATION OF DRAINAGE & UTILITY EAEMENTS.
B. REQUEST FOR REZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT, A2
TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, RSF.
C. REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION INTO 30 LOTS, 1 OUTLOT AND PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY WITH VARIANCES.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
8
Public Present:
Name Address
Mark Edman 1572 Bluebill Trail
Brent Hislop 1851 Lake Drive West #550
Curtis Neft Westwood Professional Services
Matt Amack 8633 Alisa Court
Craig J. Renir 8668 Flamingo Drive
Matt Goldstein Lundgren Bros. Construction
Steve Buan 8740 Flamingo Drive
Mayor Furlong: There are a number of items here, the first one of which and while it’s listed
under public hearing is related to vacation of existing drainage and utility easements. There’s
also a request for rezoning of the property and request for preliminary subdivision so staff report
please and make sure at some point that we get into the public hearing. We don’t want to.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. Remind me when I get, but I’m going to wrap them all together. Kind
of go back to the vacation. Kind of site where the property is. The subdivision and then back,
circle back around to why we need to do the vacations.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: So if I forget you can help remind me to open up the public hearing.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
Kate Aanenson: Subject site, the Goers property is located off of Lyman. The current driveway
comes that way but this subdivision actually will come off of Osprey Lane. It’s the only way to
access this property. Wooded area on the south. So this is the existing. There is a 50 foot right-
of-way existing on that. That’s the variance that you see before you tonight, is we think that
transition from the 50 to the 60. This item was heard before the Planning Commission on
December 6th to review the development. They approved, voted 6-0 to approve the subdivision
itself. I’ll go through the subdivision. The critical issues there and then like I said, I’ll circle
back and talk about the project itself. Again they’re splitting part of the Goers’ property, the
property to the south of this. This is heavily wooded. There was a question brought up earlier at
the Planning Commission meeting as preservation of trees. This is not in the Bluff Creek
Overlay District. The Bluff Creek Overlay District is further south of this so this is treated. The
wooded area as we do with any other project for the tree preservation and there’s a requirement
to actually replace a significant amount of trees. Part of this property is currently farmed so.
Another question that arose, there are changes that you approved tonight regarding the
subdivision and zoning ordinance. The zoning ordinance, there wouldn’t be a change that
would, there is a setback requirement from a pipeline that they would have to meet. That’s in the
zoning ordinance. They have accommodated that. There’s other changes on the plat that they
would have standing on that because by the time that’s get published this plat would be through
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
9
so they would have to make those changes on the subdivision itself. There is some extensive
grading on the site, and then also the city is working. There’s a drainage issue on the project
itself too and I’ll go through that for a minute. Again as I mentioned it was farmed. Heavily
wooded. You’re looking at some neighboring property. Looking at how this piece ties together.
Part of what the staff looks at, I just want to kind of back out a little bit. One of the projects, this
may be a little hard to see but part of what we look at is making sure all the pieces work together
so actually engineering looked at how this property ties together. There was a question on the
Bongaard property, which is on this side, how that would be served. There’s a barn over here.
Continuation of this temporary cul-de-sac. How that would serve. There is a barn there. Until
such time that that property is subdivide, that would stay the way it is. The house could stay.
It’d be a similar subdivision more than likely. The barn would probably go away so that was one
of the things we looked at. It does meet all the lot width requirements. Again this kind of a new
model that we’ll be looking at. You saw the zone changes tonight. Included in your packet are
the home plans itself. That’s the direction we’re moving in looking at some of these issues
regarding configuration of home size on the lot. So the builder has, developer has supplied home
plans. Specifically some of the smallest lots to show that they can meet the standard
requirements because we do have a 90 foot frontage. Some of the developers now are moving up
to actually 74 feet lot size so if you have 10 foot on either side, it’d be difficult to make that, so
they’ve demonstrated they can meet all the requirements for their home placement plan. So the
one issue we really struggled with was the retaining wall in and of itself. You can see along this
red line, it might be a little hard to see but there’s a retaining wall that goes up to 11 feet and
back down. It’s the only way that really this property can be subdivided. Some of the pieces
that are left in the city as you know are the more challenging ones with some rolling topography
that adds a lot of interest but also require some retaining walls. This retaining wall, the eastern
side was actually reduced quite a bit so we worked with the developer to revise and reduce a lot
of the retaining walls and their locations on the subject site itself. One of the other issues, there’s
a drainage problem ongoing for this property. There’s a large drainage area that this will
encompass. You can keep zooming. We’re in this area. Here’s Osprey through here. This is
that larger drainage area that we’ll be picking up, so the city had initiated through storm water
management to do a ponding project, so we’re partnering, because this pond serving this
development will actually pick up a greater area than the subdivision itself. So the developer
will be compensating the city for his portion of the drainage but we’re also oversizing the pond
and then when the other developments come in they’ll pay for that oversizing, so that pond will
be built to accommodate the rest of the development, and it’s also picking up some of the
drainage that’s coming currently off of Osprey Lane. There will be no park and trail dedication.
There will be fees taken at this time. Again the one issue with the street, there’s existing 50 foot
streets so we’re making a transition between the Shenandoah plat and that vacation review. The
new subdivision will accommodate the temporary pond will go away because we’re creating a
new pond. Again the vacation of existing right-of-way, we’re making a transition between one
end of 50 and 60, blending that and there’s an existing utility. Again those are no longer needed
and they’ll be incorporated in the new plat so we need to vacate that and that’s the portion you’ll
be holding the public hearing on. With that, the developer has responded to the staff in writing.
We’re working just trying to resolve some of the issues in good faith. With that, made
significant changes from when it came in. Looking at the gas line. Accommodating that.
Trying to get the setback. That is accommodated the new 20 foot so working through all those
issues, reducing the grading. Tree preservation and reduction of retaining walls so we have, they
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
10
have sent us a letter as of last week and so noted, we’re moving in the direction. We’d like to
keep the conditions in there as tracking so when they come back for final plat those don’t fall
through the cracks, so with that we are recommending approval and then I guess at this point I’d
ask you to open the public hearing regarding the vacation of the easements. With that I’d be
happy to answer any questions that you have.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Why don’t we go ahead and open the public hearing regarding the
vacation of the easements based upon the staff report, and then we may get back to other issues
regarding the rezoning request and subdivision of preliminary plat. So at this time, without
objection I will open the public hearing with regarding to the issue so say with the vacation of
the existing easements across the property as outlined in item 4(a) in our agenda. Anybody, any
interested party please come forward to the podium and state your name and address.
Mark Edman: Good evening members of the council. My name is Mark Edman. My address is
1572 Bluebill Trail. I actually back up to the pond or the drainage area you’re talking about, and
I guess I just want a little bit more clarification as to actually what is happening to that area and a
little more I guess clarification as to is it getting larger? Is it getting smaller? Is it moving? Just
kind of a little bit more from that standpoint. Also just as a note, the meeting that happened on
the 6th, I got some kind of notice that said that meeting had been cancelled so I just, from that
standpoint I don’t know what happened but there was some confusion there as to whether or not
that meeting was going on. So not that it really would have made that much difference but I
wish I would have known because I didn’t know that meeting was actually happening. So
anyway, but if you could clarify the drainage for me.
Kate Aanenson: Sure. I believe Lori has spoken to you too?
Mark Edman: No. Not me.
Kate Aanenson: Okay. I think to one or two of the neighbors. I’ll let Paul interject too if he has
some additional comments or even Todd Hoffman regarding the parks. There is a trail that exists
that’s going through that. Part of this is park property, so again as I indicated the City’s working
with an engineering firm to design ponding to accommodate runoff that’s oversized, kind of an
oversized pipe running through and causing erosion on Mr. Goers property so this will
accommodate that, plus the Bongaard property so we’re servicing a larger area which is the
city’s goal. So it’s a 3 cell pond. There will be some vegetation that needs to be removed but
this is the location. I know that was a concern of some of the neighbors that some of the trees
will have to be removed. And it’s Todd’s goal also to try to, I believe try to tie up a trail through
that to get access to the park in and of itself. But so there will be a deeper, bigger pond to
accommodate that.
Mark Edman: More space? Is it going to be larger or is it just going to be deeper?
Kate Aanenson: Mostly deeper. You want to come up here and point to it Todd.
Mark Edman: That’s the new one.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
11
Todd Hoffman: This pond will be enlarged here to the west. To this bow right here. The trees
that are currently out there on the hole or in the berm right now are primarily going to go.
Kate Aanenson: They have to go, yep.
Todd Hoffman: They should not be there in the first place on that embankment, and then we’re
having a third trail connection put in off of the new road at this location. We have our trail
connection to the park off of Bluebill. We currently have a connection off of Mallard Court. In
the future we’ll be working with the residents to connect all three of those with an asphalt trail to
the base of the sliding hill to provide some more convenient access throughout the park system.
Mark Edman: Okay, so the trees you’re talking about, only the ones that are right along there.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. Those will probably be removed with that. And part of that issue is
too, is we need to get in to maintain that so. That pond. And one of the other issues that was
brought up regarding vegetation was the sliding hill. Slowing people down as they move
towards the backs of those lots. Looking at some of those issues too.
Mayor Furlong: Does that answer your question?
Mark Edman: I guess.
Mayor Furlong: This is a public hearing. Interested parties, please come forward if you’d like to
the podium. State your name and address please.
Craig Renir: Hello, I’m Craig Renir. I live on Flamingo Drive. I actually live straight down on
the other side of the pond. Right in here. I’m wondering, why do the berm and the trees need to
be removed? What are the advantages of that? Because I’d like to keep the berm there as a
visual barrier until they redevelop and… And also it brings in those squirrels and birds and
things into the area. And why would it have to be removed I guess. What are the advantages for
removing a berm and trees?
Mayor Furlong: Okay. It’s a fair question. Would staff like to?
Kate Aanenson: If we could save it and make the functionality work, we would but really to get
the desired, you have to meet certain standards as far as slope and depth and to get it on that site,
it’s the only way it can be done.
Craig Renir: I was wondering, I don’t know if they can zoom on this. I guess we have the same
out here.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Craig Renir: And here they actually, well you were saying they were moving this pond…
Kate Aanenson: It’s a temporary. That’s correct. The temporary will go, right.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
12
Craig Renir: And they’ll be building a new pond.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. Right now what’s being done there right now is inadequate. We have
horrible erosion problems through that property. It’s inadequate. So again, we’re serving a
much larger. Part of this is picking up Lake Susan Hills. Part will pick up Bongaard’s as it’s
eroding now and then this development itself, so again it’s serving a regional area. That’s why it
needs to be so big.
Craig Renir: How about you say you’re moving a pond here at the end, a temporary pond as
well as a new one.
Kate Aanenson: That temporary pond is inadequate in size and capacity.
Craig Renir: Well I understand but where is the new pond going to be? This pond is already
here.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, it’s going to be reshaped.
Craig Renir: Okay…
Kate Aanenson: Correct, and then there’ll be two other ones that go there, yeah.
Todd Hoffman: And one will go down here.
Craig Renir: This pond is here.
Todd Hoffman: That’s here. That’s here. This is the new one that’s going to be built. These
two will be reshaped and enlarged.
Craig Renir: Do you have a topographical map or an aerial?
Kate Aanenson: That’s what this is.
Craig Renir: Yeah the aerial map, this is the flood zone already. All this area. And why
wouldn’t you not build the new pond to an area that’s already lower and a flood zone now? See
actually there’s a break…pond here reaches this corner and this is all low land. Every spring this
all floods the way it is and then carries down the creek…
Kate Aanenson: We’ll take a look at it.
Craig Renir: I’m just wondering if you put the wall here, a berm and put an additional pond
here.
Kate Aanenson: …it’s very complex as far as… Right, that’s what we’re trying to solve.
There’s an existing pond there. We’ll look at it.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
13
Craig Renir: But a lot of, I don’t know, the berm is something I think we can talk to, I know you
need a. I also understood the pond’s over 6 feet deep. Is that true?
Kate Aanenson: Right.
Craig Renir: This pond, they’re saying to go deeper with it. I believe the pond here is 6 feet…
Kate Aanenson: Well, it’s also the integrity of that pond isn’t functioning as it should be either
so.
Craig Renir: Well actually the house, we have 3 pipes coming into it now and one leading out.
Todd Hoffman: The outlet structure’s failed on that, isn’t it?
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Todd Hoffman: Yeah.
Kate Aanenson: If you look at what’s going, I don’t want to get really technical but if you look
at what’s going through right now, it’s about 100 cubic feet per second. We’re trying to reduce
that down to like 99, so we’re reducing the volume so you need more capacity to make the pond
as big as we can on that site so that’s the goal. And we’re working with the consultant. I believe
Lori has walked it, physically looked at the best we can. We certainly can revisit that and.
Mayor Furlong: In terms of the design and.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. Correct.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor if I could step in here. I think we should probably look at the overall
development itself and as it relates to the ponding, I think we should sit down with the
neighborhood and talk about some alternatives and discuss the overall construction of these. I
think we had some informational meetings and unless they’ve messed up on our notice or
something there and sit down with the neighborhood so they feel comfortable what’s going on
there. But if, I think we can do that in the next couple of weeks and get the feedback and bring
the pond section back to the council. But there definitely needs to be some more communication
done here.
Craig Renir: Well one thing I noticed that, and I don’t know if you walked it or not but, where
the outlet is for the pond, there’s actually one of the sheet of rock, the paper they use for settling
the retention in construction over the outlet. Which greatly reduces flow so we do have a high
flow of water coming into it. It just goes over the berm without the pipe. I guess those are all
that point or issues with this pond…
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
14
Kate Aanenson: It takes too much water too quickly. It doesn’t hold it back. That’s part of the
goal of the storm water management is to hold it on site so it doesn’t have the velocity of causing
that erosion as it goes to the site.
Todd Gerhardt: You’re not seeing the erosion around the pond. The erosion is occurring farther
down where the tree section is. Is where you’re seeing the erosion occur. And the reason that the
erosion is occurring down there is that, as Kate has mentioned, it’s taking so much water out of
there. There needs to be a new outlet installed.
Craig Renir: Okay. Well another thing, issue here too is this drain tile running down this
property line. Which has been washed out.
Todd Gerhardt: Yes, and I was out on the site. I saw it. The pipe separated and you’ve got
erosion going there. That’s another problem but if that pipe was still connected, the outlet of the
pipe further down into the woods, if you go to the southerly of the Goers property, you had
extensive erosion problem down there that we spent several weeks of trucking debris out of
there.
Kate Aanenson: We cleaned up the site once this summer.
Craig Renir: I was just wondering if another, over the berm we put another retention pond there
and then had it to a level where the excess would be piped out across the whole area even the
bottom of the park, …gully there even. Instead of just making a larger pipe through there.
Todd Gerhardt: Could be an option. Like I said, I think we need to sit down with you to kind of
explain how they came up with this design and then, you know if you’ve got some other
suggestions I think we’ll listen to you and see if they can incorporate them. And definitely if
we’re going to lose trees in this area, I’ve walked the area, maybe we can go back in and re-
landscape some of those areas that we’re losing some trees.
Craig Renir: I mean I realize the trees right now are small.
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah, they’re ash or.
Craig Renir: Well they grow in the flood zone, that’s why.
Todd Gerhardt: Yep, they like water.
Craig Renir: …is what’s going to happen to the bottom of the area that…farmed?
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah, I think we’re planning on going in there and revegetating that area.
Closer to where the pipe blew out. Put some longer prairie grasses in that area.
Craig Renir: I was just wondering if it was just going to become you know mowed parkland
again.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
15
Todd Gerhardt: No.
Todd Hoffman: Majority will be planted in long grass prairie. There will be just a small, little
eyebrow that will be green grass at the bottom of the hill, and then beyond that, the majority of
that will be long grass prairie.
Craig Renir: Okay. Well I appreciate it, thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you.
Todd Gerhardt: If we could get both of your name and number and we’ll sit down with you or
any of your neighbors that are concerned and talk about the pond construction.
Craig Renir: Okay, thank you very much.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Anybody else that would like to comment during the public
hearing with regard to the proposed vacation of the easements? I see a few people wiggling.
Chris Amack: Good evening. I’m Chris Amack at 8633 Alisa Court and I’m actually pretty
excited about it. I don’t know a whole lot but again I missed the meeting. I was going to go but
I also got an announcement something was cancelled so I don’t know if it was my fault or what it
was but, this backs right up into my property. My property’s right here. I guess my biggest
concern would be the erosion. Absolutely right. It’s very severe. I’ve got a retaining wall and
some landscaping that’s been done and it’s, that whole lower level I can’t even put grass in
basically. It’s when it rains it’s, you’re basically not walking back there for you know a good
week and a half. So as we look at putting a house down there, is there, are we going to elevate
the land and if so, what happens to that water? Does it come back onto mine.
Mayor Furlong: That’s a fair question.
Kate Aanenson: It should positively flow back towards the street. Towards the catch basin
there. I don’t have the elevation but we can check with him on that information.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: It’s sheet flowing to the catch basin in the street. I don’t have the sheet, do you
want to look at that Paul?
Paul Oehme: Sure.
Mayor Furlong: So that will get graded?
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, there’s a catch basin out in the street so it’s sheet flowing towards.
Mayor Furlong: With the grading that will, with the grading of those lots.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
16
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Anyone else who would like to speak at the public hearing,
please come forward. Okay, seeing nobody. Is there a motion to close the public hearing.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The
public hearing was closed.
Mayor Furlong: Let’s move on now. With regard to, there obviously are some issues that were
raised here this evening by the residents that we need to address. Mr. Gerhardt, I agree with your
idea. Is that, I didn’t hear necessarily objections to the vacation. It was where’s the water going
to go? Obviously we need to come up with a good design there based upon a variety of factors.
So does that preclude us given that, again maybe this is a question for Mr. Knutson. The motion
on the vacation was conditioned upon the final plat of this development so if we act tonight on
that vacation, if that’s a desire, do we need to wait for the pond to be redesigned I guess is my
question, if there is any more design needed. Or bring just that issue back? I’m sorry.
Kate Aanenson: I believe the pond.
Mayor Furlong: It is conditioned upon approval of the final plat so nothing’s going to happen
until these are all in place.
Kate Aanenson: …if I can just jump in but I guess what we would recommend, if it’s okay with
the council, before it comes back for final plat that we have the neighborhood meeting and we
would commit to do that. …make it a condition…
Mayor Furlong: I think we can do that sooner rather than later. Yeah, there were some good
issues raised and I think we need to get that information discussed and, as well. So okay.
Roger Knutson: But as far as adopting a resolution of the vacation as presented, I don’t see any
issues in delaying that unless staff does.
Mayor Furlong: Because of the condition that it’s contingent upon final plat.
Roger Knutson: Right. Final plat. No final plat. No vacation.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Todd Gerhardt: And if we need a different easement, we can address that on the final plat.
Mayor Furlong: Between preliminary and final. If that’s where it goes. Now there may be other
reasons that we want to pull.
Kate Aanenson: Just for the edification of those people that are concerned, it is condition 29 that
was added and that talked about the regional pond. Again we’re doing a regional pond. We’re
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
17
designing it because it’s going to serve more than this. As I indicated before the developer is
responsible for their portion that they’re contributing to it and then as the rest of the development
goes in, but then we can just add something on that number 29. That neighborhood meeting be
held prior to final plat regarding the pond. If that makes sense.
Mayor Furlong: And perhaps you raise, besides a neighborhood meeting, there may be
additional activities that take place prior to that design as well. So the conditions provide
protection as well of this design. Okay. Let’s bring it back then. Is there additional, Ms.
Aanenson is there anything additional that you want to present with regard to the overall project?
The rezoning or the.
Kate Aanenson: Not at this time.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Are there any questions for staff at this time with regard to this
project?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I have some.
Mayor Furlong: Councilwoman Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: This is for Kate. If you go back to the map and the temporary cul-
de-sac. Temporary means obviously it will be used someday for another development, is that
correct?
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: And with that development, would that entrance, would they use the
same entrance that this development is using?
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, we actually…it is a condition on there. That that cul-de-sac be extended
I the future.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I’ve been here once too many times.
Kate Aanenson: …but this would tie back across, tie back across so we would put that in over to
serve the Bongaard property if and when that developed, but we have to provide them adequate
access. If you look at the topography of this property, this area, this is north here. If you can
zoom in on this. It’s a little hard to read but it’s very challenging topography. This area down
here really it’s in the Bluff Creek Overlay. The southern part of the Goers property. You’ve got
the ravine that we talked about with the erosion as it goes through there. So really you can’t
subdivide this bottom part soil types so you really have to take the development and bring it back
over, tie it back in Audubon. So as part of what we do as planners, we have to provide access.
We can’t landlock somebody so we always sit down and work through those issues, so we’ve
looked at a way to provide access to the property to the west.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
18
Mayor Furlong: And I guess that access point, one is the southern point of this new road that’s
being developed and the other is.
Kate Aanenson: Alisa Lane.
Mayor Furlong: What’s the name of that road?
Kate Aanenson: Alisa. Alisa Lane…
Mayor Furlong: …so you’d have to loop around. Any other questions? Any questions from
others? Ms. Aanenson, on the southern portion of this property, down closer to Lyman, is
anything being done at this time?
Kate Aanenson: No. Actually it’s, the Goers will keep that house there. It does have access via
Lyman. Because of the topography and the grades, it’d be difficult to further subdivide that.
Again as a part of that it’s adjacent. The parcel next to it is right in the Bluff Creek Overlay
District so.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Nothing at this time. Thank you. Any other questions for staff? Is the
applicant here? Is there any issues that you’d like to address to the council as well?
Brent Hislop: Good evening. My name is Brent Hislop with Plowshares Development.
Mayor Furlong: Good evening.
Brent Hislop: I think Kate’s explained the key items. As you have discussion I’d be glad to
answer specific questions or one of our engineers will. No comments at this time.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Any questions for the applicant? Okay. I’ll bring it back to
council for discussion. Any discussion on this? On any or all of these 3 items.
Councilman Lundquist: Mr. Mayor, just to comment on the pond. Seems to be the concern so
need to get that. As far as Kate, when you’re talking about a condition of approval, I don’t know
that, because this is a regional pond and the developer will do their piece and we’ll do our piece.
I guess if we added as a condition that will inspire the developer to keep pushing us but I’m not
sure that’s necessarily the right spot. Not really the developer’s issue. I mean it’s really a city
issue, not a developer issue so I’m not sure that I would favor adding that as a condition but
somehow I guess, since we’re on the record that just make sure that that gets done and obviously
the developer will participate in that discussion but not really in favor of adding that as a
condition of approval of the plat and burden them with that.
Mayor Furlong: Help me understand with regard to creating a pond down there?
Councilman Lundquist: Well it’s a regional pond so it’s not, I mean it’s more than Stonefield
development so, adding that condition that the developer puts that neighborhood meetings
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
19
together and runs that and does all that is really more of a city, because it’s a regional pond,
that’s more of a Paul and Kate thing and Lori than a Plowshares.
Mayor Furlong: But the issue of creating ponding for stormwater management for this
development is there, as well as creating a regional pond.
Councilman Lundquist: Correct.
Mayor Furlong: It gives the opportunity to do that. But in terms of the process of talking to the
neighbors, making sure issues are addressed on the regional component of it.
Councilman Lundquist: Yep, that’s a city responsibility.
Mayor Furlong: And the city can facilitate that and get that done. As well as.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah but it’s all the regional problem.
Mayor Furlong: Right.
Kate Aanenson: So far, yeah. So in that sense we said, you have to provide ponding. We were
ahead of this. We recognized when we had our super event that we had, as it’s already been
discussed tonight, a blow out in some drain tile and some severe erosion down there, so we were
already being proactive and doing some design work up there, so we’re making it bigger, so
you’re right. It’s not all their burden. We’re putting a majority of that over sizing on our
property but we have design constraints. We certainly want to educate the residents…design and
see if there’s minor modifications as the City Manager’s indicated and if there’s landscaping that
we can do to enhance that. Mitigate that, we certainly want to get that input. Whether you put it
in here a condition or not, we’ve committed to do that so.
Todd Gerhardt: Mr. Mayor, council members. The role that the developer would play on this is
where exactly those future drainage and utility easements are going to go. They’re kind of the
front person in establishing those and we’ve got to make sure where we need them. Where they
work. Don’t impact their development so they’re a party to this and so they’re kind of the one
that we have to vacate the old easements and establish the new ones. Probably on a portion of
your property, or Plowshares development, and some on our’s so, that’s the role that I see
Plowshares playing in this. And that we would coordinate with the neighborhoods. Bring them
into City Hall and explain how the construction of the ponds would be done. What would
happen to the berm. What the landscaping plan would look like, probably after the ponds are
constructed. That’s how I view the next 2 weeks to occur.
Mayor Furlong: I think, and since we’re talking about the pond, Councilman Lundquist brought
it up. Condition 29 talks about an alternative if the pond is not built. Clearly it’s the objective
here to build a regional pond, is that correct?
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct, that’s our goal to solve a problem. Right.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
20
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright.
Kate Aanenson: Again our policy has been to go where we have those opportunities to get the
best use of our dollars and this is an opportunity. A majority of our property of a developer
that’s coming forward can expand the project and solve the problem. A bigger problem.
Regional policy.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Councilman Lundquist: My point, I think we’re going, it’s the right thing to do. We need to get
it done. My point was that I want city staff to drive that process and lead that process with
obviously the developer participating a significant amount, but not that they take a lead on that.
That we take a lead on that.
Mayor Furlong: That’s fine. Okay. Any other thoughts or discussions on the proposed rezoning
or subdivision? Councilman Lundquist, no?
Councilman Lundquist: No.
Mayor Furlong: Anything?
Councilman Peterson: Nor do I.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: No.
Councilman Labatt: Kate a couple questions on the location of that pipeline. I’m trying to look
at this cross section on the grading.
Kate Aanenson: Actually the pipeline comes, oops we’re not on. So again this is north. Osprey.
This is the street. This is the pipeline coming through. Through here, so the one lot that would
be most impacted, we actually had them show a house plan that would fit on that lot. So that
would be the lot with the additional 20 foot setback.
Councilman Labatt: And where is that lot on the big plan?
Kate Aanenson: It’s Lot 4.
Councilman Labatt: Right there, okay. So that house is just pushed to the north.
Kate Aanenson: Actually the orientation would be this way so, it’s this lot. So they met that
new standard.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. And the depth of that pipeline.
Kate Aanenson: This one. This is Lot 4, Block 1. Oh I’m sorry. It’s this lot. So this is the
pipeline though right through here.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
21
Councilman Labatt: Okay. And what’s the current depth right now of that pipeline?
Kate Aanenson: Is it 4 ½? Gas pipeline.
Brent Hislop: Depth of the pipe?
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Brent Hislop: About 3 to 4 feet.
Kate Aanenson: About 3 to 4 feet, yep. It’s pretty shallow.
Councilman Labatt: And after the grading’s done, the proposed grade…is put in there, it will
actually be a little deeper.
Curtis Neft: The maximum allowed is 8 feet deep. And that’s where we’re at…
Kate Aanenson: So that’d be the highest point of the hill at the top.
Councilman Labatt: So between the road and the pipeline, it will be 8 feet?
Curtis Neft: Correct.
Kate Aanenson: And there’s less grading as you get towards the end.
Councilman Labatt: Okay, that’s all I had. Just wanted.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Well I think my comments overall, I think it’s a good project and
it’s one again where I think the city staff and the developer have worked well together to come
up, to address some problems that exist. Try to make improvements. Use this as an opportunity.
Also plan for the development of the properties around it in terms of being able to extend this
street and loop it back around. And also deal with a number of issues surrounding our park and
the other neighborhoods, so overall I think it’s a good project and congratulate everybody that
works on it. Clearly there’s some more information to be shared and ideas to be discussed with
regard to that pond and I’m glad that we’ll be taking care of that over the next few weeks as well
to get that done so. If there are any other comments or discussion points? If not, we have three
items here. I don’t know that we need to separate those for any reason so if there’s a desire to
keep them together in the form of a motion, we can certainly, I would certainly entertain that at
this time. If somebody would like to make a motion. I think they’re in order.
Councilman Lundquist: There’s two. The third one.
Mayor Furlong: The third one is item (a) which is the vacation.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
22
Councilman Peterson: We can make the motion relevant to what is submitted in the staff report
and that might be the most prudent way to go through it. I’d certainly offer that as a motion.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. That’d be items 4(a) and (b) within the staff report, including all the
conditions there.
Councilman Lundquist: 1 through 29.
Councilman Peterson: Yeah.
Councilman Lundquist: Second.
Roger Knutson: (a), (b) and (c)?
Councilman Peterson: Yes.
Mayor Furlong: (a), (b) and (c). Okay. That motion is made and seconded. Is there any
discussion or questions on the motion? Seeing none we’ll proceed with the vote.
Resolution #2006-04: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to
approve a resolution vacating the existing storm water ponding easement, street, drainage
and utility easement and drainage and utility easement as defined on the attached vacation
description and contingent upon City Council approval of the final plat. All voted in favor
and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to approve Planning Case
#05-37 for Rezoning from Agricultural Estate District, A2 to Single Family Residential for
the Stonefield Subdivision as shown on plans stamped “Received November 18, 2005”. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to approve to approve the
preliminary plat for Subdivision Case #05-37 for Stonefield for 30 lots and 1 outlot with a
right-of-way width variance, as shown on the plans stamped ‘Received November 18, 2005’,
subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant will be required to meet the existing site runoff rates for 10-year and 100-year,
24-hour storm events. The proposed enlargement of the existing stormwater pond must be
designed to meet the City’s minimum standards and coordinated and approved by the City
Water Resources Coordinator.
2. The storm sewer must be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Storm sewer sizing
calculations and a full-size drainage map must be submitted with the final plat for staff
review and approval.
3. Drainage and utility easements must be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm
drainage system including ponds, drainage swales, and wetlands up to the 100-year flood
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
23
level.
4. Staff recommends that Type II silt fence, which is a heavy duty fence, be used adjacent to the
existing wetland, existing creek area, and around the proposed pond. In addition, tree
preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. Erosion control blankets
are recommended for all of the steep 3:1 slopes with an elevation change of eight feet or
more.
5. All plans must be signed by a registered Civil Engineer in the State of Minnesota.
6. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will have to be obtained, including but not
limited to the MPCA, NPDES, Watershed District, MN Department of Health, Carver
County and the Williams Pipe Line Company.
7. The developer must obtain written permission from the Williams Pipe Line Company to
perform the proposed grading within the easement. The developer is responsible for
complying with all conditions of the Williams Pipe Line Company and assumes full
responsibility for work performed within this easement.
8. On the utility plan:
a. Show all the proposed storm sewer pipe type, size and class.
b. Show the sanitary sewer pipe slope and class.
c. Show watermain pipe class (C900).
d. Add a storm sewer schedule.
e. Show the existing storm sewer between Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 within the center of the 20-
foot utility easement.
f. Show the stormwater manholes rim and invert elevations.
g. Add a note to remove the temporary pond outlet control structure.
h. The last street-accessible storm manhole discharging to the stormwater pond must be
manhole with sump.
i. Add a note: any connection to an existing structure must be core drilled.
j. Extend the storm sewer farther to the south along the proposed street.
k. Remove Lots 7 and 8 backyard storm sewer and add a storm sewer along the property
line between Lots 4 and 5 and between Lots 8 and 9 block 4.
9. On the grading plan:
a. Show Type II silt fence adjacent to wetland, pond, creeks, etc.
b. Show the benchmark used for the site survey.
c. Use class 5 storm sewer in the roadway; revise the note under general grading and
drainage notes accordingly.
d. Extend the swale between Lots 1 and 2, Block 4 farther to the east.
10. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered civil engineer
and a permit from the City's Building Department must be obtained. In addition,
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
24
encroachment agreements will be required for any retaining wall within a public easement.
11. The underlying property has not been assessed for sewer or water improvements. The 2005
trunk hookup charge is $1,458.00 per unit for sanitary sewer and $2,955.00 per unit for
watermain and the SAC fee is $1,525.00 per unit. All of these charges are based on the
number of SAC units assigned by the Metropolitan Council. Sanitary sewer and watermain
hookup fees will be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit
issuance.
12. All disturbed areas must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to
minimize erosion.
13. Any off-site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner.
14. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will
be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes.
15. The developer is responsible for 100% of the cost and construction of the lift station and
forcemain and any associated costs.
16. All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City’s
latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant is also required to
enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in
the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and
the conditions of final plat approval.
17. Add a “dead-end road” sign at the cul-de-sac.
18. On the plat, show all existing and proposed street names.
19. Add City Detail Plate Nos. 1001, 1002, 1004, 1005, 1006, 1009, 2001, 2101, 2109, 2110,
2201, 2204, 3101, 3102, 3104, 3106, 3107, 3108, 3109, 5200, 5203, 5204, 5206, 5214, 5215,
5216, 5217, 5221, 5232, 5234, 5240, 5241, 5300, 5301, 5302, 5302A and 5313.
20. Show the street lights and a stop sign on the plans.
21. Submit public utility plans and profile for staff review.
22. City Forester’s Conditions:
a. A minimum of two overstory trees shall be required in the front yard of each lot.
b. The developer shall be responsible for installing all landscape materials proposed in rear
and side yard areas.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
25
c. Tree preservation fence shall be installed at the edge of the grading limits prior to any
construction.
d. Tree preservation on site shall be according to tree preservation plans dated 10/14/05.
Any trees removed in excess of proposed tree preservation plans will be replaced at a
ratio of 2:1 diameter inches.
23. In the absence of parkland dedication, it is recommended that Stonefield pay full park
dedication fees at the rate in force upon final platting. At today’s rate, these fees would total
$120,000 (30 lots x $4,000). Additionally, the applicant is required to construct the
neighborhood asphalt trail connector to the property line as depicted on their preliminary
plan submittals.
24. Water Resource Coordinator’s Conditions:
a. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be
maintained around Wetland D. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and
staked in accordance with the City’s wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland
buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and shall pay
the City $20 per sign.
b. All structures shall maintain a setback of at least 40 feet from the wetland buffer edge.
c. The applicant shall work with the City’s consultant to accommodate regional and site-
specific storm water needs.
d. The approximate location and extent of drain tile shall be shown on the plans. The
applicant shall provide details as to whether the tile line will be removed, abandoned in
place or remain. If the tile is to remain, the flow from the tile shall be accommodated in
the design of the storm water management plan.
e. The applicant shall provide rate control and storm water treatment to reduce off-site
impacts. To provide a low-gradient means for controlling rate and volume, the applicant
shall consider cooperating with the City to construct a wetland in the rear portions of any
number of Lots 1-8, Block 3. In the event that the applicant is interested in pursuing
wetland construction for banking purposes, this planning shall be integrated with the
City’s consultant’s storm water infrastructure planning.
f. Drainage and utility easements (minimum 20 feet in width) shall be provided over all
existing wetlands, storm water infrastructure and storm water ponds.
g. The developer asserts that, due to the steep grade in the southern portion of the property,
custom grading would not save any additional trees. In addition, the developer maintains
that the slope of the road and the location of the retaining wall make custom grading lots
impractical. If the developer demonstrates to the satisfaction of staff that custom grading
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
26
for their typical house pad would not result in additional significant tree preservation,
mass grading of this area may be approved.
h. The existing outlet structure of Pond A shall be removed and replaced in accordance with
the City’s standard detail. A stable emergency overflow (EOF) shall be provided for the
pond.
i. The portion of the silt fence that runs from the pipeline easement through Lot 7, Block 3
shall be moved upslope to the west by 30 to 60 feet to more clearly define the grading
limits. The area of property between the silt fence and the gully and property line shall
be seeded and mulched to control weeds and get a desirable cover crop in areas that were
recently farmed.
j. A temporary basin shall be constructed in the vicinity of Lots 6 and 7, Block 3. The
temporary sediment basin shall be installed prior to disturbing upslope area. A
temporary perforated riser and stable emergency overflow (EOF) for the basin shall be
installed; details shall be included in the plan. The basin shall be properly sized for the
watershed area, according to NPDES requirements (i.e. The basins must provide storage
below the outlet pipe for a calculated volume of runoff from a 2-year, 24-hour storm
from each acre drained to the basin, except that in no case shall the basin provide less
than 1,800 cubic feet of storage below the outlet pipe from each acre drained to the
basin).
k. Chanhassen Type 2 silt fence shall be provided for the perimeter of the site up to Lot 10,
Block 3. From there, Type 1 may be used. Silt fence shall be shown on the plans around
Lots 1 and 2, Block 1.
l. Curbside inlet controls are needed; Wimco type or ESS type (or approved similar
protection) inlet controls shall be used. Curbside inlet protection shall be provided for
existing inlets adjacent to the site exit on Osprey Lane. City standard inlet protection
details 5302 and 5302A shall be included in the plans. The proposed rear yard catch
basin protection shall be revised; Wimco type, ESS type or equal must be used. The
proposed silt fence shall be installed with additional rock around Chanhassen type 1 silt
fence.
m. The plans shall be revised to show energy dissipation for the flared end section on Lot 7,
Block 3.
n. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All
exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year
round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames:
Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can
Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area
10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.)
Flatter than 10:1 21 days
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
27
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any
exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a
curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or
other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water.
o. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and
street sweeping as-needed.
p. In order to fund the maintenance and expansion of the BC-P4.10 storm water pond and
construction of additional capacity, the costs will be allocated among the benefiting
properties. The total cost of materials and construction will be divided by the number of
acres in the resulting subwatershed. The City will be responsible for the acres
contributing from land already developed, park land and land to be developed in the
future (e.g., the Bongaard parcel). The developer will be responsible for the acres
contributing from their development. If, for any reason, the regional storm water facility
is not constructed, the developer will be responsible for providing storm water quality
and quantity management on the subject property and paying Surface Water
Management connection charges in accordance with City Code. At this time, the
estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is
$65,364.
q. In conjunction with the BC-P4.10 storm water ponding project, land in addition to the
land shown in Outlot A may be required. At this time, the estimated amount of land is
approximately 0.5 acres. The developer and the City will seek to agree upon the terms of
the use of land for ponding should additional land be required. The developer, if required,
shall provide additional land for ponding.
25. Fire Marshall Conditions:
a. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must be
either removed from site or chipped.
b. Fire apparatus access roads and water supply for fire protection is required to be
installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the
time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided.
A fire apparatus access road shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed
load of fire apparatus and shall be serviced so as to provide all weather driving
capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire Code Section 503.2.3.
c. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections once construction of the
new roadway allows passage of vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota Fire Code Section
501.4.
d. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees,
shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
28
that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to
Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1.
e. Fire hydrant spacing is acceptable.
f. Submit proposed street names to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire
Marshal for review and approval.
26. Building Official Conditions:
a. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before
building permits will be issued.
b. Demolition permits must be obtained prior to demolishing any structures on the site.
c. The developer must submit a list of proposed street names for review and approval prior
to final plat of the property.
d. Retaining walls more than four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and
a building permit must be obtained prior to construction.
e. Separate sewer and water services must be provided each lot.
f. Existing wells and on-site sewage treatment systems on the site must be abandoned in
accordance with State Law and City Code.
27. The retaining walls shall be maintained by a Homeowners Association.
28. The City shall not be responsible for maintenance of storm water infrastructure on Lots 7, 8,
and 9, Block 3.”
29. In the event that the regional pond project is not constructed, the applicant has proposed
the installation of a second outlet structure on Pond A. In that event the existing outlet
structure that is failing must also be replaced. The cost of a new outlet structure to
replace the existing failing structure would be borne by the City, but the replacement
would be done by the applicant.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you everyone. And thank you to the residents too that came out and
spoke this evening. Drainage and utility easements are often non-issues so I’m glad that people
came and spoke because I think we’ll end up with a better project afterwards so thank you very
much. For your involvement and interest.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
29
GALPIN CROSSING, NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF
HIGHWAY 5 & GALPIN BOULEVARD, RICH RAGATZ: REQUEST FOR
RECONSIDERATION OF CONCEPT PUD FOR A 10 UNIT TWIN HOME PROJECT
AND A 66,000 SQ. FT. OFFICE DEVELOPMENT.
Roger Knutson: There’s two ways you can do it. I mean it’s one, formally until you move to
reconsider there’s nothing to discuss. So if you want to have a discussion, you could.
Mayor Furlong: We could have an informational discussion.
Roger Knutson: You could, I think the normal way you would do it is, is ask for presentation
and then ask if there’s a vote to reconsider. And you get to there, a vote to reconsider brings it
back in front of you for action.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Councilman Lundquist: Do you need a 4/5 vote on reconsideration like we needed to approve?
Roger Knutson: No, not to reconsider, no. To reconsider it’s a simple majority vote. The action
on the main item still requires a simple majority.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Ms. Aanenson, why don’t you give us an update on the request and the
applicant is here, we’ll certainly provide him time as well to address the council.
Kate Aanenson: As you stated this item appeared at your last City Council meeting. The staff at
that time was going for conceptual PUD. Staff recommended conceptual PUD with a couple of
caveats, that the applicant, Epic Development is requesting reconsideration, specifically the
reconsideration of the setback for a neighborhood business district and the number of pads, and
that development not be proceed until the retail study, retail market study comes back. We have
started the retail market study process. It’s our goal to have that done in April, but again the
reason we did that is this property is guided residential and we have a lot of requests to build
commercial and we’re very careful about the consideration of where we place that and we want
to do our due diligence too and make sure that it’s appropriately located. Clearly the way it’s
located we believe is some smaller kind of more typical box that we really try to discourage
along the Highway 5 frontage, so we want to get additional input through the retail study on what
needs may be out there and look at some of our options as far as if we were to rezone some other
sites, based on traffic and those sort of things, where would those best, those sites be best suited.
So with that we stand by our original recommendation of the conditions of approval. So I’d be
happy to answer any questions.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, any questions at this point for staff. No? Okay. Is Mr. Ragatz here this
evening? Good evening. Would you like to address the council?
Rich Ragatz: Yes please.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
30
Rich Ragatz: Mr. Mayor, members of the council, my name is Rich Ragatz, Epic Development,
Eden Prairie, Minnesota. I was here last time and when it was tabled I ended up leaving. You
guys voted on, that’s why I’d like you reconsider these three points. I guess the first one, I just
think the setbacks for neighborhood business are more appropriate than what you’re looking at.
15 and 35 feet instead of the 50 and 75 feet from Highway 5 and Galpin. I think we could work
things, move things around to make those other additional setbacks work if need be. Secondly
the number of buildings, I think our market research is telling us that people want to have their
own identity. Have smaller buildings. Their own building if possible and so we think, we hope
that you’ll see the same thing. Thirdly, the market study. We just think ideally we’d like to
move forward with our preliminary plat before the market study is completed. We’re looking to
do office, mostly office and office service on the site and there’s been two sites that have been
taken out of the office industrial zoning, the Madsen piece and the Bernardi piece and we’re only
looking to rezone 8 acres versus about 200 acres that’s been taken out of that zoning designation.
So we think that’s appropriate for us to get that rezoned hopefully through our preliminary plat
process. If you don’t see it that way, maybe we could look at it with just the preliminary
information so it doesn’t set us back several months, additional months. And just I’m here for
comments. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. I guess a question, couple questions. Being raised here.
With regard to the setbacks, I’m just going back and looking at our staff report from the prior
time. This was a concept PUD that was approved.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: So that is, is here’s what we’d like to do. Yeah, we give some feedback and
look at it but ultimately when the preliminary comes forward is the issue. I’m trying to
understand here or take a look for sure. What was the, under the concept plan, what was the
proposed rezoning? It’s residential right now. What was it? Just a PUD-R?
Kate Aanenson: PUD-R, yeah. And the use on it was neighborhood commercial, although…and
actually industrial was what we were looking at.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: Just to kind of step back and typically how we’ve done rezoning, if someone
comes in for a significant rezoning for example, when you did look at the Bernardi piece which
is now Town and Country, you had a project in front of you. Typically to get a rezoning this city
has a history of looking at a project to say, that makes sense as a use. We don’t have that.
That’s again the question…to say well maybe we need to see a little bit more. We’re replacing
industrial land. To us it looks very typical. We have other people look at that, that that’s really a
typical retail layout so we just have some concerns about that, so if it’s going to be retail, we’d
like to have a grouping. If you look, what we spent a lot of time doing on the north side of West
78th between Powers and going down to Kerber, you know we’ve really got some nice layout
there. Kind of mutifying all those projects and that’s where, if were to do something like that
and I think we’re just premature.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
31
Mayor Furlong: The issue of a number of smaller buildings versus fewer larger buildings. Is
that an issue that we’ve dealt with before and give us some history there?
Kate Aanenson: Well I think you know…function. You set yourself up for certain expectation
of a use and that’s our concern and I think we’ve learned the history of that when we’ve had
opportunities to subdivide into smaller lots or we’ve lost an opportunity to land a larger use and
if we’re trying to get industrial, typically those are a little bit bigger footprint. So if it’s office,
again I’m not sure who that would be because we’ve been working, we know who all the office
people are looking so a lot of them, so we’re just kind of concerned about what that would be
too. Again, when someone comes in on this kind of a project to look at a rezoning, typically
there’s a lead. You’ve got a use that’s ready to go. I believe there is one. The rest I think may
be a little bit more, we don’t know and that’s a concern. I think it’s, we have to be careful about
what we’ve done to our core which is why we’ve done the retail study. Looking at that rezoning
to say, if we’re going to rezone some property, where would that best be? …some other market
needs. Where do we want to capture some of those? We’re careful about not doing strip along
Highway 5. That’s always been our goal and I think that’s why we have what we have in the
downtown so just being really careful about that decision. There’s no rush, in my opinion. Take
our time and make a good decision.
Mayor Furlong: I know we’ve had requests on other sites along Highway 5 for a number of
smaller buildings. Multiple parcels versus sticking with larger buildings. The Steiner
development where Lifetime Fitness is currently located I think was one of those where we had
some, call it an opportunity if you will but a proposal to break that up into a number of smaller
lots so. Okay.
Councilman Peterson: And then the market study Kate, I can’t recall, when do we estimate that
it’d be done again?
Kate Aanenson: April 1st, yeah. So we kicked that off so we’re underway. Pretty good about
that process.
Mayor Furlong: Any other questions for staff on this. Any discussion or comment on the issue?
Councilman Peterson: I don’t see anything that’s changed since we last voted on this so.
Mayor Furlong: Yeah, I think that the council, you know I think it’s, I’m glad that we had a
chance here to think about these issues but again I think based on what we’ve heard this evening,
I’m comfortable with the action that we took at our last meeting. Unless there’s anyone else that
would like to at this point make a motion for reconsideration.
Councilman Lundquist: No.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: No, I agree on waiting for the market study. I think it will be…make
better decisions for the rezoning in the future.
Mayor Furlong: Yeah, I think that’s, that is a, you raise a good point Councilwoman Tjornhom
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
32
about the marketing study and the value that that’s going to have across the entire city, especially
in the…like this where we are looking at rezoning and location so. Thank you. I guess with that,
if there’s no motion by the council we’ll just look forward to receiving the additional information
in the time that we’ve discussed and allow the approval of last meeting to stand. Okay, thank
you.
ORCHARD GREEN, 2611 & 2621 ORCHARD LANE, PETER KNAEBLE: REQUEST
FOR SUBDIVISION REVIEW FOR 4 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.
Public Present:
Name Address
Steve Lynch 5225 Park Avenue
Matt Pavek 7110 Plymouth Avenue No, Golden Valley
John Dragseth 2600 Forest Avenue
Jacqueline A. Dorsey 311 So. Water Street, Northfield
Kate Aanenson: Thank you. The applicant is requesting to subdivide 2.02 acre parcel into 4
single family homes. Just so you know when it originally came in with an additional lot, the
staff did work looking at house sizes and reduced it down to 4. This item did appear before the
Planning Commission on December 6th to review the plat and the Planning Commission voted 5-
0 to approve the request. I believe there’s a little bit of controversy regarding dispute on the
property line and why that condition was removed. It’s stated right here in the staff report,
typically the city does not, because we’re not the interested party in this property line dispute,
would not make that a condition of approval because in our opinion based on the amount of
property in dispute, the lot, the plat would still go forward with the additional right-of-way being
removed, and I’ll just show you that real quick here… If we were to lay this out the same, this is
the area in red that’s in dispute. So even if that property was removed from the plat itself, the
lots would still meet all the minimum requirements of the setback so if there is a dispute, and that
property was to go away, you could still meet all those standards of the one part of the plat could
be added administratively later so it’s really a civil matter that, so we addressed it in the cover
memo. It was a Planning Commission item. Again we don’t hold up a plat for that so that’s why
we moved, removed and put to the front of the agenda on the cover memo so we did address it.
It wasn’t dropped. We just explained how we did that. With that I’ll just go through the plat
quickly. There’s no street improvements for existing streets for the property so the 3 lots will
have access via Orchard and the other one off of Forest. The average lot size is 22,000 so again
kind of moving in that direction of little bit bigger lots for executive homes. There are no
wetlands on the site. With this plat we’re looking at providing some additional easement for
ponding in the future. There is some water issues in the area so with that we’re not putting a
pond in at this time but we’re accommodating a drainage easement so in the future as we work
through those issues, we can accommodate potentially a future pond, so they will be paying
some ponding and quality fees through the subdivision. Again there are services in the area.
Existing lots. It needs to be additional service line but that would be accommodated. Parks and
trails, there is a park in the immediate vicinity so we’ll just be taking park and trail fees. There
will be some tree replacement and approximately 19 trees to be replaced. All the lots do meet
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
33
the requirements of the city ordinance as far as area, frontage, depth and impervious surface so
with that it appears to be a pretty clean subdivision. We are recommending approval with the
conditions in the staff report starting on page 8.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff. If there are any.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: It looks like the area is small enough so where like the hard surface
coverage and stuff, that wouldn’t affect any amount.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, that lot is, that lot itself is 26,000 square feet so there should be adequate.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: Alright. Is the applicant here this evening? Would you like to address the
council on any issue?
Matt Pavek: Council members, Mr. Mayor, my name is Matt Pavek with Terra Engineering.
I’m one of the engineers and developers on the project and we just would like to say we concur
with the staff report and available for any questions if you have any. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any questions of the applicant? Thank you. Appreciate you being
here. Okay, is there any? There was a public hearing conducted at the Planning Commission.
And so this is not necessarily, we don’t hold the public hearing here but if there is any issue or
public comment because of issues that have changed between the staff report and the Planning
Commission or here, or anything else, certainly we’d like to hear that public comment as well.
John Dragseth: Mayor, council members. 2600 Forest Avenue which is the property to the
south. Southeast. I’m not prepared to address any substantive issues today because of the
change. I first learned of this change this morning and therefore I don’t know what to say in
response to what the staff has said. I haven’t had time to prepare that. What I’d like to address
is procedure that occurred. The Planning Commission met and was presented by the city staff
and the city staff inserted condition number 22 and presented it to the Planning Commission.
That was all the Planning Commission saw. That’s all that they approved. I did not notice until
this morning when looking at the presentation that would be given to the council that 22 had
disappeared as a condition. That is something the Planning Commission was never shown.
Never voted on. I don’t know what exactly why it was removed and moved to the cover page as
I understand, but it was removed as a condition. I think it makes sense as a condition and when
he, city staff first presented it I agreed to it and therefore I didn’t say anything at the Planning
Commission about it. Did not have an opportunity to object to it at that time because it wasn’t an
issue in the case. Did not have an opportunity to go through the appeal process from the
Planning Commission because it was never an issue in this case. Learned about it for the first
time this morning. Now it’s interesting when they first added it, the city staff first added it I
asked why did you add it in that way and they said well because it’s a private issue. A civil issue
and so we’ll just put it on there. Developer can take care of it as a private, civil issue as a
preliminary to final plat. When I talked to city staff today and said why did you take it off, same
reason. It’s a civil issue, a private issue. And apparently is now shifting the burden to me to take
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
34
care of it instead of the developer seeking approval from the city. I think that is an improper and
probably legally infirm, although I haven’t been able to research this approach to doing this.
There is, now granted a city can take any approach that they want within reason to approve these
processes, but once you put rules and process in place you have to follow that process. That’s
my general understanding of the rules. I don’t believe that process has been followed here. 22 is
dropped without review of the Planning Commission. Without an opportunity to comment on it
and then suddenly without notice put in a cover letter and said as a condition today. It’s also the
dropping of it is questionable because the same reason for dropping it was the reason that was
given for putting it on in the first place. Seems arbitrary, capricious to drop it at this point. Not
sure why staff decided to drop it after they previously on their own motion put it in in the first
place. I guess I’m kind of curious about what the basis for that, and ultimately it’s infirm
because there was no notice for the change. I first found out about it this morning. Called staff
immediately mid-morning. Didn’t get a response until after lunch when I actually called staff
again and asked you know was this a mistake because I understand 22 was added right before the
Planning Commission meeting. Kind of given an indication well no, it’s in there and I was
shown it was in the cover letter. Part of the problem is, if you ever look at the cover letter on the
web site all you see is a big black maple leaf because the watermark on the city stationary blacks
out everything that’s on the cover letter, so I didn’t know about this change of any sort until
really 2:00 p.m. this afternoon. I would say that that’s not adequate notice. So what I would
propose to the City Council is that City Council approve the plan, the plat, preliminary plat as
proposed to the Planning Commission and the same plat that the Planning Commission
approved, and not shift the burden to clear up this civil issue onto somebody who is not seeking
approval for the City Council’s vote. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Comments or reaction.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, I’d like to have the city attorney explain or verify if any processes have
been violated since the Planning Commission’s action on this.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
Roger Knutson: Mayor, members of the council. There’s no process that’s been violated. The
Planning Commission makes a recommendation to you and you take that into consideration.
What the recommendation to you was is not in dispute and has not been concealed from you.
You know what it was. It had that condition in there. Staff is recommending that that condition
be deleted. It’s not unusual for the Planning Commission to recommend one thing and the staff
to recommend something slightly different. And if I could just comment further on the dispute.
First, the City as you know is not in a position to resolve property line disputes. I can issue an
opinion and say here’s my opinion where it is, and that’s nice but the parties aren’t bound by it.
I’m not a judge. This body is not, does not have authority to resolve property line disputes. So
what we do is look at information to make sure a stranger to the title for example isn’t walking in
here and saying I want to plat some property. We make sure you have an ownership interest in
the property. And then here we have looked at it and this property, so you know, is Torrens
property. There was a proceeding a number of years ago with this very issue, at least the record
was resolved. Now someone can always challenge that later and the adjoining property owner if
he chooses to challenge it, that’s the adjoining property owners’ prerogative to do so. From our
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
35
perspective as a city we look at, is this something that should hold up approval, and our
judgment is no. That if someone wants to bring this on further and have it resolved, there’s
mechanisms to do that. There are courts. We don’t think it should up the plat.
Councilman Peterson: Do we even have a legal right to stop that? Isn’t that kind of your point?
Roger Knutson: Yes. That’s my point.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
John Dragseth: Is it possible to address two of those points quickly?
Mayor Furlong: Certainly, please. Keep it brief.
John Dragseth: First point, it may not be unusual for city staff to disagree with the Planning
Commission. What is unusual is for city staff to recommend a point. The Planning Commission
to approve it, and then city staff without any explanation to remove that exact same condition
that they put in themselves. Second point on the Torrens. There are two types of Torrens. It
wasn’t mentioned. If you read the Chapter 508.23 of the Minnesota Statute you can do a simple
Torrens where you register the property in general. There’s also a registration of the boundary.
This property did not have the boundary registered. Thank you.
Jacqueline Dorsey: My name is Jacqueline Dorsey of Visten, Dahl, Marsh and Dorsey, 311
South Water Street, Northfield. I am counsel for Sandra and Dwayne Johnson. They are the
current owners of the property. I just wanted to bring up a couple of issues. First of all Mr.
Knutson is correct that the Johnson’s own Torrens property. It was registered, almost 16 years
ago. The Johnsons agree with the new recommendation of the Planning, of the city planner that
item number 22 be deleted requiring a resolution of that property dispute. I believe that they’re
correct in their assessment. First of all it would be extremely dangerous, again as Mr. Knutson
pointed out, if anyone could come in and say I have a concern about a boundary line or I think
part of that property belongs to me and every subdivision that comes before this council would
roll to a stand still. It would also be changing the course of the current laws which require
someone who has a boundary dispute and believes that they have an interest in the property, right
now they have the responsibility to take some action if they believe they need to protect their
property. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Sir, you have a public comment on this entire project, the proposed
subdivision? Very good, thank you. With that, are there any follow up questions for staff or for
the applicant? Okay. Then we’ll bring it back to council for discussion. Thoughts or comments.
Councilman Lundquist: Mr. Mayor I think, like you said, pretty straight forward. We don’t
often see ones that come along that are this straight forward without a lot of the stuff, especially
Kate like you said before with what’s left in the city. They’re usually the more difficult ones so,
and as far as the condition in or not in. I did see this condition 22 when I looked at the Planning
Commission verbatim things and along with Mr. Knutson and staff, I’d say it’s, since Mr. Ayotte
isn’t here anymore I would venture that we don’t have a dog in that fight so. Regardless of
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
36
whether 22 is in or not, I think I would, I would have recommended that it be removed anyway
so that point, anyway. So I think cut and dried. Pretty cut and dried here. No issues and support
the proposal as published in the final staff report with conditions.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Other comments, discussion.
Councilman Labatt: I would echo Mr. Lundquist in supporting the conditions 1 through 21.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
Councilman Peterson: As well as I.
Mayor Furlong: Same? Very good, thank you. Without restating the issues, the subdivision
does meet ordinance and that’s what we’re looking for and it went through the process with the
Planning Commission adopting approval. I do agree with Councilman Lundquist with regard to
that last condition and the reason that it would likely not be approved as well. That’s not, those
types of conditions and proposals have come before this council that I’ve been involved in and
they’ve come out each time so. With that, is there a motion? To approve, which I believe begins
on.
Councilman Labatt: Move approval for.
Mayor Furlong: Do you have a page number?
Councilman Labatt: Preliminary Plat for Case 05-42, subject to the following conditions 1
through 21 in the staff report dated.
Mayor Furlong: Today.
Councilman Labatt: January 9th.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none we’ll
proceed with the vote.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council
approve preliminary plat for Planning Case 05-42, Orchard Green for 4 single family lots
as shown on the plans prepared by Terra Engineering and stamped “Received November
4, 2005”, subject to the following conditions:
1. Applicant shall submit a landscaping plan showing 19 trees as replacement plantings. Plan
shall specify size, species, and locations.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
37
2. All areas outside of grading limits shall be protected by tree preservation fencing. Fencing
shall be installed prior to grading and excavation for homes on each lot. Any trees shown as
preserved that are removed or damaged shall be replaced at a rate of 2:1 diameter inches.
3. The water and sanitary hook-ups for lot 2 must be moved to the driveway in order to preserve
the 12” maple.
4. The developer must obtain all permits necessary to remove the existing homes.
5. The grading plan must be revised as follows:
a. All proposed contours must tie in to existing contours, particularly the 992’, 990’ and
988’ contours on the west side of Lot 1; and the 996’, 994’ and 992’ contours on the east
side of Lot 3.
b. Staff recommends that the low floor elevations for Lots 1 and 2 be lowered one foot to
achieve an 8 foot walkout. Staff recommends that steps be installed in the garage on Lots
3 and 4 to achieve an 8 foot walkout.
c. A drainage breakpoint elevation must be shown northeast of the building pad corner on
Lot 3.
6. Hydrology calculations must be submitted and shall include pre- and post-development
volume and peak discharge rates for the 2, 10 and 100 year rainfall events.
7. Any proposed retaining wall over four feet high requires a building permit and must be
designed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota.
8. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will
be required to supply the City with a detailed haul route and traffic control plan.
9. The developer must acquire a Work in Right of Way Permit from the Engineering
Department before commencing work in the right of way and shall submit a financial
security to ensure that Orchard Lane and Forest Avenue are properly restored after the
services have been installed.
10. The developer shall pay the $29,298.00 trunk and lateral water and sewer fees in cash with
the final plat or assess them to the lots within the proposed development. The lateral
connection charges can be assessed at 8% for 8 years. The trunk hookup charges can be
assessed at 8% for 4 years.
11. Detailed grading, drainage, tree removal and erosion control plans must be submitted with
the building permit for each lot.
12. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited
to the MPCA and the Watershed District.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
38
13. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All
exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round,
according to the following table of slopes and time frames:
Type of Slope
Time
(maximum time an area can remain unvegetated
when area is not actively being worked)
Steeper than 3:1 7 Days
10:1 to 3:1 14 Days
Flatter than 10:1 21 Days
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed
soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter
system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man
made systems that discharge to a surface water.
14. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street
sweeping as-needed.
15. The plans shall be revised to show the location(s) of the rock construction entrance(s).
16. The plans shall be revised to expand the drainage and utility easement in a straight line from
the point where the 978 elevation intersects the east lot line of Lot 4, Block 1, to where the
978 elevation intersects the 20’ sanitary sewer easement at the southern edge of Lot 4, Block
1. Standard drainage & utility easements shall be dedicated in all other locations.
17. Based on the proposed developed area of approximately 2.02 acres, the water quality fees
associated with this project are $2,208; the water quantity fees are approximately $5,464. At
this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat
recording, is $7,672.
18. In the absence of parkland dedication, it is recommended that Orchard Green pay full park
dedication fees at the rate in force upon final platting. At today’s rate, these fees would total
$16,000 (4 lots x $4,000).
19. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any existing structures.
20. Provide a cleanout on the sewer service for Lot 3.
21. Final grading plans and soil reports must be submitted to the Inspections Division before
building permits will be issued.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
39
BLUFF CREEK TWIN HOMES, SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LYMAN BOULEVARD &
HIGHWAY 101, MARTIN SCHUTROP: REQUEST FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENT TO INCORPORATE THE PROPERTY IN THE 2000 MUSA;
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BLUFF CREEK
OVERLAY DISTRICT; AND SUBDIVISION WITH VARIANCES FOR AN 18 UNIT
TWIN HOME DEVELOPMENT, 2 OUTLOTS AND PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor and council. This subject site is located at the corner of
Lyman Boulevard and 101. It’s located on the south west corner. This area currently is not in the
MUSA based on the fact that doing the improvements on 101 and Lyman and the property
immediately to the west…subdivided, staff felt it’d be prudent to work with the property owner
to advance this development of this project, so it does require a land use amendment again which
we support. This item did appear before the Planning Commission on December 6th. There were
a couple changes that the Planning Commission did recommend and I’ll go through those. This
is the subject site. I’m trying to follow the paper and it’s not matching up. There we go. It’s a
little bit complex in the fact that we have to get the access to this street to tie into the future
access, so that’d be a property that’s coming, what was the Sand’s property and now looks like it
will be developed by the Shelard Group at the intersection there, and then also there is a gas line
easement which we’ll touch a little bit more about in a minute. And then there’s also the Bluff
Creek Overlay District, a significant wetland so it would be the appropriate land use. It’d be
hard to get a single family neighborhood in there based on the size itself to try to make that
transition to the Springfield neighborhood. Commercial across the street. You’ve got some
larger lots to the west so in looking at this staff felt that a twin home PUD seemed to make the
most sense. Again density on this we’re looking at 18 lots. These are more a traditional twin
home as you can see. In putting together the PUD you can have 30%. In working with the
applicant we actually got it down to 25% and put together a compliance table. The home sites
themselves would be one story. I think it’s a really nice design. A different product. We do
have variation in the fact that there’s some of the units will actually be side loaded. One of the
variances that we’re requesting is a 50 foot street and that allows, based on the pitching of the
gas line, it’s actually in this area. We talked about this earlier that it’s a 60 foot easement in
here. It was actually a 50 foot setback so as we stated earlier and looked at that ordinance, we’re
trying to have some consistency. It’s difficult for the staff too but this has quite a bit of setback
from the street, so that actually gives a built in buffer for that. One of the things that the
Planning Commission looked at is they wanted to see access through this via this cul-de-sac to
get back up to this…So I touched on some of the major developments itself. Again we looked at
the PUD as an appropriate tool to create that transition between the surrounding land uses.
Again doing a twin homes, keeping it underneath the density. We did put together design
standards. I showed you a typical house but if you look at on page 5, we put together some
setback standards. Again the interior lot lines. 5 foot so those houses, while they had their own
lot, they’ll be 10 feet apart but 5 on each side. And that was one of the recommendations that the
developers adhere to a 5 foot setback requirement. There’s a few that didn’t and that they show
the trail. There was also a large water line that they’ll have to incorporate going along 101 and
that one can accommodate potential developments in the future. So again this wetland, kind of
the water demarcation that we further develop like that is in the 2010 but that will be the buffer
for that. There’s no park dedication. There’s a park across the street so we’re taking fees for
that. There is a conditional use for development within the overlay district. They’re not
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
40
touching the primary district but there will be some minor grading so water quantity and quality
fees, handling the ponding on site. Be taking those. Again the 50 foot street. We’ll have a 31
foot cross section which is our standard again. We supported that 50 foot in order, because
we’ve got this excessive setback requirement here, and allow for some of those side loaded
garages. We think it will add a lot of street interest too. There will be tree replacement.
Approximately 23 trees. So with that there are 4 motions. We are recommending approval.
There are 4 motions. One for the comp plan amendment advancing this into the MUSA. Again
we believe that’s prudent because we’re doing all the improvements on the 3 sides, major sides
of the property. Rezoning it to the, they’re going for concept and preliminary PUD and a
preliminary plat and then finally on page 16 the conditional use permit for work within the Bluff
Creek Overlay District. So with that I’d be happy to answer any questions that you have.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff.
Councilman Lundquist: Kate, where does the, where’s the MUSA line now? Is that on Lyman
or where?
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, it’s on Lyman. Yep.
Councilman Lundquist: And with the, then what’s the western, or I guess the eastern boundary
of the MUSA area now?
Kate Aanenson: It’d be, we’d move it to here. Those lots.
Councilman Lundquist: Where is it currently?
Kate Aanenson: Oh, it’s actually right on 101. I’m sorry. Today, 101 correct.
Mayor Furlong: It’s 101 and Lyman isn’t it?
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, because you have the Springfield development that’s in. It will go down
just to Bandimere. It kind of cuts across…
Councilman Lundquist: Okay, where 101 makes a jog there is where, if you continued that
straight, that’s where it is there. So this is probably what, 200 feet? Something like that.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, it’s contiguous on the north and on the east side to the current MUSA.
And again we felt the timing of that, in meeting with the City Engineer and the property owner,
this probably goes back a year. Our development of Lyman and 101 significantly impacts the
property, so we felt it’d be prudent to let them make some wise decisions while we’re looking at
all this development and then have them not be able to make some plans for that.
Councilman Lundquist: So then along those lines, when we just approved a study or dollars for a
study tonight on 101, on the consent agenda, do we have any idea of what that’s going to look
like or what might or might not happen with, and I’d hate for something like this to come in,
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
41
spend all the money, do all the work and then all of a sudden we have a study that says well
maybe we should put a road right through the middle of it or something like that.
Kate Aanenson: 101 at this intersection…will not be changed. Actually they’re building the
new part of 101 terminus to here, so and that includes, it’s restricted median through here too to
access was another reason why it’s restricted on 101. Just past this I believe.
Mayor Furlong: You’re saying as part of this. Part of the new Highway 212 construction overall
project with the realignment of 101, this part south of Lyman on 101 is already part of that
development project.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: We’re not…create median in there.
Kate Aanenson: Which is one of the reasons we wanted to advance it because they’re being
impacted, and that restricts development because there’s actually a median I believe to, almost to
the cul-de-sac length so it’s restricted. You know one way, right-in/right-out. We looked at
some of those issues too as far as stacking, so that’s already being accommodated with the
212/101 construction, but you’re right. After that.
Councilman Lundquist: So this is far enough…
Kate Aanenson: Yep, and after that we have to examine the rest of that property. Then we kind
of get into that wetland area, those curves and that.
Councilman Lundquist: Yep. And then the park, I’m assuming when you said a park across the
street you’re talking about Bandimere?
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Councilman Lundquist: Do we have some provisions then to get from here over there without
having to try to dodge traffic across 101?
Kate Aanenson: Right I think, that was one of the reasons why the Planning Commission felt
strongly about this and making this connection to get you across the street and go back down. I
think long term wise we’ll have to look at that with 101 construction.
Councilman Lundquist: So is there a controlled intersection there for people to cross at Lyman?
Lyman and 101 will be a controlled intersection?
Paul Oehme: Yeah, there’ll be a signal there. There’ll be, there already is an existing trail along
the east side of 101 and that will be improved in connection with the 212 project.
Councilman Lundquist: Right, just so these people can get across 101. Okay.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
42
Kate Aanenson: I did want to point out one other things. I gave revised findings of fact. That
should also be included as part of your motion too.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Other questions for staff.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: My only concern was the trail going to Bandimere Park. I realize it
will be probably an empty nester type of place, or a life cycle which I like but I still would hate
to see little kids trying to zig zag across those roads on their bike.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Other questions for staff.
Councilman Peterson: The only one I had Kate is one of the negatives of using your Planning
Commission to see some of these drawings is the elevations are kind of tough to see. As I visual
the space, we’ve got some pretty good elevation changes. I’m guessing 30-40 feet. Is it
dropping from Lyman south? The road in and of itself in and out is going to be relatively level
isn’t it?
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, up at the top of the street you’re at 923 and then back…
Councilman Peterson: 30 plus feet.
Kate Aanenson: Dropping back…then the biggest change is where it comes back of those
lots…walk out on the backs of those.
Mayor Furlong: Can you point to us on there where the existing home is located approximately?
Kate Aanenson: Right there.
Mayor Furlong: Right in there, okay.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, and the driveway was coming here, so again for lifestyle for them to be
able to do that, restricting the access point. Making those changes kind of letting them make
some other hard decisions.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Anything else Councilman Peterson? Questions? Councilman Labatt?
Councilman Labatt: No sir.
Mayor Furlong: Councilman Lundquist?
Councilman Lundquist: Kate, when you looked at the comp plan stuff, this area, what was the
original guiding for it?
Kate Aanenson: Low density. It does meet the low density requirements, so it’s within that.
I’m sorry, I should have stated that.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
43
Councilman Lundquist: You probably did.
Kate Aanenson: No, I don’t think I did. It’s actually guided low density and that’s what they’re
coming in at. It goes up to 4 units an acre. That on this is actually 3.3. 3.38. And again, we
were trying to balance that because you have some existing larger homes and the single family
and commercial, what makes the most sense. And the price point and the look. We think it adds
a different type of product. Housing product in the city, which is a nice balance.
Councilman Lundquist: Okay, thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Couple of questions in terms of the, and this may be a question for Mr. Oehme.
In terms of the length of that cul-de-sac and how, it looks like the right-of-way comes right up to
the right-of-way on 101, is that correct?
Paul Oehme: 8 feet away I believe.
Mayor Furlong: It’s 8 feet away, okay. Is there any issue or concern with regard to cars driving
on that road with traffic on 101 in terms of distraction? And I’m thinking specifically in the
evening with lights and headlights and such like that.
Kate Aanenson: We can look at landscaping maybe too Paul.
Mayor Furlong: Anything to, I guess has that been addressed or not? And if not, can we
consider.
Paul Oehme: We can look at it. It’s a good point. We didn’t really take a look at it. The trips
generated on the new roadway.
Mayor Furlong: They’ll be limited.
Paul Oehme: Be very limited so I don’t know how much conflict it would be.
Mayor Furlong: And there may not be but I, the right-of-way looks like it comes, if there’s 8
feet between the two right-of-ways then, is that part of the private property for one of the lots or
does it touch? You’d still have the 15 foot from the curb to the right-of-way is about 15 feet
there so you’d have that buffer area. But you don’t want to be planting anything in there.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: And there’s also a significant water line going down there…We can look at
that.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
44
Mayor Furlong: Take a look at that between preliminary and final. The other question I have, is
the, or the access point for this road off of Lyman, is that then where we will line up the access
point for the property to the north?
Kate Aanenson: That’s the intent.
Mayor Furlong: That’s the intent.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, we’re just trying to get clarification on that. I think from Paul and I
meeting with MnDot, wanted that road, we have a water line to shift that as it touches down at
Lyman, to shift that a little bit to the east to have the roadway over our water, our utilities there.
So that is the goal. That has to be shifted all before it comes back for final plat.
Mayor Furlong: Just for understanding, where does this Highway 101 from the north currently
come down just across from that road? Can you see? Okay, so it’s right in there. Okay. What’s
the anticipated access control, or the control onto Lyman for those two roads?
Paul Oehme: Onto Lyman there? There won’t be any signals or controlled.
Mayor Furlong: It will just be stop lights going onto Lyman, correct? Or stop signs.
Paul Oehme: There will be, well at the new intersection there there will be turn lanes designated
for right turn lanes and left turn lanes into the property so there will be controlled access into that
site via the turn lanes but.
Mayor Furlong: On Lyman.
Paul Oehme: On Lyman, correct.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright, but there isn’t going to be a stop light or anything?
Paul Oehme: No stop signs, no stop lights.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright, and it’s not restricted to a right-in/right-out?
Paul Oehme: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Paul Oehme: It will be a full access.
Kate Aanenson: I think there is a median but it stops…
Paul Oehme: Yeah, it might be farther up on 101.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
45
Mayor Furlong: Okay, and the area of Bluff Creek, just for clarification. It might be in the staff
report. If it is I apologize for the redundant question but is that the primary zone or secondary
zone?
Kate Aanenson: …that would be the secondary zone. It’s a no touch in the primary zone which
is not.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Does the primary zone come onto the property though?
Kate Aanenson: Yes it does.
Mayor Furlong: Okay so, and these all meet the setbacks from that?
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Okay. Good, thank you. Any other questions for staff? If not, is
the applicant here this evening? Good evening.
Martin Schutrop: Good evening council and Mayor. My name is Martin Schutrop. I’m the
developer of the property and so I’m here to answer any questions you may have.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any questions for the applicant? Thank you. Appreciate you
being here. Again this was heard at the Planning Commission. The public hearing was held. I
don’t know that there were any significant changes but if somebody would like to provide any
comments to the council, we’d be happy to hear them at this time.
Debbie Lloyd: Debbie Lloyd, 7302 Laredo Drive. Hello again.
Mayor Furlong: Hello. Thanks for waiting.
Debbie Lloyd: I would have sent this via e-mail but I was not able to access all the information
on the web site last night. It was my first opportunity to review everything and I do have two
concerns. One, I did address during the meeting and I didn’t see any update on it in the report
and I know how many details there are to review so I just want to bring it up one more time
again. The interior, no I’m sorry, the interior, I’m looking at this. Lot 1 and 2. Interior public
right-of-way. Page 5 of the report. Lot 1 and 2 have a 20 foot interior public right-of-way. In
Section 20-506, which I didn’t have with me at the Planning Commission meeting, it states that
the minimum setback is supposed to be 30 feet but it may be waived by the City Council when it
is demonstrated that environmental protection will be enhanced…minimum front yard setback of
20 feet shall be maintained. I didn’t see anything to indicate the environmental enhancement by
reducing the setback to 20 feet. And then seeing the walkway in there, I’m thinking how far is
that going to be from those homes? I mean basically that’s cutting in. So I just want, in case you
weren’t alerted to that, I just wanted to make you aware of that fact. And then the second
question I have is, because it is a private street, and there’s no parking I believe on private streets
in PUD’s, where will people park since, I mean really they’re cut off from parking on other
streets. Perhaps there should be provision for parking in this development. Thank you.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
46
Mayor Furlong: Alright, thank you Ms. Lloyd. First question was on the justification for the 20
foot setback for Lots 1 and 2 versus 30.
Kate Aanenson: I think it’s woven into the 50 foot street setback and the fact that we’ve got that
excessive gas line easement pinched by the Bluff Creek Overlay District and in a PUD you can
set what other standards you want to put in place. So this circumstance, and to allow for the
architectural change that the staff wanted of the side loaded garage and add interest, to give them
that relief. And the circumstance when we looked at guest parking, we accommodate based on
this type of product, there is stacking in the driveway itself to accomplish that. Kind of treat this
similar to what we have on other twin home projects or our single home. Most the guest parking
is in the driveway.
Mayor Furlong: Clarification I guess then, because the staff report refers to public right-of-way,
is the cul-de-sac itself a private street or would that be a public street?
Paul Oehme: The street itself?
Mayor Furlong: The cul-de-sac.
Paul Oehme: The cul-de-sac is.
Kate Aanenson: It’s a public street.
Mayor Furlong: Private street as I understood in reading the report and the minutes of the
Planning Commission related to the shared driveways for the side loaded garages, is that correct?
Kate Aanenson: That’s my understanding, correct.
Mayor Furlong: So the private streets are the access to the garages off of the public street?
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. So I think, I don’t know Ms. Lloyd, that’s how I understood it when I
looked at that. That because you’re two properties sharing the same driveway, by definition it
becomes a private street.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Because it’s going to have the same cross section on pavement
width 31 that we would have on a normal street.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, but the cul-de-sac is a public right-of-way?
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: With normal.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
47
Kate Aanenson: It’s a private street when you’ve got the driveway…
Mayor Furlong: Okay. And I guess to the specific question, what’s the environmental interest
with regard to the setback to 20 feet. I heard the Bluff Creek Overlay District mentioned as one
of the issues.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. As you’re dropping those slopes back down, it’s encumbered by an
excessive pipeline easement. We felt narrowing that and pushing those driveways closer, you
got the adequate parking with the street and the driveways. We felt that would work and to turn
the garages.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright, thank you. Thank you. Any other public comments on this
project? Okay, thank you. I’ll bring it back to council for discussion. And I’m going to take an
amalgamate question. On the extending the MUSA over this area, does that create, are there any
other issues or precedence that’s being created there? I mean this particular case it seems to
me…
Kate Aanenson: I think our approach with the Met Council is the fact to bring this forward we
felt comfortable in the fact that we’re doing a substantial regional system change that has
implication for this corner and we think that that’s the major issue.
Mayor Furlong: It’s contiguous on both sides.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah with two state highways, or two regional systems. The state highway and
the county collector road.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Comments. Discussion on the project.
Councilman Lundquist: My only comments would be not generally in favor of you know
rushing and kind of piecemeal development, which one could argue either way on this one but
since Kate I think you made a good point of this one kind of being squeezed on a lot of directions
and so I’m inclined to make an exception here and go through that and give us one little piece in
there and, seems like a good project. A good product that we don’t have a lot of or any of so,
you know inclined to say okay on this piece on something that generally I wouldn’t support for
those reasons but think this one warrants it.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Other comments.
Councilman Peterson: Mr. Mayor I think that to, it adds a certain amount of housing stock that
we don’t have a lot of in Chanhassen. It’s one of those things that cycles through but I think it
seems to be a very nice design into our community so, I certainly believe the exceptions are with
merit.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Comments, Councilwoman Tjornhom.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
48
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I agree with Councilman Peterson. I think it’s a good fit for the area
concerning what’s going to be going on around it.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
Councilman Labatt: Agree with everybody. I think the timing is correct with, considering
what’s happening with 212 and 101.
Mayor Furlong: Yeah I would concur. I think to ask this property owner to wait, there doesn’t
seem to be the justification. I think anytime, to Councilman Lundquist’s point, I think you need
to be very hesitate to deviate from the comprehensive plan but I think when you merit or weigh
the merits of the individual case, I think this one certainly is justified and it’s, it works on a
number of different levels, which have been mentioned so I would certainly support it as well.
Any further discussion? If not, is there a motion? The motions I believe begin on page 409 of
our electronic packet.
Councilman Labatt: Mayor, I move that we approve comprehensive plan amendment to
incorporate the property in the current Urban Service Area subject to review and the approval of
the Met Council. Condition A. Can we take these all at one time or do we take them all as one?
Mayor Furlong: I don’t know that there’s any reason to split them unless there’s, let’s make
them at once and.
Councilman Labatt: Okay, so I move condition A, B and C in staff report subject to the
following conditions as indicated and set forth, and adopting the current new findings of fact.
Kate Aanenson: And there’s one other, D is actually on page 16. So it’s A, B, C, D.
Mayor Furlong: D moves down to the Wetland Alteration, is that right? Bluff Creek Overlay
District.
Councilman Labatt: Yeah, the findings of fact go with C correct?
Kate Aanenson: With all of them.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. And condition D.
Mayor Furlong: So items A, B, C and D with conditions laid out in the staff report for each of
those individual items is appropriate, subject to the revised findings of fact. Thank you. Is there
a second?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none we’ll
proceed with the vote.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
49
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council
approve the following items subject to the revised Findings of Fact:
A. Resolution #2006-05: The City Council approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment
incorporating the property in the current Metropolitan Urban Services Area (MUSA)
subject to review and approval by the Metropolitan Council.
B. Approval of the Concept and Preliminary Planned Unit Development rezoning the
property from A2, Agricultural Estate District to PUD-R, Planned Unit Development-
Residential incorporating the development design standards contained in the staff report.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
C. Approval of the preliminary plat creating 18 lots, two outlots and right-of-way for
public streets with a variances for the public street right-of-way width and the use of
private streets to access lots 8, 9, 12, 13, 16 and 17, plans prepared by Ryan Engineering,
dated October 28, 2005, subject to the following conditions:
1. A sidewalk connection on the south side of the street from the internal street cul-de-sac to the
intersection of Lyman Boulevard shall be provided.
2. The development shall pay full park fees in effect at the time of final plat approval.
3. Applicant shall resubmit for city approval a landscaping plan that includes 84 trees. At least
one tree is required in each front yard. Common areas must be sodded and provided with
irrigation. Native plantings will be required along the southern edge of the development
parallel to the wetland. These plantings shall be species selected from the Bluff Creek
Management Plan planting list.
4. Applicant shall meet the minimum number and types of plantings required for the
bufferyards.
5. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees,
shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that
fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to
Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1.
6. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections once construction of the new
roadway allows passage of vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota Fire Code Section 501.4.
7. Fire apparatus access roads and water supply for fire protection is required to be installed.
Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of
construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
50
8. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of
fire apparatus and shall be serviced so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities.
Pursuant to Minnesota Fire Code Section 503.2.3.
9. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be
removed from site or chipped.
10. Submit street names to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for
review and approval.
11. Two additional fire hydrants will be required; one at the intersection of Lyman Boulevard
and the new proposed road, and one in the area of Lot 13/14.
12. A minimum 16.5 foot buffer strip shall be maintained from the delineated edge of the
wetland. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the
City’s wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the
direction of City staff, before construction begins and shall pay the City $20 per sign.
13. A drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated over all of Outlot B. The developer may
dedicate Outlot B to the City.
14. All structures shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer.
15. All structures shall meet a 40 foot structural setback from the Primary Corridor boundary of
the Bluff Creek Overlay District as required by Chanhassen City Code. In addition, no
grading shall occur within the first 20 feet of the Primary Corridor. The plans shall be
revised to eliminate grading within 20 feet of the Primary Corridor.
16. The plans shall be revised to include the City of Chanhassen’s standard detail 5300 for silt
fence. Type 2 silt fence shall be used along the southern grading limits and at the normal
water level of the pond. Type 1 silt fence shall be used elsewhere. Silt fence shall be
installed around the storm water pond at the pond’s normal water level until surrounding
areas have adequate vegetative erosion control established.
17. The plans shall be revised to include City of Chanhassen standard detail 5302A for Wimco or
similar catch basin inlet protection.
18. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year
round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames:
Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can
Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area
10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.)
Flatter than 10:1 21 days
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
51
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed
soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter
system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man
made systems that discharge to a surface water.
19. All erosion and sediment control measures shall be installed and maintained in accordance with
City, Carver County Water Resource Management Area and MPCA permit requirements.
20. A SWPPP should be developed by Ryan Engineering for the site which would encompass an
erosion and sediment control plan. The SWPPP is needed prior to applying for the NPDES
permit.
21. Erosion control blanket is needed for the slopes NE of lot 18 and the southern slopes from about
the 912 / 910 proposed contours to the bottom of the slope within 14 days of final grade.
22. Energy dissipation at the FES inlet to the permanent storm water pond is needed. A detail is
needed.
23. The proposed storm water basin must be used as a temporary sediment trap during construction
and must be excavated in the initial construction phases of the development. A temporary
diversion berm should be constructed to divert runoff from lots 18 to 11 into the pond. This
should be included in the SWPPP.
24. A temporary outlet and / or a temporary stabilized EOF for the temporary basin is needed.
25. Inlet controls are needed for the CB’s within 24 hours of installation. A detail is needed;
Chanhassen city specifications are Wimco type inlet control or equal.
26. The silt fence as proposed is running up and down the slope along the west and east boundaries
of the site. The silt fence must be installed with J-hooks to effectively provide sediment control
and not concentrate runoff to the south.
27. A concrete washout area is needed in the SWPPP; silt fence, sump area and rock driveway
should be used and could be located in Outlot A.
28. A permanent outlet structure is needed for the permanent storm water basin in the southwest
corner of the pond. Detail is needed.
29. A stable emergency over flow (EOF) is needed for the permanent storm water basin. Riprap or
a turf reinforcement mate (TRM) could be used and specifications and detail area needed.
30. The contractor shall inspect daily all erosion control measures and perform maintenance on
BMPs as needed or required.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
52
31. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat
recording, is $21,857.
32. The final plans must include the following revisions:
a. Existing contours within 100 feet of the proposed development must be shown on the
plan.
b. Note the top and bottom of wall elevations for all retaining walls.
c. Note the location and elevation of the emergency overflow on the east end of the cul de
sac.
d. A full-size drainage area map must be submitted.
e. A five-foot wide concrete sidewalk must be constructed on one side of the street.
f. Show the proposed street light layout.
g. A stop sign must be installed at the intersection at Lyman Boulevard.
h. All plan sheets must be signed by an Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota.
33. If import or export of material is required for the development of this property, the applicant
must submit a detailed haul route to the City.
34. The existing well and septic system must be properly removed/abandoned.
35. The developer must field verify the sewer and watermain stub locations and elevations. If
the stubs have not been installed the developer shall directional bore the utilities under
Lyman Boulevard. All costs and permits associated with this work would be the developer’s
responsibility.
36. Public utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's
latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and
specifications must be submitted at time of final plat and shall include all required
information.
37. The applicant is required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the
necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee
installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval.
38. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g.,
Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES
Phase II Construction Site Permit), Department of Health, MCES, Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers, Minnesota Department of
Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval.
39. Access and maintenance agreements shall be recorded against the benefiting properties for
the private streets.
40. Buildings over 8,500 sq. ft. in size must be protected with an automatic fire protection
system. The State of Minnesota is in the process of revising Chapter 1306 of the Minnesota
State Building Code regarding fire protection systems. It is not yet entirely clear how these
changes will affect residential construction. It is important that the developer meet with the
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
53
Inspections Division prior to final design to determine what ramifications, if any, the new
requirements will have on the project.
41. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. Existing
utilities and on-site sewage treatment systems must be abandoned in accordance applicable
regulations.
42. A final grading plan and soils report must be to the Inspections Division before permits can
be issued.
43. Retaining walls over four high must be designed by a professional engineer and cannot be
constructed until a building permit is obtained.
44. The applicant shall create a Homeowners Association to take responsibility of the retaining
walls and maintain them.
45. Walls and projections within 3 feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire-
resistive construction.
46. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by
the Building Official.”
47. That the developer provides trail access to the southwest corner of 101 and Lyman.
48. That the developer revises drawings to adhere to the 5 foot setback requirements.
49. The developer shall install a 16 inch watermain along 101 and loop the watermain within the
project to this watermain. The city will reimburse the developer for the costs of oversizing
the pipe for the 16 inch watermain.
D. Approval of Conditional Use Permit to develop within the Bluff Creek Overlay District
subject to the following conditions:
1. No grading is allowed within the first 20 feet of the Primary Corridor boundary.
2. All structures must meet a 40 foot structural setback from the Primary Corridor boundary.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Mayor Furlong: Just a quick comment. We had a number of these items that came through the
Planning Commission and I think they did a great job working through a number of the issues
here so, Ms. Aanenson and Mr. Papke who are here, I think the Planning Commission did a good
job on all these so we appreciate your efforts. Please relay that back to them. That completes
the items of new business.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
54
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS:
Mayor Furlong: If none I would direct my fellow council members to the second to last page
under the correspondence. After a couple pages of financial reporting. Page 528 on the
electronic packet. That is an invitation to a meeting that will be put on at Carver County this
coming Saturday, the 14th. This is the outgrowth of recommendations for Eastern Carver County
Leadership group which Mr. Gerhardt and I regularly attend, which consists of the cities within
School District 112 and the county and the school district. This is a matter that’s really relating
to emergency preparedness within our county, within our city. I think this is something that
we’ll be looking at going forward this year. I think this was suggested and I think periodic
review of what we have in place, we have systems in place but I think it’s important that we
periodically review it. I would hope that all of us can attend. I know that they’ve extended the
invitation to cities and elected officials across the county so, Mr. Gerhardt if we can be sure that
that gets posted as a meeting with the likelihood that a quorum may be present there. But this is
a good opportunity for all of us to get together to understand what level of preparedness is in
place. To ask questions. To meet with other elected officials as well, so I would hope that
people can attend. Any other council presentations? Okay.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
Todd Gerhardt: If you go to the last page we have our building permit valuation summary and
didn’t put this in for any reason but to keep you updated on the history of our building permit
valuations. We ended 2005 meeting our goal on revenue. Might be a little bit under, but kind of
a nice little history there. Residential in the earlier years, ’98 through probably about 2003 were
heavy on the residential, light on the commercial. Kind of the last 2 years we’ve been heavy on
the commercial and kind of light on the residential but if you look 2003, 04 and 05, in 2003 we
had a non-profit, I think it was St. Hubert’s expansion. There was $5 million, or probably
Westwood Church. $5 million there so we’ve pretty much been the same level for the last 3
years when it comes to residential and commercial and addition valuations from a tax paying
standpoint. So, any questions on any of those? Some other good news that we received this past
week, the Chamber has selected the City as a finalist as the Business of the Year potential
recipient and that presentation will be made at their January 24th luncheon. I think I sent an e-
mail out to council members and mayor on that so if anybody is interested in attending that, let
me know and I can send in an RSVP for you. So I don’t know who the other finalists are, but it
was just nice to be named in that group. I think we had a great 2005 and I think this is a little
nice recognition just to be a finalist. I think I notified everybody on Christmas Eve we had a
carbon monoxide scare at a residential home where we had 5 adults, or 4 adults, or 2 adults and 3
children that had come down with carbon monoxide poisoning. Were sent down to Hennepin
Medical Center for treatment. Just want to get the message out there that everybody should have
a carbon monoxide detector in their homes. This is a real wake-up call. Luckily it turned out in
favor of the homeowners and our volunteer firemen did a fantastic job of responding and
recognizing the problem right off the bat so. And the homeowners for calling 911 when they
detected people weren’t feeling well so. Dizziness. Lightness of the head and headaches are
some of the symptoms for that, and I’m sure Greg Geske will probably talk a little bit about that
at our next City Council meeting. With that, that’s all I had.
City Council Meeting – January 9, 2006
55
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Gerhardt?
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to adjourn the meeting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 8:55
p.m..
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
JANUARY 3, 2006
Chairman Sacchet called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Uli Sacchet, Kurt Papke, Jerry McDonald, Debbie Larson, Dan
Keefe, and Mark Undestad
MEMBERS ABSENT: Deborah Zorn
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner; and
Alyson Fauske, Assistant City Engineer
PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS:
Deb Lloyd 7302 Laredo Drive
Janet & Jerry Paulsen 7305 Laredo Drive
PUBLIC HEARING:
PUBLIC HEARING TO REVIEW AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
ADDRESSING POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT AND MAKING THE APPROPRIATE FINDINGS AND DECISIONS
ON THE NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT; REQUEST FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WITH VARIANCES; AND A SITE PLAN REVIEW
APPLICATION TO CONSTRUCT A LOCAL ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION
SUBSTATION ON PROPERTY ZONED INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK, MINNESOTA
VALLEY ELECTRIC, PLANNING CASE NO. 05-30.
Public Present:
Name Address
Ronald Jabs 125 MVEC Drive, Jordan
Dennis Wolf 125 MVEC Drive, Jordan
Gene Kotz 17845 Highway 10, Elk River
Carole Schmidt 17845 Highway 10, Elk River
Sharmeen Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner Papke asked staff to
explain the conditions necessary for approving a negative declaration of an Environmental
Impact Statement. Commissioner McDonald asked for clarification of the variance requests.
Commissioner Keefe asked staff to clarify the size of the wall for screening purposes, site
drainage patterns, and notification requirements, especially for people in the mobile home park.
Chairman Sacchet asked for clarification on the findings regarding improvements to the site, and
lighting plans. The applicant, Ron Jabs with Minnesota Valley Electric introduced his team
Planning Commission Summary – January 3, 2006
2
consisting of Denny Wolf with Minnesota Valley Electric, and Gene Kotz and Carole Schmidt
with Great River Energy. Mr. Jabs and Denny Wolf addressed concerns of the Planning
Commission regarding EMF emission, screening, lighting, the height of the wall system,
landscaping, and if Minnesota Valley Electric is aware of any environmental findings against the
Xcel facility. Carole Schmidt gave a brief summary of the environmental assessment study that
she prepared. Chairman Sacchet opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public
hearing was closed. After commissioner comments, the following motions were made.
Papke moved, McDonald seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of
Site Plan 05-30 for an electric substation as shown on the plans dated Received September
2nd and November 30th, 2005 with variances to allow access off of Stoughton Avenue,
maintain a 200 foot setback from existing residential neighborhood and construct a facility
on a 2.35 acre parcel, based on the findings of the staff report subject to the following
conditions:
1. Building Official Conditions:
a. Permits are required to construct the perimeter wall and fence.
b. The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of
Minnesota.
2. The applicant will provide additional information about drainage to staff for further
review.
3. Annual maintenance shall be performed on the infiltration basin so that it will function as
modeled.
4. The applicant must meet minimum ordinance requirements for bufferyards and submit a
revised landscape plan to the city for approval.
5. Overstory plantings shall be added to the understory totals for bufferyard plantings.
6. Detailed lighting plans shall be submitted including photometrics and type of light fixture.
The ordinance requires no more than 0.5 foot candle at the property line. Only downcast
shielded fixtures are allowed as required by ordinance. Any security (motion detection)
lighting should also be shown.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
Papke moved, McDonald seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval
for Conditional Use Permit 05-30, for the construction the electric substation and a 10 foot
wall with the following condition:
1. A security fence as specified in the National Electric Safety Code shall surround the
Distribution and Underground Electric Distribution Substations.
Planning Commission Summary – January 3, 2006
3
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
Papke moved, McDonald seconded that the Planning Commission recommends that the
City Council approve a Resolution Declaring No Need for an Environmental Impact
Statement for the Minnesota Valley Electric Substation. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
JACOB’S TAVERN: REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A 6,808 SQUARE
FOOT RESTAURANT BUILDING ON 2.02 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF HIGHWAY 5 AND CENTURY BOULEVARD, TRUMAN HOWELL
ARCHITECTS, PLANNING CASE NO. 05-40.
Public Present:
Name Address
Truman Howell 17815 Hutchins Drive, Minnetonka
Jacob, John & Joan Howe-Pullis 1385 Wildflower Lane, Chaska
Scott Thorpe 6716 Point Drive, Edina
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner McDonald asked for
clarification of what staff is proposing for gables as opposed to what the applicant has shown on
the drawings. Commissioner Keefe asked staff to explain how they calculate the height of
buildings, façade transparency, parking easements, and the level of service at the intersection of
5 and Century Boulevard. Commissioner Papke expressed concern with the fake silo element.
Truman Howell, spoke on behalf of the applicants, addressing the architectural and functional
design of the silo, dormers, cross parking with the hotel, and pedestrian circulation. The
applicants passed around a sample menu for the commissions to look at. Chairman Sacchet
opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed. After commission
discussion, the following motion was made.
McDonald moved, Larson seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval
of Site Plan Planning Case #05-40, plans prepared by Schoell & Madsen, Inc., dated
November 10, 2005, for a 6,808 square-foot restaurant on Lot 1, Block 1, Arboretum
Business Park 6th Addition, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary
security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping.
2. A recorded parking easement for the benefit of Lot 1, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 6th
Addition for the use of nine stalls on the Holiday Inn Express site (Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum
Business Park 6th Addition) is required as part of the site plan.
3. The developer shall install site furnishings including benches, bicycle racks, and tables.
Planning Commission Summary – January 3, 2006
4
4. All signs shall require a separate sign permit.
5. Mechanical equipment, either roof-mounted or at grade, must be screened.
6. The building must be protected with an automatic fire sprinkler system.
7. The building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State
of Minnesota.
8. The building owner and or their representatives shall meet with the Inspections Division to
discuss plan review and permit procedures.
9. Pedestrian ramps shall be provided in all locations where the sidewalk ends at a curb.
10. The full access driveway onto Century Boulevard is allowed. However, should the driveway
cease to operate in a safe manner in the opinion of the property owners of Lots 1 or 2, Block
1, Arboretum Business Park 6th Addition, or Lots 1, 2 or 3, Block 1, Arboretum Business
Park 4th Addition, or if any of the following conditions are met, the property owners of Lots 1
and 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 6th Addition and Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1,
Arboretum Business Park 4th Addition shall be assessed 100% of the costs incurred to correct
the conditions in a fashion acceptable to the City of Chanhassen:
a. Level of service “F” at the intersection during peak AM and PM times.
b. Level of service “D” or below at the intersection during non-peak times.
c. Significant accidents that are attributed to the configuration of the intersection occur that
indicate a mutually recognized safety concern at the intersection.
11. The slope located along the southern property line shall be seeded with a native grass mix
and left natural. The applicant will be allowed to mow along the parking lot and trail if
necessary.
12. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to ensure the existing downstream storm water
infrastructure is sized adequately for the proposed development.
13. Two details for silt fence are included on the detail sheet. The old detail for silt fence (Detail
5300 last revised January of 2003) should be removed from the detail sheet. The plans
should be revised to show inlet protection around all storm sewer inlets.
14. Wimco-type inlet controls should be specified for inlet protection. Inlet protection shall be
provided for existing catch basins immediately adjacent to the project.
15. During installation of the proposed storm sewer infrastructure to the existing storm sewer,
temporary caps or plugs should be provided until the installation of the pipes and inlets are
complete.
Planning Commission Summary – January 3, 2006
5
16. A temporary cover of mulch and seed is needed within 14 days of final grade for any
exposed soils or if any exposed soils are not actively worked within a 14-day time period.
17. Any sediment tracked upon paved surfaces must be scraped and swept within 24 hours.
18. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies
(e.g., Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(NPDES Phase II Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
(for dewatering), Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of
Health) and comply with their conditions of approval.
19. A professional civil engineer registered in the State of Minnesota must sign all plans.
20. The applicant will be required to submit storm sewer sizing design data for a 10-year, 24-
hour storm event with storm sewer drainage map prior to building permit issuance.
21. The applicant should be aware that any off-site grading will require an easement from the
appropriate property owner.
22. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the
City’s Building Department.
23. Add the latest City Detail Plate Nos. 1004, 5214, 5300 and 5302.
24. The site will be subject to City sanitary sewer and water hookup charges at the time of
building permit issuance. The 2006 trunk utility hookup charges are $1,575.00 per unit for
sanitary sewer and $4,078.00 per unit for water.
25. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited
to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, MnDOT, etc.
26. On the utility plan show all the existing utility sewer type, size, slope and class.
27. Cross-access easements for the shared driveway access must be obtained and recorded
against the lots.
28. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees,
shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that
fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to
Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1.
29. Yellow curbing and “No Parking Fire Lane” signs will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire
Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and location of signs to be installed.
Planning Commission Summary – January 3, 2006
6
30. Builder must comply with the following Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention
Division Policies.
a. #1-1990 regarding fire alarm systems,
b. #4-1991 regarding notes to be included on all site plans,
c. #7-1991 regarding pre-fire drawings,
d. #29-1992 regarding premise identification,
e. #34-1993 regarding water service installation,
f. #36-1994 regarding proper water line sizing,
g. #40-1995 regarding fire protection systems.”
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CHRISTENSEN SUBDIVISION: REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY
INTO 2 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS WITH VARIANCES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT
6710 GOLDEN COURT AND ZONED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, APPLICANT
ROBERT CHIRSTENSEN, PLANNING CASE NO. 05-44.
Sharmeen Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner Papke asked for
clarification regarding the placement of the driveway. The applicant, Robert Christensen
clarified that the driveway staff is requesting be shifted is his current driveway. Chairman
Sacchet opened the public hearing. Janet Paulsen, 7305 Laredo Drive asked for clarification on
the driveways, and where property lines are measured. Deb Lloyd, 7302 Laredo Drive asked if
this property was within 1,000 feet of Lake Lucy because there was no notice of the impervious
surface requirement and concern with the number of access points. Chairman Sacchet closed the
public hearing. The following motion was then made.
Larson moved, Undestad seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of
the preliminary plat for Planning Case 05-44 for Christensen Subdivision for 2 lots with
variances to allow two flag lots as shown on the plans dated received December 2, 2005, subject
to the following conditions:
1. A minimum of one tree (2 ½” diameter) is required in the front yard of each lot.
2. All areas outside of the grading limits shall be protected by tree preservation fencing.
Fencing shall be installed prior to grading and excavation for homes on each lot and located
at the dripline or beyond whenever possible. Any trees shown as preserved that are removed
or damaged shall be replaced at a rate of 2:1 diameter inches.
3. Silt fence shall be installed along the grading limits along the east edge of the site from the north
property line to the rock construction entrance. Two silt fences shall be installed in “smiles”
perpendicular to the flow line upstream of the 18” CMP leaving the site to slow the water and
prevent discharge of sediment from the site.
Planning Commission Summary – January 3, 2006
7
4. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street
sweeping as needed.
5. Based on the proposed developed area of approximately 1.05 acres, the water quality fees
associated with this project are $1,680; the water quantity fees are approximately $3,045. At
this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat
recording, is $4,725.00.
6. Prior to City Council consideration of the preliminary plat, the following changes must be
incorporated into the plans:
a. All plans must be signed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota.
b. The plans must show the proposed lowest floor elevation for Lot 1.
c. A separate utility plan must be submitted and must resolve the apparent conflict of the
existing 6” watermain over the existing sanitary sewer manhole on Lot 1.
d. The utility plan must show the lateral sanitary sewer within the east-west portion of
Golden Glow Court to the manhole within proposed Lot 1.
e. The utility plan must show the sanitary sewer service to the Martinka property.
f. A 20-foot wide drainage and utility easement must be platted over the existing 6”
watermain on Lot 2. The easement shall be centered over the watermain.
g. Drainage and utility easements must be platted over the existing sanitary sewer and
watermain services to the house on Lot 2 and the Martinka property. The easements
shall be 15 feet wide and centered between the sanitary sewer and watermain services.
h. The utility plan must include notes where conflicts between services and/or culverts
appear.
7. Prior to City Council consideration of the final plat, the developer must comply with the
following:
a. Hydrology calculations must be submitted and shall include pre- and post-development
volume and peak discharge rates for the 2, 10 and 100-year rainfall events.
b. Hydraulic calculations verifying the design of the driveway culverts must also be
submitted.
c. Any proposed retaining wall over four feet high requires a building permit and must be
designed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota.
d. Soil boring information must be submitted.
e. The driveway to Lot 2 must be at least 10 feet from the property line.
8. Building Official Conditions:
a. Separate water and sewer services must be provided for each lot.
9. Fire Marshal conditions:
a. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy Premises Identification (Copy
Attached).
Planning Commission Summary – January 3, 2006
8
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner McDonald noted the verbatim and summary
minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated December 6, 2005 as presented.
Chairman Sacchet adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 8:40 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 3, 2006
Chairman Sacchet called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Uli Sacchet, Kurt Papke, Jerry McDonald, Debbie Larson, Dan
Keefe, and Mark Undestad
MEMBERS ABSENT: Deborah Zorn
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner; and
Alyson Fauske, Assistant City Engineer
PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS:
Deb Lloyd 7302 Laredo Drive
Janet & Jerry Paulsen 7305 Laredo Drive
PUBLIC HEARING:
PUBLIC HEARING TO REVIEW AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
ADDRESSING POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT AND MAKING THE APPROPRIATE FINDINGS AND DECISIONS
ON THE NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT; REQUEST FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WITH VARIANCES; AND A SITE PLAN REVIEW
APPLICATION TO CONSTRUCT A LOCAL ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION
SUBSTATION ON PROPERTY ZONED INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK, MINNESOTA
VALLEY ELECTRIC, PLANNING CASE NO. 05-30.
Public Present:
Name Address
Ronald Jabs 125 MVEC Drive, Jordan
Dennis Wolf 125 MVEC Drive, Jordan
Gene Kotz 17845 Highway 10, Elk River
Carole Schmidt 17845 Highway 10, Elk River
Sharmeen Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item.
Sacchet: Thank you Sharmeen. Questions from staff. Anybody? Kurt, go ahead.
Papke: Okay. On the top of page 3 of staff report you’re recommending approval of a resolution
of negative declaration of an environmental impact statement. This is a new one for me and
could you please explain the conditions for granting such a negative declaration. How did we
arrive at the fact that it was lawful and right to do this?
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
2
Al-Jaff: First of all the environmental assessment worksheet basically looks at given standards.
Given criteria that we agreed upon, I believe it was a month ago. When we conducted the
scoping of the EA. These elements were studied, were analyzed and there were no negative
impact on the environment based upon the information that we gathered. There are some
recommendations that were made in the environmental assessment. Based upon the information
that we have in the environmental assessment, you really do not need to go into any further
study. An environmental impact statement would take this entire process a step further and go
into additional recommendations. Additional, it will take each impact. Analyze it further. We
did not see the need for that in this case. We believe that the environmental assessment that we
have addressed all of these issues.
Papke: Where I’m coming from is, let’s take a case where we would have a disgruntled neighbor
or something and they said okay you, the city planners and the Planning Commission approved
this negative declaration. What is the legal basis for this? Can it be challenged? I’m just
looking to make sure that you know this is all buttoned up and we haven’t left ourself exposed
here to any kind of a challenge of this resolution of negative declaration.
Al-Jaff: It has been published in the.
Papke: Reviewed by the city attorney or anything like that?
Al-Jaff: It has not been reviewed by the city attorney, however we have been working with the
city attorney step by step to make sure that it’s published properly. It went to every individual,
every agency that needs to review their, this environmental assessment. Give us their
professional opinion and so far every comment that we have received has been, there’s no further
need for additional review.
Papke: Okay.
Al-Jaff: And the public hearing process that you have before you today is another step in that
direction.
Papke: Okay. Second question and this may be, you may have to defer this one to the applicant.
We’re stating here, we’re justifying the variance from the 500 foot distance by saying okay, the
subject site is 200 feet from the mobile park and we’re removing the existing substation so it’s
moving farther away. Okay, that’s goodness. But this is a great drawing of the new field
strengths around the new substation and the wires but the one thing, it wasn’t clear to me from
the staff report is, if I were to go out there with measuring instruments right next to that mobile
home park, when we put up the new substation, we tear down the old one, is it possible that the
newer substation is emitting more EMF? Is the level going to go down or stay the same or go up
in the mobile home park when this is all said and done? And we’ll leave that for the applicant.
Okay.
Al-Jaff: I will let the applicant answer that question, and you will be pleased with that answer.
Papke: Okay. That’s all I have.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
3
Sacchet: Good question Kurt. Jerry, you have a question?
McDonald: I’ve got a couple. The variances, I just want to make sure I know what we’re
looking at. Okay, you want a variance for the distance and also we’re looking for a variance for
the size because this is only 2.3 and you’re saying normally it should be 5 acres?
Al-Jaff: Correct.
McDonald: Okay. So that’s the two variances and the other is…or to accept the EA assessment
so we don’t have to do an environmental impact?
Al-Jaff: There isn’t a variance there. I’m just asking you to, based upon what we analyzed.
What we read, all the comments that we have received, there is no need for additional studies to
be conducted, and that’s where the negative declaration comes in.
McDonald: Okay. And so there’s just two variances we’re being asked to approve.
Al-Jaff: Correct. And they are variances to the conditional use permit criteria.
McDonald: Okay, thank you. I have no further questions.
Sacchet: Thank you Jerry. Any other questions? Dan.
Keefe: I’ve got a couple. The 8 or the 10 foot conditional use, why do we need to go to 10 feet?
Versus staying within the 8 feet.
Al-Jaff: We’re trying to maximize the screening and if you give me one moment here. There
was a 10 foot, 10 foot fence or a 10 foot wall. You will still be able to see some of the
equipment. Basically maximizing the screening.
Keefe: Yeah, I’m just talking where the.
Al-Jaff: …yes they can.
Keefe: Yeah, I was wondering about why not 12 feet to screen it all out versus. I don’t know
where the 10 foot came from.
Al-Jaff: We compare it to something that might resemble a building. There really wasn’t any
other reason.
Keefe: Okay. Another question on the wall, relates to the water. Can you kind of show where
the water would flow on this site because it looks like that’s really an impervious wall.
Al-Jaff: Alyson do you want to take that one?
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
4
Keefe: I guess both inside and out.
Fauske: That was one of the comments in the staff report. Engineering brought up that here’s
the proposed grading plan here and as you can see, north being this direction, this direction here,
the sheet draining coming to the west, while that was one of our recommendations for approval,
that they show us how to facilitate drainage, the sheet drainage from the pad to that infiltration
basin at that location. And it’s a simply a matter of putting in a small depression with the
structure underneath the wall.
Keefe: And it looks like it’s, the site goes from what, east to west?
Fauske: Correct.
Keefe: So on the east side, where’s the water going to go when it hits the east side? It’s going to
come down at that wall, right? Is it going to go around the outside or how is it going to flow?
Fauske: Well the flow pattern will be, actually when you look at the grading plan here there’s a
high point at this location and so you’d basically just have the pad only, for all intensive
purposes, just the pad drains, sheet draining that location.
Keefe: Okay, so the wall isn’t.
Fauske: We’re not taking a large drainage area from there.
Keefe: Okay.
Fauske: And when we looked at, they did submit some hydrology calculation showing their
existing and proposed runoff scenarios and their matching the existing that they’re putting in this
infiltration basin which we also check for capacity given the soils out in that area.
Keefe: Okay. Alright. Just a couple other questions. One, in regards to the notification on this.
We had to notify people what, 500 feet?
Al-Jaff: Correct.
Keefe: Did that include the mobile home owners or?
Al-Jaff: Correct, and the applicants chose to go door to door and knock on people’s doors.
Yeah, they’ve truly done their due diligence to make sure that if there are any issues they have
addressed them upfront.
Keefe: So with this particular notification card that we send out.
Al-Jaff: It was sent out to.
Keefe: It doesn’t look like, I don’t know how many mobile homes but it, I don’t know.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
5
Al-Jaff: It was sent to the owners of the park. I believe it’s a rental park and so.
Keefe: Okay, so the owner of the property would have gotten, received the card.
Al-Jaff: Correct.
Keefe: And then they notified the homeowners of the units themselves.
Al-Jaff: Correct.
Keefe: Okay.
Al-Jaff: I am not 100% positive that they are renters in these, but the owner of the property was
notified.
Keefe: Is that park in Chaska?
Al-Jaff: Yes it is.
Keefe: I just want a point of clarification. Are we required to notify people over city boundary
lines?
Al-Jaff: Everyone within 500 feet has to be notified.
Keefe: Okay. Last question, and this is in regards to the environmental assessment. Are you
aware of any environmental findings against Xcel? The Xcel station that’s already there.
Al-Jaff: No.
Keefe: Any jurisdiction on any environmental?
Al-Jaff: It’s being, it was looked upon as a structure that will be removed and definitely an
improvement.
Keefe: But it hasn’t been cited for any environmental issues that you’re aware of?
Al-Jaff: Not that I’m aware of, no.
Keefe: Okay. That’d be all.
Sacchet: Mark?
Undestad: No.
Sacchet: Debbie, any more questions?
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
6
Larson: Yeah I’ve got actually, the one that’s there currently that’s going to be taken down, I
assume it looks that it’s smaller that what we’ve got going in.
Al-Jaff: That’s correct.
Larson: So I guess my concern was, and I’m sure the applicant will explain this but I just want
to make a point of it that even though it is farther away from where the residents are, it’s going to
be stronger than the one that’s currently there, I assume.
Al-Jaff: I will allow the applicant to address that. Again I think you will be pleased with what’s
happening.
Larson: I’ll go with that. That’s all I have.
Sacchet: Okay. On the staff report on page 8, your statement, finding 2.4. The proposal will be
an improvement to the planned neighboring uses. Other than the removal of the Xcel substation,
are there any other improvements that you could list?
Al-Jaff: You’re taking out a substation. You’re replacing it with landscaping. It really is going
to clean up the area.
Sacchet: So that’s aesthetic solely?
Al-Jaff: From an aesthetic standpoint I think that it’s going to be a great improvement.
Sacchet: Okay. Then there is some mention of lighting. There’s actually also a condition on
lighting. We need lighting plans.
Al-Jaff: I didn’t see any, I contacted the applicant. You know if there was anything such as a
security light, motion light, we need to make sure that we take a look at these plans. That they
meet ordinance requirements.
Sacchet: And that’s still pending at this point? We can ask the applicant.
Al-Jaff: Yeah.
Sacchet: Yeah. And under the conditional use permit for the fencing we say security fence.
Does that mean the chainlink fence as well as the wall?
Al-Jaff: Correct.
Sacchet: That covers both?
Al-Jaff: Yes.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
7
Sacchet: Okay. Just want to be clear about that.
Al-Jaff: And one of them is more aesthetic than the other.
Sacchet: Indeed it is. That’s all the questions I have, thank you. Thanks Sharmeen. With that I
would like to ask the applicant, if you want to come up and add to what we’ve heard from staff
and we may have a few questions for you, as you already heard. If you want to state your name
and where you’re from please, for the record.
Ron Jabs: Yes, very much appreciate the opportunity. My name is Ron Jabs. I’m with
Minnesota Valley Electric and with me this evening I have Denny Wolf with Minnesota Valley
Electric, Gene Kotz which is with Great River Energy and Carole Schmidt who is also with
Great River Energy. I guess I’d want to point out that Carole did a considerable amount of
research in responding to the EA portion and so she’s our expert when it comes to those sorts of
things. I guess I’d like an opportunity to respond to some of your questions. Hopefully I can
answer them but there probably are some other things that I’m going to defer off to my other
experts that I’ve got along here so. Should I?
Sacchet: Go ahead.
Ron Jabs: Okay. I just threw together some scratchy notes here but one of the key things, well
let me start out in essentially the site right today is an old gravel pit, basically unreclaimed and
uneven terrain and so forth and of course that will be cleaned up in that process. There are also
two sets of transmission lines that run right across the site where the substation will be placed.
Right underneath that transmission line. The substation itself, just the mere fact that there’s a
transformer within it doesn’t really create any strengthening of the EMF potential, and one of the
things that is quite important to understand, I’m not sure exactly where our spot is here but this
demonstration here just uses a copying machine as an example. Basically if you go up to any
outlet within your home, any electrical appliance is going to emit a certain amount of EMF. The
point being that if you’re only 6 inches away from this copying machine, you’ll probably have
around 90 milligauss. However if you get out to 4 feet you’re down to 1 milligauss so it
dramatically decreases. By the same token within our substation we have the transformers and
gear and so forth centered within that, but once you get to the perimeter of the property, the
levels are, equate to normal background level so they aren’t really any higher once you get off of
the acreage. Maybe one thing I should point out is that we are, we’re developing a 2.3 acre piece
of property that we acquired from Gedney. We also acquired an additional half acre, .5 acres
from Xcel and we’re actually, although we’re not merging the legal descriptions together, we
own both parcels and the entire complex will be landscaped and incorporated. The mobile home
court right now has a 69 KV transmission line that goes across it. It has a 115 KV transmission
line, and a 230 KV, and quite frankly those influences far exceed the influence of the new
substation that is going in. The mere fact that we’re getting rid of the old substation removes it
away from the mobile home park. It also removes it visually from right off of Stoughton
Avenue, and our landscaping and so forth that will be incorporating is going to significantly hide
it. The fact that there’s about a 10 foot wall there will pretty much cover up a majority of the
equipment. Most of the equipment is about 12 foot tall. There are a couple of incidental pieces
that get 15, maybe even 17 foot tall but most of it is, well it’s modular in nature and pretty well
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
8
low profile so we do expect that that will do a good job of blocking the view, plus the trees and
landscaping that it will be breaking it up. Typically this is the first time that we’ve gotten into a
wall type situation on, I think we’re up to like 13 substations or so on our system. This will be
the first wall. Typically we’re only about 8 foot, well by code we have to be at 8 foot for
security and keeping animals or kids or whatever out of the premise. I guess we do feel the 10
foot is adequate. I guess you could argue pretty much any height. It’s probably an endless kind
of a question there but, one point was made about the watershed and the way this is designed,
basically it’s a pier channel. A pier with channels in it and the walls actually float in that channel
but the whole bed of the substation, including an extension out around the substation is a course
gravel rock. And so any rain that would drop within the substation will flow naturally slowly out
of that and then travel the normal courses over land into these retention ponds and so forth so it
won’t be caught within, to any great degree. It will through this course rock it will actually filter
out across the property, so hopefully that is satisfactory. If not, if we need to make some special
piping or something like that we could do it but we didn’t anticipate a true need for that. In
terms of lighting, we don’t show any. It wasn’t necessarily included. We do have substations
where we do have a, now a downcast security type light. It might be nice to have one of those
within. It’s not a make or break kind of a thing but if we did have that, if it were necessary we
could have a switch on it but at this point nothing is, nothing is proposed so that’s why we
haven’t included anything in that, addressing that. There probably were other questions but
hopefully that addresses a few of them. How else can I?
Sacchet: Thank you. Any other questions from the applicant? I think you addressed them very
well. Yes Mark, go ahead.
Undestad: Actually you answered one of my questions, was how many of these have you done
with this wall system around there. The other question I had in that, most of these are left open
or with chainlink fence or cyclone fence. Are there any concerns with locating this down there
where the only chainlink area goes out to the woods and now you’ve got a nice 10 foot wall
encasing all this down there with no lighting? Going to be climbing around in there but, a 10
foot wall. Maybe a 12 foot wall. I don’t know.
Ron Jabs: It’s been used on other systems, other electric utilities have used the 10 foot and I
think that’s where the number came from initially. It was felt that that was high enough to
comply with the National Electric Safety Code and so forth.
Undestad: So are they going to have security lighting in there or something?
Ron Jabs: Yeah, it probably wouldn’t hurt to have lighting. We appreciate the idea of using the
downcast type lights versus something that’s going to disperse out and affect the neighbors.
Highly unlikely because of the nature with you know, cemetery there and Gedney. I don’t see
that we would have any concerns. As things develop to the north being commercial, they’re
going to have some lighting as well. It’s far enough away from the mobile home park that I
wouldn’t expect it to have any impact but you know. Like I say, in some of our substations we
do have them and there are some advantages to having that in there. One of the reasons that we
did want to have at least one site open is that air flow into the area around the, into our, around
our transformers is beneficial. It was all dead air. There’s no other exchange of air other than
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
9
going out the top. It tends to heat with them and so that is also another reason for having one
side open.
Undestad: Okay.
Sacchet: Any other questions? Yes Kurt.
Papke: In the landscaping plan, you currently don’t meet the code requirements for like I think
you intend to up your tree count somewhat in order to meet that?
Ron Jabs: It was suggested and one of the concerns that was pointed out in the write up is that,
tall trees can grow up and interfere with the transmission lines from a maintenance and a
reliability problem, and so it was proposed that we put some understory, some additional
understory type shrubbery in there and quite frankly I forgot if we had prepared a drawing of that
nature or where we’re at with that.
Denny Wolf: I’m Denny Wolf with Minnesota Valley Electric. I’m not, I think, I thought we
had met everything that required but we’ll review if we need to put more shrubbery and stuff in
there, we’ll take care of that. I know we’ve had fun working with Sharmeen and her, people
from the city here so…
Sacchet: Thank you. Dan, you have a question too?
Keefe: Yeah, just one quick question that I asked staff and I’ll ask you as well. Are you aware
of any environmental findings against the Xcel facility there?
Denny Wolf: We are the, we would have the same concerns being that there was an unknown
nature what was happening in there. Both a Phase I and a Phase II environmental study. The
Phase I we’re just basically looking at the area, is there any possibility. And because of the
aerial photos taken back in about 1940, we could see where the depression was in there and what
work had been done there. It looked like digging and I think as Ron mentioned, there’s probably
just a gravel area in there. So we did a Phase II in there whereas we went in, dug up the site.
Took the soil samples around various points in the site there and that’s from the Gedney property
and that all came out okay. We also were concerned with the Xcel site there because of previous
oil containment in the area there. We also did a Phase I and a Phase II in there where they
analyze soil in there and those all came out okay. They’re well within the limits of the area there
so. I was going to bring the report along. It’s a very lengthy report but I would have them just
give us a cover letter too… Basically we don’t have to do anything else in the area. Everything
is okay as far as they’re concerned according to the environmental study.
Sacchet: Excellent. Thank you very much. Did you want to add anything else or?
Ron Jabs: The only thing maybe I should highlight, since he brought up the environmental.
There is a, Carole has prepared the EA and there’s an index and there is, there’s a multitude of
different agencies that we’ve already gone through DNR and quite a number of different
agencies and most of those have opportunity to respond and indicated that there’s really a lack of
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
10
any concerns whatsoever. I guess if you want to, if you’d like to get into the specifics, I’m sure
Carole can address more of how it’s.
Sacchet: Do you want to give us a 2 minute summary Carole?
Carole Schmidt: I can do that. We contacted, I’m Carole Schmidt… We contacted several
agencies. The Corps of Engineers, Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of Natural
Resources... The Corps indicated that they did not require a permit. There are no wetland issues
on the site. The Fish and Wildlife Service indicated that the bald eagle is documented in
Hennepin and Carver counties but not in this particular location, and that the project would not
adversely affect the bald eagle. The DNR, which runs a sensitive area…and there were some
known occurrences of rare features in the area, but it’s pretty close to the river and they said at
this particular site they wouldn’t see that it would affect any of those resources. So the DNR
signed off. There were no properties eligible for historical, the register of historical places. And
the construction would not affect any prime farmland soils according to the NICS. So it’s really,
if I were to pick a…it’s a pretty prime location. It’s tucked away and actually the mobile home
court is…the road so they’re not going to be able to see it very much anyway, especially with
that wall up there. So I thought it was a very good site from an environmental standpoint.
Sacchet: Thank you very much. Alright. With that, I’d like to open the public hearing. If
anybody here would like to comment to this, please come forward now and tell us if you have
something to say. Seeing nobody getting up, I assume there’s nobody that wants to address this
item. I’ll bring it back to the commission for comments and discussion. Any comments,
discussion? Are we all clear about everything? I have just one little comment. In the staff
report, let’s see where it was. Page 12. When it looks at the findings for the variances, which is
the size of the acreage as well as the setback. The first criteria that we look at is whether there’s
a hardship and staff report doesn’t necessarily touch on hardship. It just tells about the reasons
why it’s alright, and I would actually say it would be a hardship to enforce the code under the
circumstances. Just to address that straight on. I think that’s the only comment I have. Does
anybody want to make a motion please.
Papke: Mr. Chair, I’d like to make a motion that the Planning Commission recommends
approval of Site Plan 05-30 for an electric substation as shown on the plans dated Received
September 2nd and November 30th, 2005 with variances to allow access off of Stoughton Avenue,
maintain a 200 foot setback from existing residential neighborhood and construct a facility on a
2.35 acre parcel based on the findings of the staff report subject to conditions 1 through 6. I also
like to recommend approval for Conditional Use Permit 05-30 for the construction of the electric
substation and a 10 foot wall with the one condition as listed in the staff report, and also
recommend the City Council approve Resolution declaring no need for an Environmental Impact
Statement for the Minnesota Valley Electric substation.
Sacchet: Thank you Kurt. Do we have a second?
McDonald: I’ll second.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
11
Sacchet: Any friendly amendments? Actually I wonder whether for the site plan
recommendations, condition number 2. Whether we should specify the plans must identify the
proposed drainage outlet? I mean outlets is little bit, could be outlet for different things, even
though it talks about drainage at the end. Could it be misunderstood?
Fauske: If I could Mr. Chair.
Sacchet: Please.
Fauske: A recommendation would be that the applicant submit some information regarding their
proposed material for their pads to, so staff can verify that there is positive drainage across.
Sacchet: So then the friendly amendment would be that condition 2 would be replaced by the
applicant will provide additional information about drainage to staff for further review. That
would it suffice with that?
Fauske: Yes it would.
Sacchet: Okay. Is that acceptable Kurt?
Papke: Yes.
Sacchet: I assume there are no more other friendly amendments.
Papke moved, McDonald seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of
Site Plan 05-30 for an electric substation as shown on the plans dated Received September
2nd and November 30th, 2005 with variances to allow access off of Stoughton Avenue,
maintain a 200 foot setback from existing residential neighborhood and construct a facility
on a 2.35 acre parcel, based on the findings of the staff report subject to the following
conditions:
1. Building Official Conditions:
a. Permits are required to construct the perimeter wall and fence.
b. The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of
Minnesota.
2. The applicant will provide additional information about drainage to staff for further
review.
3. Annual maintenance shall be performed on the infiltration basin so that it will function as
modeled.
4. The applicant must meet minimum ordinance requirements for bufferyards and submit a
revised landscape plan to the city for approval.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
12
5. Overstory plantings shall be added to the understory totals for bufferyard plantings.
6. Detailed lighting plans shall be submitted including photometrics and type of light fixture.
The ordinance requires no more than 0.5 foot candle at the property line. Only downcast
shielded fixtures are allowed as required by ordinance. Any security (motion detection)
lighting should also be shown.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
Papke moved, McDonald seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval
for Conditional Use Permit 05-30, for the construction the electric substation and a 10 foot
wall with the following condition:
1. A security fence as specified in the National Electric Safety Code shall surround the
Distribution and Underground Electric Distribution Substations.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
Papke moved, McDonald seconded that the Planning Commission recommends that the
City Council approve a Resolution Declaring No Need for an Environmental Impact
Statement for the Minnesota Valley Electric Substation. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
JACOB’S TAVERN: REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A 6,808 SQUARE
FOOT RESTAURANT BUILDING ON 2.02 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF HIGHWAY 5 AND CENTURY BOULEVARD, TRUMAN HOWELL
ARCHITECTS, PLANNING CASE NO. 05-40.
Public Present:
Name Address
Truman Howell 17815 Hutchins Drive, Minnetonka
Jacob, John & Joan Howe-Pullis 1385 Wildflower Lane, Chaska
Scott Thorpe 6716 Point Drive, Edina
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item.
Sacchet: Thanks Bob. Questions from staff. Yes Jerry, do you want to start?
McDonald: Okay, you talk about the gables. What’s the difference between what you’re
proposing and what we have on these drawings?
Generous: It’s just the type of roof element. Instead of having, a shed dormer has this flat roof
that comes off the building. What I was proposing was that they provide gables, basically taking
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
13
this element and putting it above the windows so you’d have separate units. It would help to
maintain, what we were looking at was the continuity of these peak elements and also this
elevation. However again the applicant provided this type of roof treatment specifically and I
want them to be able to address that to you.
McDonald: Okay. The only question I have.
Sacchet: Debbie.
Larson: How about, before you go away. Sorry. So, is it just a design feature or is it a feature
of how it functions?
Generous: It will be aesthetic. A design feature on this. So both of them.
Larson: Okay. So it’s your opinion against their’s at this point?
Generous: Correct.
Larson: Okay.
Keefe: I’ve got some.
Sacchet: Go ahead Dan.
Keefe: Am I next?
Sacchet: Yeah.
Keefe: Okay. You know on page 2 and you talk about the height of the roof is 37 feet however
the building height is calculated as 29 feet, since by code only half the roof height is included in
the building height calculation. I’m not sure I understand what that was intended to mean.
Generous: It’s just a technicality. We say that the building height is 29 feet but it’s actually, if
you go to the peak of the roof, it’s 37.
Keefe: But you don’t take the 37, you just go.
Generous: No, because you take out half of that roof elevation basically…
Keefe: Okay. Then.
Generous: Either way it complies with the ordinances.
Keefe: The façade transparency section on page 5, I’m not sure what is meant by that. It says
due to the use of a wrap around veranda, almost 100% of the western elevation, visual
transparency is viewed by the public. I’m not sure what.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
14
Generous: Well normally when we look at a building, if you take this north elevation we would
only, we would count this entire space and this would have no transparency. By adding these
elements you’re creating an outdoor room and so you’re giving that depth of visual perception of
looking into a building so you have the opening that would be required under our ordinance, and
we only say half of it and they provided an entire wall basically with that opening.
Keefe: I see what you’re saying. Alright. The parking easement for the use of 9 stalls with
Holiday Inn Express. What are the hours of operation that they’re proposing for the restaurant,
do you know?
Generous: I’m not sure. Maybe you can ask the applicant.
Keefe: Yeah, I guess the one question I have in regards to that would be whether, I’m not sure
whether the Holiday Inn is ever at capacity in the evenings and whether we may end up with
some capacity issues on that site for parking. What’s your sense on that?
Generous: Well to date whenever I’ve been out there, there’s lots of vacant empty space.
Keefe: Right. Yeah, but if this restaurant, say this restaurant really takes off…
Generous: Hopefully they’re also staying at the hotel and restaurant and visiting other facilities,
and that’s the whole idea that this is very convenient for the hotel to have this there. People can
be staying there and you’re walking over and then they take up space so if someone came there,
theoretically couldn’t go in anyway.
Keefe: Right. The intersection, in terms of the level of service, I mean currently is that, what is
that intersection? Are we talking about the corner of Century and 5?
Generous: No, it’s the median opening that, for the two driveways off of Century.
Keefe: So if one goes over to the daycare facility…use the bank right, and is that a straight curb
cut then?
Generous: Yes. It’s straight across from, this is like an intersection and initially staff was
concerned about that. What the turning movements and so right now it’s still operating at an A,
very good level of service but you don’t have full development out there.
Keefe: Alright. How is the 5, and I know we talked about this a little bit I think when Lifetime
came in, in terms of the level of service of 5 and Century. How is that intersection operating?
Generous: I believe it’s still good. Actually, one of the future items we’re going to look at is
past traffic studies and what’s the reality versus what was…
Keefe: So adding this particular use.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
15
Generous: It was contemplated under the entire project and those improvements out there were
designed to accommodate that. Our only issue wasn’t at 5 and Century. It was down in the site.
Keefe: Right because if you get a lot of people turning in at a particular time, and they use the
restaurant and/or the hotel, you’re going to back up potentially to 5.
Generous: And that was the movement that was the worst was the left turn out from the retail on
the west side of Century from the original studies.
Keefe: Okay. But at least as we know now, the traffic patterns are still operating pretty well and
we don’t anticipate that this, we don’t know exactly what will happen but what we think might
happen isn’t going to degrade it substantially or what do we think?
Generous: We don’t believe it will but we wanted to continue that condition 4 just because they
were, the applicants weren’t involved in that original subdivision. We wanted to make sure they
were aware that this had been an issue at one time.
Keefe: Let me just take it one step further. If we find out, and how do we determine whether it’s
operating fully or not? I mean just the number of people or accidents or?
Generous: Alyson maybe.
Fauske: At one of the future Planning Commission meetings staff would like to get Planning
Commission’s direction as far as what you would like to see as the follow-up on some of these
traffic reports that we’re getting for some of these sites. That’s one of the questions that we’ll
get direction from you at a later date. As far as answering your question, how do we determine
that, that’s something we can discuss at that meeting but it would require a traffic count.
Typically what we get in traffic counts right now is just straight through traffic. We don’t get
turning movements, so we would have to look at putting out some more traffic counts to count
the thru traffic. The turning movements and such and from there determine the level of service.
Keefe: Okay, so in order for the condition that you’ve got in here which would, what would
happen if the condition was found to be a level of service that wasn’t appropriate? Wasn’t good.
We’d not allow that curb cut? Would we put in a semaphore or some sort or what would be the?
Fauske: Well, we could look at the recommendations from the original traffic report and then as
far as the costs are concerned, it says the businesses in there are assessed 100% of that cost so the
taxpayers will not be incurring any of those costs.
Keefe: So it could be that that median becomes solid all the way across in the long term but I
can’t imagine that wouldn’t, either you’d have to get all the business’s agreement to that right?
Generous: No, it’s not based on this. It would be true through the review of the, or accidents or
stacking. You know instead of closing it completely, a directional turn may be one of the results
of it to eliminate some of the conflicting turning movements.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
16
Keefe: Alright. Good, that’s it.
Sacchet: Kurt.
Papke: I guess it’s great to see a project like this come to Chanhassen but I’m really struggling
with the fake silo. What kind of feedback have you received on the aesthetics of this silo? And
you know, it just seems very incongruous and I’m a little concerned with the big berm there. It’s
going to look like a missile silo peaking over the top of the hill. I’m just curious if you’ve
received any feedback on the aesthetics.
Generous: I’ve had it both ways. Some people don’t like it. Others say you know, the site used
to be a farm site so it sort of goes back to that heritage.
Papke: It also harkens back to the other fake silo on.
Generous: The one up here on Village on the Ponds, yes. That’s what I looked at when I saw
that. Oh, finally book ends to the community. Just a little bigger. Actually there’s different
things they can do with this you know. Maybe it’s a decorative element and during the holidays
with lights on it.
Papke: On a not totally unrelated vein, is there any need for any lightning antenna because this
might be a great candidate for a lightning strike there.
Generous: We can have the applicant, architect answer that if you don’t mind.
Papke: Okay. What, is there any city code or regulations surrounding that sort of thing? I don’t
recall.
Generous: There may be building code requirements and that our building official would review
and the architect may know.
Sacchet: Is that it for questions? Yeah, I think what’s left of question is for the applicant so with
that I’d like to ask whether we have an applicant. If you want to come forward please. If you
state who you are. Where you’re from and if you want to add anything to what staff presented
and we may have some questions for you.
Truman Howell: Thank you very much lady and gentlemen of the Planning Commission. My
name is Truman Howell. Truman Howell Architects and with me tonight I have the owners of
the project, John and Joan and Jake Pullis. They’re here tonight to observe our city in motion.
The comments I think I can try to address any questions that you have. We probably will maybe
have some disagreement on some aesthetics apparently but the initial direction from my clients
was that we take the vernacular of the area, the upper Midwest and do something unique with it.
Something stylized. I’m not sure you’re aware that the silo is not a closed structure. It is open,
as well as the peaks on the top of the back portion of the building. Those are also open and in
steel. The idea quite frankly for those came from French cities, and I don’t know if you’ve seen
photographs or been there or whatever, but there were many French towns that had for steeples
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
17
on their church, these very lacy and very nice steel, just steel cupolas and tops. And so when I
was dealing with the farm feel or the farm look to this, it suddenly dawned on me, if that silo, is a
strong element but to make it useful and attractive we would open it up and we’d put some fabric
at the top and so that fabric at the top of that, not metal. Okay? So we’re trying to keep it light.
In reference to the windows, the, and I don’t know if we can use either one of those I guess.
What I would like to do, can we look here? Okay. You’re moving, I’m moving. Great, okay. If
you can imagine now this building is going to be seen in 3 dimension so you’re not going to see
ever probably this face just as you see it here. So when you’re arriving you’re going to be seeing
this enormous cupola or basically an A-frame looking element. And as you come around the
building then you begin to pick up pieces of this. Now if you’ll take a look, and if you were,
imagine in your mind that you’re going to take those 3 windows and you’re going to put dormers
on them. Now all of a sudden in my mind it takes away from anything we’re doing with the silo
and anything we’re doing with these two elements on the back. We wanted to keep it low key
and something that would enhance the look of these other elements there. And so that’s why we
didn’t use that. As a matter of fact in one of the early designs we did use some dormers. We put
them in a somewhat different location but again it began to be what we see, what I see a lot of
today which is dormers on top of dormers on top of dormers on top of dormers, and I finally, I
rebelled and fortunately my clients agreed with me. So we’re casting no aspersions to anyone
else’s feelings about it because I think you know aesthetics is always very personal. I understand
that that is another way to do it. We happen to choose to do it this way and we think it’s
simplifies an otherwise potentially very busy element. In terms of the parking, cross parking for
the restaurant and the hotel. You’ll find throughout the country that hotels want restaurants and
restaurants want hotels and they do, the timing works out well for them. I’ve done about 200
hotels and boy, let me tell you. Every time there’s one, the first thing you look for is where
that’s restaurant to go next to it. And well we’ve all done that when we’ve traveled, and so I
think that, and certainly the parking part of that, while there are some situations where it is not
good, this one in my mind and in my experience is going to be very adequate to handle both
functions, because they really will be working at somewhat different times, even though they do
overlap slightly. I’m open to questions.
Sacchet: Any questions from the applicant? Mark.
Undestad: Yes. With the gable up on the roof there, the length of that upper windows across
there.
Truman Howell: Yeah.
Undestad: Okay, if you’re looking at that, the length of that and you were to put that gable on
there, how tall would that be?
Truman Howell: On all 3 of them or 3 of them individually?
Undestad: Well, what were you thinking Bob? 3 individual or one?
Generous: I was thinking of separate, individual ones.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
18
Truman Howell: Well, boy I just don’t, I see if you put them compatible with the, say the two
elements on the left hand side there. You’re going to be coming pretty close to the peak I would
think.
Undestad: Right, so that’s why I’m looking at here when you kind of pencil that out on your
peak drawing, if you brought those up, that kind of comes almost to the top of there.
Truman Howell: Yeah, yeah. Because I don’t think you’d want to, I don’t think you’d want a
low one. Similar to the slope on the bottom there. Again in my mind but.
Undestad: And I think you’re right. It’s that vision coming straight into.
Truman Howell: Yeah, because that’s going to be a ponderous thing coming in the front of it.
You’re really looking at something, this thing is very strong.
Undestad: And the top of the silo you said was a fabric.
Truman Howell: Yeah.
Undestad: What type of fabric? Just a canvas?
Truman Howell: What does Hoigards make? Awnings, yeah.
Larson: So does that need to be replaced at some point?
Truman Howell: Sure. Yeah. Yep, probably. Get Bob up there and change it. Sure. I’m sure it
will over time. It will fade. I have one over my office entry and we’re due. Been a couple-3
years.
Sacchet: Any other questions? Kurt?
Papke: Lightning rod?
Truman Howell: Oh, oh lightning rod. You know I don’t know. I’m sure our electrical
engineer is going to ground this baby. I know you’re right. Maybe we’ll, I wonder if the radio
station, do you have a radio station? We could do that but I definitely, if that’s a requirement by
any code, believe me there’s no way in the world we want people in a hazardous situation, and
we definitely will look into that for you.
John Pullis: I wonder if the commission understands the functional aspect of the silo.
Truman Howell: Oh, sorry. That was a big part of the design. Thank you John. Well, if you
look at the plan, it’s on A-1 on your drawings. Here I’ll try to, this is a very light drawing on the
screen. Can you see that? Okay. Now do you see up towards this upper left hand portion. See
this element here? Okay, that is the bottom of the silo. Those individual pieces are the steel that
starts at the core there, and goes up, and it actually frames 3 fireplaces. The one fireplace is at
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
19
the bar area. The second fireplace is in the waiting area. The third fireplace goes out onto the
deck, which then based on the site plan you go right out to the, I think Bob displayed or talked
about the fire pit outside, and so that is all related and that’s why, that’s kind of, I should have
said that’s part of the silo.
Larson: Is there like a skylight or something or does it just come out of the smokestack?
Truman Howell: No. No, it comes right out of the roof.
Sacchet: So you can have sausages and smoke them.
Truman Howell: The lighting is going to be fabulous around that. It’s going to be amazing.
You should see his menu. His menu is unbelievable.
Sacchet: Yeah, what’s the menu? In fact I want to hear, what kind of restaurant are we getting
here? Wow, they come prepared. No kidding. I’m impressed. I love it.
Truman Howell: Yeah, this will make your mouth water. This stuff is.
Larson: And then does the Planning Commission get like a free meal there?
Sacchet: Now we’re getting in trouble.
Truman Howell: It might have something to do with the outcome this evening.
Sacchet: I have another question for you. Site furnishings, like staff made a statement that
they’re assuming there would be a good weather seating during the warm season on the patio. Is
that an accurate assumption?
Truman Howell: Sure, yes.
Sacchet: And then there’s actually a condition about site furnishings, benches, bicycle racks,
tables, I guess that’s a given because we want to confirm with you where you stand with that.
Truman Howell: Not a problem.
Sacchet: No problem there.
Joan Pullis: We don’t have numbers on that. It’s not specified how many bike racks or how
many benches or…
Sacchet: I think that’s for you to figure out.
Truman Howell: We’ll be able to do that.
Sacchet: Yes Kurt, you have something more?
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
20
Papke: The fire pit, any safety issues with the fire pit? Is there going to be any kind of railings
or what?
Truman Howell: Yes. There is a railing around it, and I think it shows on the site plan if I’m not
mistaken. Oh boy. Okay. Now this larger circle is actually the fence around it, so nobody can
just walk up. The fire pit itself is actually a raised element so it’s not sitting down in a pit. No,
you can’t fall into it. You walk around it. Actually they’re commercially made now. I was
amazed.
McDonald: I have one question for you. On the skylight, or on the lights. The function is as a
skylight, help light that forward area. It’s the 3 windows that we’re talking about. So we’re
talking about dormers, okay. Thank you.
Sacchet: I’m studying the menu. Forgive me.
Keefe: Do we know what the hours are?
Truman Howell: Ah, that was a question, was there not? I think it’s noon on, right?
John Pullis: No, we’re open earlier. 11:15. 10:00. 10:00 or 10:30 maybe.
Keefe: I have a question in regards to the site plan. It references in the report about needing to
tie into the existing paths. There’s a path system on the south side and on the west side.
Truman Howell: Yes.
Keefe: And I’m not seeing where you do that on your plan. Maybe you can kind of.
Truman Howell: I can show you where those are. This is a sidewalk here. Here’s the drive
under for the hotel, okay? So you’re probably familiar where it actually exists. Across that
driveway, this is the driveway here. Across there is this upper, or the northern walkway. It
actually walks clear around this enclosed outdoor area, and comes around to the front of the
building. On the south side it goes past the entry into the dumpster area, trash enclosure area and
goes along side of that and along the south side and across and up to the front, as well as if you
can follow my finger here, going across here. Across the parking lot, out to I believe there’s a
walkway.
Keefe: Okay. And then that walkway will then tie into the, ties into that path on the south, is
that right?
Generous: Well there’s nothing on the south. It goes to Century. Remember there’s a sidewalk
on the, or a trail on the both sides of that. And then just to the south, there’s a trail system
around the wetland complex that is part of the 6th Addition we had the developer put in and it
tied it over to the east side which had been started with Autumn Ridge development.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
21
Keefe: Right, so in regards to tying into that trail system, the way that we would tie into it has
really gone to the west here.
Generous: Right, out to Century and then down.
Keefe: Via this walkway which essentially is a walkway through the parking lot and then across
to the sidewalk, correct?
Generous: Right.
Sacchet: Any other questions from the applicant? Anything more you’d like to add from your
end?
Truman Howell: Nothing.
Sacchet: Thank you very much. With that, I’d like to open the public hearing. If there’s
anybody here that’d like to address this item, this is your turn. Seeing nobody that gets up, I’ll
close the public hearing. Bring it back to the commission for comments and discussion. Any
comments? Any discussion?
Larson: A comment.
Sacchet: Yes, go ahead Debbie.
Larson: Okay, regarding the windows. Okay, I’m a designer by trade so I’m looking at this and
I’m thinking I really like it and I’ll tell you why. What they’ve done is they’ve taken an old idea,
an old concept that to me looks like an old farm house or an old church or an old something, and
they’ve put a modern swing to it. And it looks a bit more contemporary on the side, which
brings it up to current times and that’s why I personally like the flat window look because like
the applicant, or architect. What are you?
Sacchet: Architect.
Larson: Architect said. You’ve got round. You’ve got square. You’ve got you know that
cupola. But this particular site tends to have more of a modern look to it to me and the front
tends to be more old fashion looking and I think it’s just a wonderful blend of both. So as it
stands, the silo is a little puzzling to me other than the fact that it’s kind of cool looking and like
you said, bookend for the other end of the city. I think it’s neat so with that said, I think it’s
wonderful.
Sacchet: Any other comments? Jerry.
McDonald: Well I guess the only comment that I would make is that you know the whole thing
about the windows to me is a design issue. I don’t know the first thing about design. I say that’s
up to the applicant to put in what he wants at that point. There’s nothing in the code that I’m
aware of that would really dictate that we get into this. So I guess I see this as more of a non-
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
22
issue. You have a silo and it’s an interesting concept. So I really have no problems with the
design of this. I mean it meets everything as far as code. It’s probably going to fit in at that area.
We’ve got a lot of different architecture going on down there and I think this kind of helps to
stand out a little bit and also this with the silo, the one thing you’ve got going for it, it will
become a landmark. So you know, from that standpoint I’m perfectly acceptable with the plans.
Sacchet: Thanks Jerry. Anything else? Just to echo a little bit the design part. I think that’s, in
this case is I would think is an applicant thing. I would also point out that from the western
elevation, it actually the harmony with the flat roof is a nice touch, and that’s really the main
elevation that’s going to be seen. Whether we have the dormers, I think would actually take
away from that look that you put together there. So I would think that condition number 4 could
be struck out. And it’s just wonderful to see a restaurant coming in there. Really excited about
that. So I’d like to have a motion. Yes, you have another point or? You want a motion. Go
ahead Jerry.
McDonald: I make the motion that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan
Planning Case 05-40, plans prepared by Schoell & Madsen, Incorporated dated November 10,
2005 for a 6,808 square foot restaurant on Lot 1, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 6th Addition,
subject to the following conditions, 1 through 35.
Sacchet: 31.
McDonald: 31. And I would accept a friendly motion about number 4.
Sacchet: So you strike out number 4? Okay. We have a motion. Is there a second?
Larson: I’ll second.
Sacchet: We have a motion and a second. Any friendly amendments?
McDonald moved, Larson seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval
of Site Plan Planning Case #05-40, plans prepared by Schoell & Madsen, Inc., dated
November 10, 2005, for a 6,808 square-foot restaurant on Lot 1, Block 1, Arboretum
Business Park 6th Addition, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary
security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping.
2. A recorded parking easement for the benefit of Lot 1, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 6th
Addition for the use of nine stalls on the Holiday Inn Express site (Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum
Business Park 6th Addition) is required as part of the site plan.
3. The developer shall install site furnishings including benches, bicycle racks, and tables.
4. All signs shall require a separate sign permit.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
23
5. Mechanical equipment, either roof-mounted or at grade, must be screened.
6. The building must be protected with an automatic fire sprinkler system.
7. The building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State
of Minnesota.
8. The building owner and or their representatives shall meet with the Inspections Division to
discuss plan review and permit procedures.
9. Pedestrian ramps shall be provided in all locations where the sidewalk ends at a curb.
10. The full access driveway onto Century Boulevard is allowed. However, should the driveway
cease to operate in a safe manner in the opinion of the property owners of Lots 1 or 2, Block
1, Arboretum Business Park 6th Addition, or Lots 1, 2 or 3, Block 1, Arboretum Business
Park 4th Addition, or if any of the following conditions are met, the property owners of Lots 1
and 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 6th Addition and Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1,
Arboretum Business Park 4th Addition shall be assessed 100% of the costs incurred to correct
the conditions in a fashion acceptable to the City of Chanhassen:
a. Level of service “F” at the intersection during peak AM and PM times.
b. Level of service “D” or below at the intersection during non-peak times.
c. Significant accidents that are attributed to the configuration of the intersection occur that
indicate a mutually recognized safety concern at the intersection.
11. The slope located along the southern property line shall be seeded with a native grass mix
and left natural. The applicant will be allowed to mow along the parking lot and trail if
necessary.
12. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to ensure the existing downstream storm water
infrastructure is sized adequately for the proposed development.
13. Two details for silt fence are included on the detail sheet. The old detail for silt fence (Detail
5300 last revised January of 2003) should be removed from the detail sheet. The plans
should be revised to show inlet protection around all storm sewer inlets.
14. Wimco-type inlet controls should be specified for inlet protection. Inlet protection shall be
provided for existing catch basins immediately adjacent to the project.
15. During installation of the proposed storm sewer infrastructure to the existing storm sewer,
temporary caps or plugs should be provided until the installation of the pipes and inlets are
complete.
16. A temporary cover of mulch and seed is needed within 14 days of final grade for any
exposed soils or if any exposed soils are not actively worked within a 14-day time period.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
24
17. Any sediment tracked upon paved surfaces must be scraped and swept within 24 hours.
18. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies
(e.g., Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(NPDES Phase II Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
(for dewatering), Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of
Health) and comply with their conditions of approval.
19. A professional civil engineer registered in the State of Minnesota must sign all plans.
20. The applicant will be required to submit storm sewer sizing design data for a 10-year, 24-
hour storm event with storm sewer drainage map prior to building permit issuance.
21. The applicant should be aware that any off-site grading will require an easement from the
appropriate property owner.
22. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the
City’s Building Department.
23. Add the latest City Detail Plate Nos. 1004, 5214, 5300 and 5302.
24. The site will be subject to City sanitary sewer and water hookup charges at the time of
building permit issuance. The 2006 trunk utility hookup charges are $1,575.00 per unit for
sanitary sewer and $4,078.00 per unit for water.
25. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited
to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, MnDOT, etc.
26. On the utility plan show all the existing utility sewer type, size, slope and class.
27. Cross-access easements for the shared driveway access must be obtained and recorded
against the lots.
28. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees,
shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that
fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to
Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1.
29. Yellow curbing and “No Parking Fire Lane” signs will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire
Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and location of signs to be installed.
30. Builder must comply with the following Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention
Division Policies.
a. #1-1990 regarding fire alarm systems,
b. #4-1991 regarding notes to be included on all site plans,
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
25
c. #7-1991 regarding pre-fire drawings,
d. #29-1992 regarding premise identification,
e. #34-1993 regarding water service installation,
f. #36-1994 regarding proper water line sizing,
g. #40-1995 regarding fire protection systems.”
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CHRISTENSEN SUBDIVISION: REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY
INTO 2 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS WITH VARIANCES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT
6710 GOLDEN COURT AND ZONED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, APPLICANT
ROBERT CHIRSTENSEN, PLANNING CASE NO. 05-44.
Sharmeen Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item.
Sacchet: Thanks Sharmeen. Questions from staff. Kurt?
Papke: The staff report, bottom of page 5 you state that the driveway to Lot 2 must be shifted so
that it is at least 10 feet from the property line. Could you point out where that short coming is?
I wasn’t quite able to make it out.
Fauske: Here’s your pipe for drainage and utility and the driveway is a couple feet from that
location. At this location and it’s a difficult plan to read. The dark brown line here shows the
actual property line, following my pen here. That’s the 5 foot drainage and utility. Here’s the
driveway. So our ordinance reads 10 feet from the property line. That’s where we’re getting
that from.
Papke: So if you shifted, what to the north, are you going to run into the same thing? Do you
have enough space?
Fauske: No. 10 feet right here so we can shift it over a few feet to meet ordinance.
Papke: You’re not going to have them narrow the driveway? There’s enough room to move it?
Sacchet: Any other questions? No other questions from staff? Thank you Sharmeen. With that
I’d like to ask if we have an applicant? If you want to come forward. If you have anything to
add, please do so. State your name and address for the record please, and if you can pull the
microphone towards you so we get the sound. Yep, there you go.
Robert Christensen: Robert Christensen, 6710 Golden Court. I think the question was, that
number 5, moving, it was Lot 2 which is where my house is located.
Sacchet: There it is.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
26
Robert Christensen: …over in Lot 2 and I think this one had to be shifted, or not shifted. It’s
just got to be 10 feet away from the property line, but this is the actual shift here.
Sacchet: Oh, it’s that one that gets shifted. Is that accurate Alyson? Because that’s the existing
one, right?
Al-Jaff: Lot 2 would be existing.
Sacchet: Can we ask the existing one to be shifted?
Fauske: Well the existing one should be brought into conformance unless there’s a necessity to
bring it as a variance. We can look at, it looks like it might be pretty close there to shift it. I
mean they’re already getting some changes, some realignments with that existing driveway to
bring it into conformance so, it’s not a huge plan change. It was just more of a housekeeping
item to make sure that we had everything up to code.
Sacchet: Is that an issue for you Mr. Christensen?
Robert Christensen: No.
Sacchet: You don’t have an issue with it? Okay. So even if that driveway, the existing one
needs to be shifted, you don’t have a problem with it?
Robert Christensen: No.
Sacchet: Well then it’s not an issue. That’s very good. That’s easy.
Robert Christensen: I just thought I’d correct that.
Sacchet: Okay. Anything else you’d like to touch on?
Robert Christensen: No, I guess not.
Sacchet: Do we have questions for the applicant? No? Thank you very much. Now this is a
public hearing. Does anyone want to address this item? This is your chance. Seeing somebody
get up, yes there we go.
Janet Paulsen: I’m Janet Paulsen, 7305 Laredo Drive. I’ve just got a question on the plan here.
Sacchet: Can we switch on the plan Nann please? Thanks.
Janet Paulsen: First of all, what is this driveway here?
Sacchet: Is that access to the Martinka property?
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
27
Al-Jaff: That’s an access. These are existing situations. Our ordinance clearly states and State
Statute states that if these are existing situations, you don’t.
Sacchet: It’s pre-existing.
Al-Jaff: Yes, and this subdivision is not intensifying this use.
Sacchet: Okay. So in other words that driveway to the southern property would stay off of that
driveway for the time being? No, I see you shaking a head.
Robert Christensen: Mr. Martinka said he will abandon that driveway because he has another
new access out to Golden Court.
Sacchet: So he’s going to access directly for Golden Court and so that access driveway will be
closed apparently.
Al-Jaff: When Mr. Martinka subdivides his property, that is correct.
Sacchet: Not right away. Okay.
Janet Paulsen: So why not make it a private street?
Sacchet: Well we’re not really changing that are we?
Al-Jaff: No.
Sacchet: Can you address that Sharmeen?
Al-Jaff: Everything is remaining as is. The southern portion where the neck is, is remaining
undisturbed. Currently there is an outlet out there and the outlet is maintaining that setback that
you see from the edge of the driveway. The applicant applied for a neck lot and that’s what
they’re getting and that’s consistent with a previous recommendation.
Sacchet: Does that answer your question Janet? Sort of.
Janet Paulsen: Not really.
Sacchet: Not totally but a little bit.
Janet Paulsen: I would think that a certain safety issue with traffic going onto a public street, a
private street would probably serve it better.
Sacchet: Yeah, but this is not the issue in front of us. While we could argue it’s sort of in front
of us but what’s really in front of us is a neck lot above it.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
28
Janet Paulsen: And then the next question was on Lot, on the upper lot. Where is the front
property line there?
Sacchet: How do we measure property line Sharmeen, can you point that out?
Al-Jaff: …property line right there.
Janet Paulsen: And that is because why?
Al-Jaff: In looking at the way the ordinance reads, it’s the closest property line to a public street,
and it is our interpretation that this is the closest property line.
Janet Paulsen: Well I would just like to say that that’s the convenient one because you have to
have a 30 foot front yard and a 30 foot back yard and that’s the way it sits.
Sacchet: How would you measure it Janet? I mean do you have an alternative way to look at it?
Janet Paulsen: I guess you can just choose because these are two lines, I mean.
Sacchet: Well you couldn’t measure the width of the flag.
Janet Paulsen: I just don’t think that the home that’s shown on there would have a 30 foot front
yard and then a 30 foot back yard if it had the east/west line be the front property line. I guess
it’s just choosing which line you want and which is convenient. That’s all I had.
Sacchet: Go ahead Mark.
Undestad: I think when you measure the lot thought, we do not include the flag portion in that
lot. Is that right?
Al-Jaff: That’s correct.
Undestad: So you would use that, the flag portion wouldn’t be considered a lot line out on the
street there. Does that make sense?
Janet Paulsen: The front property line should be the line that’s closest to the public street.
Sacchet: Right, I think that’s.
Janet Paulsen: I guess that one is. That’s all I have, thank you.
Sacchet: Okay, thanks Janet. Anybody else? Yes indeed.
Deb Lloyd: Deb Lloyd, 7302 Laredo Drive. I’m just questioning whether this is within 1,000
feet of Lake Lucy.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
29
Sacchet: Is it within 1,000 feet of Lake Lucy? Can we answer that question?
Al-Jaff: Yes it is and.
Deb Lloyd: Because there’s no notice of the impervious surface requirement because it would
be considered shoreland and typically that would be noticed.
Al-Jaff: It will maintain all requirements of the ordinance as far as hard surface coverage, as
well as building height. These are things that we do look at.
Sacchet: And would there be a difference? And that would be looked at with the building
permit? Not necessarily at this time.
Generous: However they are the same, RSF in the shoreland districts have the same impervious
coverage for single family residential property. 25%.
Deb Lloyd: I’m just noting it because typically it would be included in the report. Also I, you
know I look at this and I know, you know we’re typically adverse to private streets but there is a
safety aspect here. Whether or not the existing driveway is there, you’re subdividing and you are
looking at a variance condition.
Sacchet: How do you see that we’re touching the existing situation.
Deb Lloyd: How are you touching it? You are approving variances for two flag lots. You
could, as a condition make that a private street if you so chose.
Sacchet: And what would be gained by doing that? I mean.
Deb Lloyd: You’d have one access which would be wider, 20 feet along a 60 foot here. Versus
two accesses on the 60 foot into.
Sacchet: Oh you mean it would be one access instead of two.
Deb Lloyd: I’m just.
Sacchet: Yeah, I just want to understand where you’re coming from. How would you then
reconcile that the third access is going to go away within the very foreseeable time.
Deb Lloyd: There’s no guarantees from prior reports which weren’t mentioned, this was all
brought up a year ago. Burlwood was the subdivision and Martinka said he had no intent on
selling. So everything is hearsay.
Sacchet: That’s true, okay. Well, do you want to address that from the staff viewpoint at all?
Al-Jaff: There are case studies and I have talked to the city attorney about what impact and what
type of conditions can you attach to a subdivision and had I know this was going to be the case I
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
30
would have attached the case study that they, he had emailed me. If you have an existing non-
conformity and if the subdivision is not intensifying this non-conformity, then you cannot require
it to be, you cannot require it to be eliminated or removed. As far as what’s in front of us today,
we have a request for a neck lot. This is a dead end cul-de-sac.
Sacchet: There’s not a lot of traffic.
Al-Jaff: No, there isn’t a lot of traffic. If this was an arterial or collector, then we would be the
first to say, limit the number of access points.
Sacchet: Isn’t it also that, I mean the concept that was chosen like 10 years ago was to make
those two kind of neck type lots. That’s why they were two outlots created in front of it, so by
all of a sudden putting in a private street and then adding the third lot which apparently doesn’t
want to be part of it in the long run anyhow, we would be deviating from that overall original
plan, wouldn’t we?
Al-Jaff: That’s absolutely true and the sketch that I brought in, that I showed earlier was from
1995.
Sacchet: Yeah, and I mean I don’t mean to brush to the side your comments Debbie and Janet
but we struggled with this when Burlwood came in and we found that it’s with this pre-existing
decisions and directions taken, unless there is really a clear way to go a different route that is
obviously bringing a lot of benefits, it’s best to build on what decisions that were made before.
So that’s, I think that’s something that needs to be looked at as well. Alright, the public hearing
is still open. Anybody else? Jerry, last option. Alright. I close the public hearing. I bring it
back to the commission for comments and discussion. I see a shaking head here. Another
almost shaking head. No? No comments. So if no comments, then how about a motion.
Larson: Recommendation. Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following
motion. Approval of preliminary plat for Planning Case 05-44 for Christensen Subdivision for 2
lots with variances to allow flag lots as shown on the plans dated received December 2, 2005
subject to the following conditions, 1 through 9.
Sacchet: We have a motion. Is there a second?
Undestad: Second.
Sacchet: Do we have any friendly amendments? Do we need to say allow two flag lots in the
description? Just to be specific.
Al-Jaff: We can definitely do that.
Sacchet: I would ask that as a friendly amendment. Is that acceptable Debbie?
Larson: Yes.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
31
Sacchet: Alright. We have a motion. We have a second. We have a friendly amendment.
Larson moved, Undestad seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of
the preliminary plat for Planning Case 05-44 for Christensen Subdivision for 2 lots with
variances to allow two flag lots as shown on the plans dated received December 2, 2005, subject
to the following conditions:
1. A minimum of one tree (2 ½” diameter) is required in the front yard of each lot.
2. All areas outside of the grading limits shall be protected by tree preservation fencing.
Fencing shall be installed prior to grading and excavation for homes on each lot and located
at the dripline or beyond whenever possible. Any trees shown as preserved that are removed
or damaged shall be replaced at a rate of 2:1 diameter inches.
3. Silt fence shall be installed along the grading limits along the east edge of the site from the north
property line to the rock construction entrance. Two silt fences shall be installed in “smiles”
perpendicular to the flow line upstream of the 18” CMP leaving the site to slow the water and
prevent discharge of sediment from the site.
4. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street
sweeping as needed.
5. Based on the proposed developed area of approximately 1.05 acres, the water quality fees
associated with this project are $1,680; the water quantity fees are approximately $3,045. At
this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat
recording, is $4,725.00.
6. Prior to City Council consideration of the preliminary plat, the following changes must be
incorporated into the plans:
a. All plans must be signed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota.
b. The plans must show the proposed lowest floor elevation for Lot 1.
c. A separate utility plan must be submitted and must resolve the apparent conflict of the
existing 6” watermain over the existing sanitary sewer manhole on Lot 1.
d. The utility plan must show the lateral sanitary sewer within the east-west portion of
Golden Glow Court to the manhole within proposed Lot 1.
e. The utility plan must show the sanitary sewer service to the Martinka property.
f. A 20-foot wide drainage and utility easement must be platted over the existing 6”
watermain on Lot 2. The easement shall be centered over the watermain.
g. Drainage and utility easements must be platted over the existing sanitary sewer and
watermain services to the house on Lot 2 and the Martinka property. The easements
shall be 15 feet wide and centered between the sanitary sewer and watermain services.
h. The utility plan must include notes where conflicts between services and/or culverts
appear.
Planning Commission Meeting – January 3, 2006
32
7. Prior to City Council consideration of the final plat, the developer must comply with the
following:
a. Hydrology calculations must be submitted and shall include pre- and post-development
volume and peak discharge rates for the 2, 10 and 100-year rainfall events.
b. Hydraulic calculations verifying the design of the driveway culverts must also be
submitted.
c. Any proposed retaining wall over four feet high requires a building permit and must be
designed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota.
d. Soil boring information must be submitted.
e. The driveway to Lot 2 must be at least 10 feet from the property line.
8. Building Official Conditions:
a. Separate water and sewer services must be provided for each lot.
9. Fire Marshal conditions:
a. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy Premises Identification (Copy
Attached).
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner McDonald noted the verbatim and summary
minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated December 6, 2005 as presented.
Chairman Sacchet adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 8:40 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
DECEMBER 20, 2005
Chairman Stolar called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Glenn Stolar, Paula Atkins, Tom Kelly, Ann Murphy, Steve
Scharfenberg, Kevin Dillon and Jack Spizale
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation
Superintendent; Dale Gregory, Park Superintendent; Tom Knowles, Recreation Center Manager;
and Susan Bill, Senior Center Coordinator
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Kelly moved, Murphy seconded to approve the agenda with
the following additions: Todd Hoffman added item 7(a), Recreation Supervisor update and
discussion of the approved 2006 Capital Improvement Program. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Dillon moved, Murphy seconded to approve the verbatim
and summary Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated November
22, 2005 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote
of 7 to 0.
PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION ICE RINK MONITORING SCHEDULE.
Jerry Ruegemer presented the staff report on this item. The commissioners picked days and
times to monitor the rinks from a schedule provided by staff. Chair Stolar asked Dale Gregory
for a status report of the current conditions of the rinks. There was no formal action taken on
this item.
RECREATION PROGRAM REPORTS:
2005 TREE LIGHTING CEREMONY EVALUATION. Jerry Ruegemer presented the
update on this item.
WINTER PROGRAM UPDATE. Jerry Ruegemer presented the update on this item.
RECREATION CENTER REPORT. Tom Knowles presented the report on the Rec Center.
SENIOR CENTER REPORT. Susan Bill presented the report on the Senior Center.
Park and Rec Summary – December 20, 2005
2
PARK AND TRAIL MAINTENANCE REPORT. Dale Gregory presented the report on park
and trail maintenance.
ADMINISTRATIVE: Todd Hoffman presented the year end review for 2005 for the park and
recreation department and the 2006 approved CIP program. Jerry Ruegemer gave an update on
the Recreation Supervisor position.
COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS. None.
COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS: None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PACKET: None.
Spizale moved, Kelly seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously 7 to 0.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Rec Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 20, 2005
Chairman Stolar called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Glenn Stolar, Paula Atkins, Tom Kelly, Ann Murphy, Steve
Scharfenberg, Kevin Dillon and Jack Spizale
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation
Superintendent; Dale Gregory, Park Superintendent; Tom Knowles, Recreation Center Manager;
and Susan Bill, Senior Center Coordinator
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Kelly moved, Murphy seconded to approve the agenda with
the following additions: Todd Hoffman added item 7(a), Recreation Supervisor update and
discussion of the approved 2006 Capital Improvement Program. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Dillon moved, Murphy seconded to approve the verbatim
and summary Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated November
22, 2005 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote
of 7 to 0.
PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION ICE RINK MONITORING SCHEDULE.
Ruegemer: Thank you Chair Stolar, Park and Rec Commission has made recommendation to the
City Council to approve our test sites. We talked about that back in October for that. City
Council did approve a recommendation made by the council. At looking ahead we did add 3
family rinks sort of as a test site at Chanhassen Hills, Pheasant Hills Park and Rice Marsh Lake
Park. I believe those are up and going right now with kids skating on those. Dale and his crew
have been very busy keeping up and adding additional ice, basically on a daily basis so they’ve
been real busy with that. We’re going to take a look at adding that, it talks about you know as
we have in the past with keeping track of data collected at these test sites so we can kind of
formulate a good decision on the conclusion of the ice rink season to see if our test sites were a
positive thing within our neighborhood. So we’re going to take a look at that. Staff did develop
a, kind of a schedule with dates and random times to go around to these test site locations.
We’re asking for the park and rec commissioners to take a look at that and kind of fill in their
name where appropriate to cover the necessary shifts provided on the schedule. Park
maintenance crews will also be out there when they’re flooding at the different locations and
kind of keep track, as we have in the past, where we say kind of a light, medium or heavy use
based on skating patterns and shavings on the ice and it’s real scientific so. So Dale’s crew will
Park and Rec Commission – December 20, 2005
2
keep track of that. There is a blank form within the tractors and the flooding vehicles that we can
keep track of information and report back to the commission in March sometime so, we can take
a look at that. We also did include again for the commission’s information a listing of all the
warming houses and skating rinks and hockey areas within our park system for the winter of ’05-
06. The square boxes are not the proposed rinks anymore. They are part of the rinks that we will
be maintaining for the season along with these circled areas. So there will be 4 warming houses
again within our park system this year at Roundhouse Park, City Center Park, the Rec Center and
North Lotus Lake Park so. We did open all of the warming house locations last Friday. The 16th
I believe and so we are fully staffed and open on a daily basis at this point so. And as well we
will be for the remaining of the season for as long as we can go, so if the commission would like
to take a look at the schedule on that, we can take a look at the necessary columns. The dates are
listed. The attendance person, whom that may be at the time. And then the 3 locations that
we’re going to be monitoring throughout the winter season. So at this time I guess I’d like to
open the schedule up for the commission members to start filling in their names.
Dillon: And I take it Jerry that if we take a slot that we check all three rinks, am I right?
Ruegemer: Correct.
Dillon: Okay.
Stolar: If people want to share a day though I think we could do that too. To take a rink, you
know.
Hoffman: You just need to make a note. One would go to Chan Hills and the other person
would go to the other two or something like that.
Stolar: Exactly, however you want to do it so.
Murphy: Do we stay there for any length of time or is it just go and see at that point in time?
Ruegemer: Yeah, I kind of think the, you certainly can stay longer than that time that’s listed on
the schedule because we’re going to take that random sampling. Just kind of give it kind of
broad…so if you’d like to stay longer, you certainly can do that. I can e-mail the point schedule
or I can mail you a stack of however many appear on the schedule.
Scharfenberg: Jerry I’ll take Saturday the 31st of December. Saturday the 7th. Saturday the 21st.
Hoffman: It’s about 3 per person.
Scharfenberg: And I’ll even take February 4th.
Stolar: What time does Feb Fest start?
Ruegemer: Feb Festival starts roughly around 11:00 or near noon that day.
Park and Rec Commission – December 20, 2005
3
Stolar: I can take this Friday. I possibly can take Saturday. I have to check for sure on that. But
I think I can.
Spizale: Jerry I’ll take Monday, December 26th. And Tuesday, January 2nd. Let’s see, Saturday,
January 14th.
Hoffman: It’s really going to give the commissioners some first hand experience on just what’s
going on out there in the park system so. You can talk to people at the rinks.
Stolar: I’ll do January 1st also. Sunday.
Murphy: Jerry, I can take Thursday, the 22nd. You’re taking Saturday?
Stolar: Yes, I have Saturday.
Murphy: And I can take that Monday at 1:00.
Stolar: Monday at 1:00?
Murphy: Yeah, or did somebody else already have. Oh wait, no I won’t be here. Okay.
Ruegemer: One that we may want to add is the Monday, Martin Luther King Day. I think the
kids are off on school, I believe that’s the 16th. We’ll be open all day long at the regular skating
rinks, if that’s one that the commission would like to entertain adding.
Atkins: I’ll take Wednesday, Thursday and Friday the 28th, 29th and 30th of December.
Ruegemer: Steve, which ones did you take?
Scharfenberg: The 31st, the 7th, the 21st and February 4th.
Kelly: I can take the 28th.
Hoffman: Of January?
Kelly: Yep.
Ruegemer: Who was that, Kelly?
Hoffman: Yep.
Kelly: And I can take the 8th of January and the 15th.
Atkins: I can also take January 2nd too.
Hoffman: Jack’s got that.
Park and Rec Commission – December 20, 2005
4
Atkins: Does he? Okay.
Ruegemer: I think we’re still looking for Tuesday the 27th of December. Sunday, January 22nd.
Sunday, January 29th and 3 in February.
Murphy: I can take those Sunday, the 22nd and 29th.
Ruegemer: Thank you.
Dillon: And I’ll, Tuesday the 27th and what else?
Ruegemer: You’ll take the 27th?
Dillon: Yeah.
Ruegemer: Okay. And then that takes us up through, there’s 3 left at Sunday, February 5th.
Saturday, February 11th and Sunday, February 12th.
Dillon: I think I can do the 5th. I mean if I can I’ll let you know. And the 12th will be fine too.
Stolar: If you want to put me down for the 11th. I need to check something but I think I can do
that one.
Ruegemer: All filled. Thank you.
Dillon: ...just kind of shoot you a message as we go that day or.
Ruegemer: Yeah, probably just hold onto, I don’t know how we should do that.
Stolar: Actually, can I make a suggestion? If you can e-mail us a schedule with the names, we
can just mail these back with you. We’ll fill it out on our computer and mail it back to you with
the numbers. Or print it out if you want to fax it, whatever but.
Ruegemer: Okay. We’ll update the schedule tomorrow and I’ll do an e-mail to everybody
tomorrow.
Stolar: And a side note question, Dale we’ve got the rinks up and running through this luxurious
cold that we’ve had for a while. Has it helped us?
Gregory: Well it’s helped to…when we got the cold weather we’re able to flood… Then we got
a little warm weather and snow and that kind of goofed us up. We needed about 4 days to flood
and that, but they were…but now we went last night, I went out last night and a few guys are
going tonight so hopefully after that it’s going to be warm. We’re going to have to shut down.
We won’t be able to flood at night anymore because it’s going to be so warm.
Park and Rec Commission – December 20, 2005
5
Stolar: But it’s giving us a good base.
Gregory: We’re getting a real good base and everything. Where we’re running into trouble is on
the north end, the hockey rinks where the sun. If the sun is out, it beats down on the boards and
then it melts right along the boards. As soon as we get enough base where the blacktop…and we
should have that within the next couple days.
Stolar: So we might cross our fingers, we might actually have a holiday break where we can use
the rinks. First time in a while that’s been nice.
Gregory: Last time was 5 years ago that we were open this early and then it went back another 5
years again before we were open this early.
Stolar: Great. Thank you for your crew for getting out there and taking advantage of the
weather. Any other questions or comments on this?
Hoffman: A couple comments. Chanhassen Hills, very easy to find. Has a parking lot right off
of the main residential street. Rice Marsh Lake, a little more difficult. You have to wind your
way all the way back down behind McDonald’s and then there’s a small parking lot off a cul-de-
sac. Pheasant Hills, the most challenging to find. There’s a Pheasant Hill park sign just off of
Lake Lucy Road and Lake Lucy, Lake Lucy Road and what’s the other, Lake Lucy Lane? You
need to go past that and wind your way back around in the neighborhood, and then there’s just
on street parking with a pathway that goes there.
Kelly: So if you’re going off of.
Hoffman: You’re going west.
Kelly: You’re going west to Lake Lucy Road and there’s a path that goes up. You can see the
path and then it kind of sudo forks, and you kind of go right at that sudo fork.
Hoffman: And then you continue up, just keep taking the rights then you’ll get back to the park
which will be on the north side of the park instead of the south side. And there will be a trail
access there and that will come right in. If you park on Lake Lucy Lane that would be a long
walk.
Stolar: At the very least we’ll all find our ways to get to those parks.
Hoffman: Thank you everyone for doing this. It will be exciting to hear your findings.
Stolar: Great. Anything else on this item? Okay.
Park and Rec Commission – December 20, 2005
6
RECREATION PROGRAM REPORTS:
2005 TREE LIGHTING CEREMONY EVALUATION.
Ruegemer: Thank you again Chair Stolar. Again our annual tree lighting ceremony was
December 3rd from 5:00 to 6:00. Mayor Furlong did officially flip the switch, not only for the
tree but for the entire park, down here at City Center Park so when it lit up it was absolutely
beautiful. Dale and his crew did a wonderful job of getting all the lights coordinated and all the
electrical problems figured out and all that stuff so we’ve heard many positive comments from
the general public and also staff on how people feel the lights are this year so it really was a nice
event. It was not too bad of a night with a lot of people sitting around the campfire. About 100-
125 people showed up that night. Santa Claus arrived again via fire truck so that was kind of fun
with that so. Chamber was involved with that and staffing and serving refreshments. Was a nice
event. Kind of a nice old touch so the Pillsbury Dough Boy was here and it kind of was a little
fun thing for the kids. Get your picture taken. Of course Santa was handing out candy canes for
everybody in attendance so it was a nice event. I certainly over bought candy canes. We still
have candy canes left over so I need to make a note of cutting back next year. But a nice event.
Just getting people out. Just another kind of extension of the holiday season. Everybody seemed
to enjoy themselves. It’s a quick event. Relatively easy to pull off so it’s certainly our
recommendation to continue to incur for under $300 I think we get a lot of bang for our buck for
the event so, it’s a good event.
Stolar: Any questions? Okay.
WINTER PROGRAM UPDATE.
Ruegemer: …following through on a lot of these activities so. The Timberwolves game is next
Monday night the 26th. We have around 20 people going to that so it’s kind of a special kind of a
Minnesota Recreation and Park Association night where we get special discounts on tickets for
that. All the kids get to go down on the Target Center floor and shoot a basket at the free throw
line and that sort of thing. You can kind of be down on the general area so that’s a lot of fun.
Non-School Day Adventures are another big one. We’re full at capacity on the Wednesday
program, or the Wednesday trip and then we’re pretty close with our numbers on Thursday trip
as well. Those trips we combine with the Cities of Eden Prairie and Chaska so we’re going to go
snow tubing one day. Ice skating. Swimming. Chucky Cheese. McDonald’s. A number of
different things so, that’s always a popular event with that. Daddy Daughter Date Night, the
Friday night has been filled for quite a while with, I think we have 49 couples that night, and
Thursday is rapidly approaching full status so I think we’re getting down there on that one too.
Ice skating clinic we have our capacity on that and that starts next week on the 27th through the,
Tuesday through Friday. So our teacher that’s going to be teaching that as well so that is full
with that so. Just a lot of different activities going on. We have different craft classes as we’re
going on with kind of the holiday theme with that so those have been popular as well. The
Chan/Chaska, the Turkey Shoot, that’s a program that we do with the City of Chaska. We have
close to 80 to 100 kids participate in that as well so, that’s another good program for teenagers
down at the community center. So we have fun again with that. So just a lot of different things
going on within our system this year. 3 on 3 basketball is going to be starting another season
Park and Rec Commission – December 20, 2005
7
after the first of the year, around I believe the 9th. That Monday. First Monday of the month. I
think we have 14 teams signed up for that right now so it should be a good season so. A lot of
programs filled to capacity so a lot of people are taking advantages of our wonderful program
here in the city.
Stolar: Thank you. Any questions? No?
Murphy: If we get a warm up in the weather before that ice skating clinic, does that just get
cancelled and then.
Ruegemer: It is weather dependent but I guess I don’t foresee that happening at this point so.
Stolar: Okay.
RECREATION CENTER REPORT.
Knowles: Well the Rec Center is coming along pretty good. We’ve had a noticeable up tick up
activities since the weather started cold. People coming inside so that’s a good thing. We had
the camp out here a couple 2-3 weekends ago. We had about 25 people camping out over night
raising funds for the Afghan, or Pakistan earthquake relief. Then followed by the Breakfast
with Santa which a big crowd there again this year so that was successful event. We’ve been
able to add a fitness instructor to conduct a Thursday morning class, which I’m real optimistic
will be a success. It’s a good time to have a class at 9:15. So I’m hopeful that that will catch on
and we’ll be able to keep that running. Jerry kind of filled you in on the programming activity
and facility notes, we’ve allotted time again this year to some of the youth sports associations
for their usage. Currently the…Tuesday nights, CAA basketball is in our gym and the CYSA
softball group is on our gym also Tuesday nights. Mainly pitchers and catchers who are working
on…so it’s a small group but they’re there every week so it’s nice to have the space for them.
Stolar: Great. Okay, thank you. Any questions for Tom? And this is your first report so.
Scharfenberg: …batting cage up in the third gym. Is that for the CYSA?
Knowles: Yes. And then they get usage in the spring before they’re ready to go outside, like in
early March and stuff they’ll bring the batting, pitching machines and so forth in there. They
throw carpet down on the gym floors so it doesn’t get…so yep, that’s what that is.
Scharfenberg: Okay. Is there going to be any usage if you just wanted to come in and use that?
I mean we don’t have a pitching machine but if you wanted to go in and just pitch balls and hit
and that, is that available?
Knowles: It’s…as traffic allows. If we have just a huge crowd of people playing basketball,
we’d probably have to say no, but if there’s not much business going on, we could throw up the
nets fairly quickly.
Scharfenberg: Okay.
Park and Rec Commission – December 20, 2005
8
Stolar: Any other?
Hoffman: …holiday times real quickly.
Knowles: Oh, this is off the top of my head. December 24th we’re open 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m..
December 25th we are closed. Then the next weekend, December 31st, that Saturday it’s 8:00
a.m. to 4:00 p.m. again and then we’re closed Sunday the 1st.
Stolar: Okay, thank you.
SENIOR CENTER REPORT.
Bill: To echo what Jerry was saying, all of our programs and last summer and throughout the
fall have been filled to maximum capacity. We’re operating every one of them just about has
waiting lists. I don’t know where everyone’s coming from but it’s a good sign. A couple things
I want to highlight was our holiday party and we got a co-sponsorship by the Community Bank
Chanhassen… Anyway, holiday party. Bill Traxler from the Community Bank Chanhassen
gave us $880 which took care of the cost of the food so we had a catered meal, which we were
able to serve and we charged participants $5.00 and that covered entertainment and door prizes.
People had a great time. Bill and his assistant came and we presented them with a plaque of
appreciation. They were very, very appreciative and indicated they’re looking forward to it for
next year. I’ve also started a Meet and Greet Coffee is now we’re going to do them on a
quarterly basis. We’re seeing a lot of new people come into the Senior Center so four times a
year, we were doing it every other month but now we meet 4 times a year. Send out an invitation
to any new participant and the Senior Advisory Board is there so we have coffee. We talk about
activities. They get to know someone and we fill them in first hand on activities at the senior
center. I think our first one we had, oh we had 22 people and we’ll have one in January so
they’ve been well attended. One other thing I want to talk about is one on one computer training.
Last, end of last summer the Senior Commission talked about they’d like to volunteer or give
back and do something for the community. Curt Robinson, Bobby Headla and Dave Headla, as
well as a couple other people are now…computers. From the old senior center I have the
computer set or hooked up to the internet so now we offer one on one computer training where if
people call in, they want just basic computer instruction and once a volunteer will make a
connection with a person and they go over the basics, emailing, setting up mailboxes, word
documents, some things like that. Reception on that has been great. We’ve trained 29 people so
far and it’s just real nice because what I hear, basic computer classes like through District 112,
they’re in a group and we’re talking about some people that don’t even know how to turn on the
computer, so they’re a little overwhelmed when they’re in a class. Plus the senior center
volunteers really enjoy helping… friendship, he e-mails that gentleman every day and calls him
any time he can’t figure something out and…but they both enjoy that. Then the last thing I want
to highlight is Medicare Part D. I don’t know if any of you have heard about Medicare Part D.
State of Minnesota has 76 different Medicare Part D plans, which is horrendously overwhelming.
We’ve had two presentations that I’ve had State Representatives come in. Talk about basic
information. The one in October we had 85 people, so as a shoot off of that I now have some
volunteer State Representative volunteers that do one on one computer counseling. We use the
Park and Rec Commission – December 20, 2005
9
computer in the west senior center, we have access to the Medicare web site so we can do plan
comparisons. In December I think we did 15 one on one counseling where, I get a lot of
solicitation calls from like Medica or Blue Cross Blue Shield, Health Partners wanting to give
presentations. I just felt it was better having a non-biased party inform people and I’m already
full for January and February, so that’s really been a great benefit and people are real
appreciative that we can offer that. So all in all it’s been a busy year. A good year and we look
forward to 2006.
Stolar: Thank you. Any questions? Okay. Thank you.
PARK AND TRAIL MAINTENANCE REPORT.
Gregory: Thank you. Well this fall has proven to be one of our busier ones again. …shut down
for all of our parks. Soccer fields. Dock, fishing piers, everything else we normally do here in
the fall and that. We also try to keep up with some of the play equipment, finishing up what we
could on those. Lake Susan hasn’t got everything up installed, but we ran out of time. Did not
get the poured in place in and we did not get the sod. We had several of our parks ready for sod
and we had a guy hired and everything else and that, and for 3 weeks and that, he was so backed
up he couldn’t get to us so he ran out of time so that’s one of the things we really hoped we
would…this year and it would have been a great year to get the sod down this fall. We had rain.
We had everything… It’s one of those things where we’re going to have to get him right away
come spring and finish them up and get them completed then. Also we’re going to, this fall
we’re going to get stuff ready for flooding. Trucks, plows, all that sort of stuff. Got kind of
caught off guard on that. Did not have our snowblowers and everything ready when the snow
got here and that so guys did a lot of walking behind the snowblowers trying to get everything
out of the hockey rinks and that instead of using our trucks. And with the snow we’ve had,
we’ve got enough right now to basically…this early in the year but we’ve already had to go out
and blow all them off, just so it gives us more room for the rest of the year. So we’re, they’re
pretty busy with that and again we’re working getting as much done as we can as the rinks and
that, as the weather will allow us. They should be in real good shape for the holidays and that’s
pretty much been our fall. Just keeping, keeping getting everything ready for the winter so.
Stolar: Okay, thank you. Questions? Okay, thank you very much.
ADMINISTRATIVE: 2005 YEAR END REVIEW.
Hoffman: Thank you Chair Stolar, members of the commission. During an opportunity to recap
some of the things that we accomplished in 2005, really the parks are you know the attribute
which many people move to this city for. And not just only parks but just open space in general,
and as you travel around the community and you witness the construction in the 2005 MUSA,
the Highway 212, these open spaces are disappearing. That only reminds us that places like
Bandimere Park, Lake Ann Park, the Fox Family Woods and these other places will become just
that much more valuable as the city continues to urbanize and these roads are constructed so.
Our work is important and we have future acquisitions to accomplish yet within our park system
and so those are going to be some future important milestones to accomplish. We talked about
the 2005 playground improvement project. I think you all were involved in some fashion and
Park and Rec Commission – December 20, 2005
10
it’s just going to be a real memorable event for the community and for the staff, elected and
appointed officials so again thank you for that. We would benefit from an additional covered
picnic shelter, because Jerry’s always booked up and I think Lake Ann Park probably on top of
the hill would be the best location. If you have a chance to take a walk up there next summer
and go ahead and visualize that. We’re considering slab on grade with a covered shelter type of
a situation up there so we can have additional group picnics at that location. And then again we
touched on the acquisition. The 2005 MUSA area, park acquisition. You’ll probably see some
activity in these chambers at your level in 2006. It’s going to be a heated debate, without
question. The acquisition of that property is going to be difficult. We had selected a site in the
Degler property. You saw those plans or those proposals probably 6 months ago, and we had to
pass on that acquisition or continue negotiations for acquisition due to the fact that we needed to
acquire some easements for the sewer lines and they would not sign those easements for those
sewer lines. If we continue to pursue that acquisition on a park, and so the administrative staff,
council and myself made the decision to leave that site and so we’re onto a future site and that
has the other property owners very concerned because they thought this park issue was settled on
the Degler property and it is not. And so you’ll see activity on that acquisition again in 2006.
Talking about trails, the most prominent information on trails is that the snowmobile club has
disbanded in our community. There will no longer be any snowmobile trails in our community.
Snowmobile club actively sought out easements on properties since 1980 in this community, so
they’ve been around for 25 years. So we are going to have our share of snowmobile issues this
year. We’ve already had many calls with snowmobiles on pedestrian, asphalt pedestrian trail
which is irresponsible and illegal and complaints on private property. They’re out, when they’re
on these pedestrian trails they’re running over our…that we installed to aid us in plowing so we
had some damage already, so we’ll be working with the paper. You’ll see an article this week on
snowmobiles. There really is no legal place to ride them any longer in the community, although
you see a lot of tracks out. By state law you can ride in a county ditch, in a state ditch but you
have to be in the bottom of that ditch or on the outside banks and you’d be hard pressed to find a
county or state road in our community where you can stay in that type of a situation, so. You’ll
see increased enforcement by Jackie Glazer, our DNR law enforcement, Carver County sheriff’s
has been out already this last Saturday and Sunday. Marty Walsh is not quite sure what he’s
going to do out at the regional park because that was similar to Lake Ann where they would go
through Lake Ann on trail. They would go through Lake Minnewashta Regional Park by trail.
The trail is no longer there. We will be closing Lake Ann snowmobiling. Lake Ann Park
snowmobiling and then Marty Walsh will have to, is also considering closing that park to
snowmobiles as well.
Atkins: So they can’t snowmobile on the lake?
Hoffman: Sure they can.
Atkins: Yes?
Hoffman: Yep, but you have to get there.
Atkins: Drive it on a trailer and put it onto the lake.
Park and Rec Commission – December 20, 2005
11
Hoffman: Yep, put it on the lake.
Kelly: Can I ask a simple question? Does that mean you’ll be plowing the, how about the south
LRT trail, south of Pioneer? That used to be open for snowmobiling.
Hoffman: We still have it open for snowmobiling. We have the permit already this year, so we
have a permit authorized by Three Rivers for snowmobiling and so if people find their way there,
or you’re on the neighbors, they can still go up ahead and snowmobile this year but next year we
will not pursue that acquisition of that. And then you’ll have to decide if you want to pursue it
for some other use, either walking or cross country skiing. Again our trail system is 44 miles and
growing. Residents really appreciate it. It takes a lot of time to maintain and build those trails.
We always try to build them concurrent with the road projects, but I can guarantee you as you
can see yourself, people appreciate the nature trails by far the most. They enjoy the walks
through the woods and the areas along the creeks and the swamps. Rec programming continues
to be a highlight. We talked a lot about it. I heard people say that the 4th of July celebration’s
their favorite thing of this year in Chanhassen, and I’ve heard dozens of people say they used to
go out of town and now they stay in town simply for the celebration, so I think it is a real
highlight in our community. We plan on accommodating another outstanding crowd. If you
were there last year you saw that we were overwhelmed with people. Continues to grow. This
year it will be on a Monday night. So the…will be on Monday night. Fireworks will be
launched on Tuesday the 4th I believe. The remainder of our special event program is the senior
center filled to capacity. Talk about waiting lists, even a waiting list for the Christmas party so
looking for even a larger spot for that event. Youth and family and adult programming is a
staple to our department. Look for more programs to focus on outdoors and natural areas. We
feel it’s one of our strong points. In our system we have, we are so blessed with our outdoor
facilities. Rec center’s alive and well. We’re not for sale. To many people that believe with
Lifetime here we’re going to pack up our bags and move on, but that’s not the case. There was
talk in the community that if we would ever open a community center of our own, that we could
use that as a bargaining tool that we could sell that building for…back to the school district.
Take that money and use it for our future community center, but the players are pretty well set.
The rec center will stay. Lifetime is here. Chaska’s expanded. Victoria has built. Waconia has
built. And so there’s been a lot of new recreation service providers in the west metro.
Stolar: And Eden Prairie’s redoing their’s.
Hoffman: Yep, Eden Prairie’s going to remodel, so. Tom is ready to put some exciting
modifications to the schedule so we look forward to that. Park and trail maintenance, our crew
maintains 32 parks plus 44 miles of trail and then our downtown. I talked to Charlie Eiler today.
He said he spent most of the last few days bouncing around in a Bobcat trying to scrap sidewalks
clear in our downtown because they’re all iced up so, those are things you don’t realize that our
crew does on a daily basis. There’s just 7 of them. I talked about, imagine the work you do, 2 of
you at home at your yard and imagine what these, this crew is faced with on a daily basis and so
I just commend what they do year in and year out. It’s a lot of good work. The future, the park
and recreation, we’re excited about the future. There’s really some principles that we talk about.
We like to exceed our customer’s expectations. When they show up, we want them to say wow.
This is more than I anticipated. More than I thought I would get. We want to do every job well,
Park and Rec Commission – December 20, 2005
12
which we also talk a lot about because it becomes more and more difficult as we grow bit we
maintain a fairly flat budgeting and staffing operation. And then we like to seek out the
involvement of our citizens. We believe strongly in bringing them into this room and getting
them involved. It provides buying into our programs and is the secret to secure of our future. So
I want to thank the commission for your important role in advising the City Council on the
operations of the department and for continually seeking to make things better for our citizens.
It’s my pleasure in serving as Park and Recreation Director for the community and I enjoy
working with the commission on a monthly and an annual basis so thank you for all you do.
Stolar: Thank you. Comments? Points.
Dillon; You and your staff do a great job. I mean it’s obvious that we do exceed expectations on
a regular basis, all of you and it’s great to be associated with you.
Hoffman: Thanks Kevin.
Stolar: Those words, I’m sure it echo’s everybody here. Thank you. Great. We’ll look forward
to a very active 2006. The next item. The rec supervisor update. Jerry.
Ruegemer: Just to update the commission. We have hired a replacement for Corey. Went
through, we had 59 applications overall. Interviewed 5 from that. Brought a couple people back
for a second interview. With that we did offer the position, him name is Nate Rosa. Nate has
worked a little bit with the City of Moorhead. Also the City of St. Louis Park and most recently
with the Carver Scott Coop down in Chaska. So he comes with some experience in special
events. Some programming. Not only with youth but teenagers as well and likes to fish and do
some of the things that we like to do. Certainly seems energetic and ready to focus on having his
first full time job and seems to be very excited about that. His first day will be January 4th and
he’ll work 8:00 to 4:30 every day. He’s plugged in and really wanting to do that extra mile.
Work long hours if needed and is real excited to start and look to the future so, and I’m ready for
him to start. He can walk right into the rink program and Feb Fest and so be baptism by fire so
he’ll be busy right away so.
Hoffman: It might be known that he’s a semi professional football player so he’s a big guy. Big,
strong guy.
Stolar: Awesome. Okay, well we’ll meet him I’m sure at a future meeting.
Ruegemer: I’ll have him come to the January to introduce him to the commission that evening.
Stolar: And ask us to volunteer for Feb Fest at the same time.
Ruegemer: That is correct. He can give you a report on the Feb Fest.
Stolar: Great. 2006 CIP approved program.
Park and Rec Commission – December 20, 2005
13
Hoffman: Council, City Council approved our 2006 CIP in December. Two weeks ago and last
time the commission look at this was back in August so I’d like to just bring you up to date. To
give you an idea of the $19 million dollars in CIP items approved by the City Council for the
community next year, park and trails represent 1.4 million of that. Major equipment, the dump
trucks, front end loaders, lawn mowers, those type of things is $998,000 or a million dollars.
Sanitary sewer improvements of a half a million. Street improvements are the big item, 12 ½
million dollars in street improvements for next year. And then a million dollars in surface water
management. The fall storms brought that issue more to light and the community has a lot of
conversations about that. And then water system improvements at 2 ½ million dollars to our
water system. So those are the capital improvements slated for 2006. A brief rundown of parks
and trail improvements. $6,000 for picnic tables and benches. $5,000 for trees. Off leash dog
area contributions of up to $50,000 and so again all of these will be approved by the council
when the time comes so if you get into a project with the County, you make a recommendation
and you have the dollars available. Lake Ann road and parking lot rehabilitation, $395,000.
We’ve been attempting to secure these funds for up to 10 or 15 years for some work out at Lake
Ann so we’re very happy about that. These are non-park dollars. $400,000 in road improvement
dollars so we’re very happy about that project. You’ll see a big improvement by the end of next
year. This will be scheduled late in the year to coincide with a slow time at Lake Ann.
Obviously there’s only one way in and one way out so it will provide some inconvenience to our
patrons but we’ll work around that. There’s a big item, the largest in fact on the list, the west
water treatment plant parkland acquisition for $540,000. This has already been spent in 2005 so
this item will come off of this list, the 2006 list. The land that we acquired out on Galpin
Boulevard at the Lake Harrison project, Jerome Carlson. $80,000 for the Highover Trail with the
Crestview Addition coming through. You want to go ahead and complete that trail under the
power lines. $60,000 for athletic field improvements. You remember the people here talking
about athletic field improvements. We’re going to invite them all back, all the associations at
your January meeting and start entertaining a conversation about what they would like to see
happen with those dollars. $60,000 for rec center hockey rink rehabilitation. $40,000 for the
parking lot expansion at Lake Susan. We started that project with Dale’s crew. We said now is
the time to do it. We’re here ripping this park up. Let’s go ahead and plan the future expansion
so we’re going to continue on that. Performance stage for City Center Park, up to $35,000. We
want to make a formal location now that we feel it will be a successful venue for the community.
$25,000 in rec center trees. $25,000 for Bandimere park athletic field netting. And that’s for the
soccer fields. Stop those soccer balls from going off into the pond and into the woods. Rice
Marsh Lake neighborhood trail around the park for $20,000 and that came up as a part of the
conversation of the installation of the playground, so we’re down there working with the
neighborhood and they said, we’ve seen these trails in other parks where when I’m playing with
my young child, my older child can take the Big Wheel and go around in a circle. It’s just a way
of really utilizing fully the park areas. We have good examples at North Lotus Lake Park.
That’s what I would call a park trail. It’s an internal loop in a park which really adds value to the
purchase the property. South Lotus Lake, we have a similar trail planned for $15,000. Then
we’re doing some master planning update for our $10,000 for all of our park master plans are
outdated. We want to get those up to date so we can have best planning possible. Bandimere
Heights, this is your half court basketball court, $6,000 to replace the playground that we took
out. And then tennis court resurfacing for $19,500. And then an item added late in the game, up
to $30,000 as a matching contribution to the Chanhassen Elementary School playground.
Park and Rec Commission – December 20, 2005
14
Parents have been coming into my office for a number of years and then also working with the
principal and the school district, their playground is no longer up to safety codes, similar to what
we experienced, and it was a joint partnership early on and always has been and so they’re going
to work between the district and the APT to come up with the other $30,000. And then we’re
going to allow them to manage that project and then they’ll come to you and ask for that $30,000
contribution. Bring a plan down here and say this is what we’re going to do. You can make a
recommendation to the council on how you’d like to do that. That park acts as a school
playground during the day and a community park at night, so that’s the list. A lot of work to do
in 2006 so we’re not out of the woods yet.
Scharfenberg: Todd, who will be invited for the athletic field improvement discussion?
Hoffman: All the ball associations. So CAA, soccer.
Scharfenberg: Probably Lacrosse.
Hoffman: Yeah, lacrosse. Tonka United. Both, all the groups. If there’s anyone in particular,
just send us an e-mail and we’ll get a mailing off to them.
Stolar: …the amount of discussion, do we need to maybe consider having that meeting start a
little earlier? Or you don’t think it will be that, or is this just to open up the idea? The
discussions will actually occur a little later?
Hoffman: No, yeah. Hopefully we can get through it.
Stolar: Okay. If we have to postpone something.
Hoffman: Or extend it.
Stolar: Okay. Any questions for Todd?
Dillon: So for the final approval of the capital budget, was it pretty much like a rubber stamp
type of thing? Did they give you a lot of push back on some of the items? How did it go?
Hoffman: It went very well with the council this year. They had a number of questions overall
in the budget for the City Manager, but in general the process went very smoothly and they did
not scrutinize your recommendation items. Took your word for it and approved it.
Scharfenberg: Any update from the County on the dog park issue?
Hoffman: Yes. Well the best update is that Marty skied in the park last Saturday and saw more
dog walkers than skiers so he understands the issue clearly and from a personal perspective, but
he’s just continuing to talk to the other municipalities and we’ll get an update from him later this
winter.
Park and Rec Commission – December 20, 2005
15
COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS.
Stolar: Okay. Then committee reports. We only have one committee going on right now. It’s a
surface water management and there’s really not a lot to report. I know we’re going to be
working with both the environment and water departments to do some activities that will help
surface water management in some of it, in Lake Ann?
Hoffman: Lake Ann.
Stolar: When we do the street resurfacing. So that will be a nice showcase also for some surface
water management practices. Todd mentioned that to me so that will be next fall basically.
Hoffman: And the watershed district is interested in participating.
Stolar: Great. Any presentations? Well then administrative packet, any questions on the
correspondence?
COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS: None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PACKET: None.
Spizale moved, Kelly seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously 7 to 0.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Rec Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
Administration
Phone 952 227 1100
Fax 952227 1110
Building Inspections
Phone 952227 1180
Fax 9522271190
Engineering
Phone 9522271160
Fax 952227 1170
Finance
Phone 952227 1140
Fax 9522271110
Park Recreation
Phone 952227 1120
Fax 952227 1110
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
Phone 952 227 1400
Fax 952 227 1404
Planning
Natural Resources
Phone 952227 1130
Fax 952 227 1110
Public Works
1591 Park Road
Phone 952 227 1300
Fax 952227 1310
Senior Center
Phone 952227 1125
Fax 952 227 1110
Web Site
WIIw ci chan hassen mn us
1e
MEMORANDUM
TO
7 C
Paul Oehme Dir of Public Works City Engineer
Alyson Fauske Assistant City Engineer atlf
January 23 2006
FROM
DATE
SUBJECT Approve Expenditure of Funds to Westwood Church for West 78th
Street Extension Project No 04 14
REQUESTED ACTION
Approve expenditure of funds for the cost difference between a 26 foot wide
driveway and a 31 foot wide street and associated storm water ponding wetland
mitigation trail construction and landscaping
BACKGROUND
On July 12 2004 Council approved the site plan for the Westwood Church
Expansion and authorized paying for the cost difference for oversizing the road
On November 15 2004 former Assistant City Engineer Matt Saam sent a letter
stating what the City would reimburse to Westwood Church for the cost
difference associated with construction West 78th Street to City standards versus
constructing a 26 foot wide driveway
DISCUSSION
After City Council approval of the Westwood Church site plan staff met with
representatives from Westwood Church to discuss reimbursement options for a
portion of the construction of West 78th Street The City agreed to reimburse for
the additional cost associated with constructing a 31 foot wide street versus a 26
foot wide drive The agreed upon reimbursements were as follows
1 Oversizing of West 78th Street from a 26 foot wide driveway to a 31 foot
wide street 18 238 03
2 Ten foot wide bituminous trail 16445 00
3 Additional wetland fill and mitigation required due to street widening
5 572 77
4 Additional ponding due to street widening 1 830 38
5 Landscaping along West 78th Street 10 362 00
6 Additional engineering costs 12 of the cost of Items 1 5
The City of Chanhassen A growing community with clean lakes quality schools a charming downtown thriving businesses winding trails and beautiful parks A great place to live work and play
Paul Oehme
January 23 2005
Page 2
On October 24 2005 Westwood Church s engineer Pioneer Engineering
submitted a letter requesting additional reimbursement which is summarized as
follows
1 Grading costs associated with constructing the oversizing of West 78th
Street and the trail 8 671 91 Staff is not recommending approval
2 Additional subgrade correction for the West 78th Street oversizing
2 311 13 Staff is not recommending approval
3 Land cost for the additional 20 foot of right of way required to oversize
West 78th Street and construct the bituminous trail 80400 00 Staff is
recommending approval of this item
Staff s opinion is that the grading costs associated with the oversizing of West
78th Street and the land costs for the additional 20 feet of right of way is above
and beyond the original scope of the agreed upon reimbursable items The
reimbursement for additional subgrade correction is a reasonable request
REIMBURSEMENT
A Recommended amount to be reimbursed from the Street Fund
Reimbursable Item
West 78th Street oversizing
Landscaping
Subtotal
12 engineering
Amount
18 238 03
10 362 00
28 600 03
3432 00
32 032 03
2 311 13
34 343 16
Additional subgrade correction
Total reimbursement Street Fund
B Recommended amount to be reimbursed from the Surface Water Fund
Reimbursable Item
Wetland Mitigation
Additional Ponding
Subtotal
12 engineering
Total reimbursement Surface Water Fund
Amount
5 572 77
1 830 38
7403 15
888 38
8 291 53
Paul Oehme
January 23 2005
Page 3
C Recommended amount to be reimbursed from the Park Fund
Reimbursable Item
lO foot wide bituminous trail
12 engineering
Total reimbursement Park Fund
Amount
16445 00
1 97340
18 41840
D Total Recommended Reimbursement
Street Fund
Surface Water Fund
Park Fund
Total
34 343 16
8 291 53
18418 40
61 053 09
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends City Council approval of reimbursement to Westwood Church
in the amount of 61 053 09 for the West 78th Street oversizing
Attachments
1 July 12 2004 Staffreport
2 Nov 15 2004 letter from Matt Saam
3 Oct 24 2005 letter from Pioneer Engineering
4 Dec 12 2005 letter to Pioneer Engineering
5 Reimbursement Agreement
c Dan Russ Welsh Development
g eng projects westwood church w 78th st extension 04 14 012306 reimbursement for construction doc
z
u
Q
00
PC DATE June 15 2004
CC DATE July 12 2004
CITY OF CHANHASSEN REVIEW DEADLINE July 13 2004
CASE 04 20
BY REG LH ML JS MS ST
STAFF REPORT
PROPOSAL Request for Site Plan Approval to expand the parking lot W 166 spaces and the
extension of West 78th Street and a Wetland Alteration Permit to alter and fill
wetlands on site Westwood Community Church
LOCATION 3121 Westwood Drive
west ofTH 41 at Tanadoona Drive
APPLICANT Dan Russ
c o Welsh Development
7807 Creekridge Circle
Minneapolis MN 55439 2609
952 897 7745
Westwood Community Church
3121 Westwood Drive
Excelsior MN 55331
PRESENT WNING Office and Institutional District 01
2020 LAND USE PLAN Public Semi Public
ACREAGE 58 61 acres DENSITY N A
SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant is proposing the expansion ofthe parking lot by
W 166 spaces extension of a driveway to the proposed West 78th Street extension and construction
of the West 78th Street extension No additional buildings are proposed as part ofthe current site
plan
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION MAKING
The City s discretion in approving or denying a site plan is limited to whether or not the proposed
project complies with Zoning Ordinance requirements Ifit meets those standards the City must
then approves the site plan This is a quasi judicial decision
Planning Connnission
Westwood Community Church Case No 04 20
June 15 2004
Page 2
PROPOSAUSUMMARY
The site was previously developed with the first phase of an ultimate project that will create a
campus for Westwood Connnunity Church The applicant is proposing the eXfansion of the
parking lot by 166 spaces extension of a driveway to the proposed West 78 Street extension
and construction ofthe West 78th Street extension No additional buildings are proposed as part of
the current site plan
It should be noted that the extension of West 78th Street will be a public private partnership
Westwood Church is onl r uired to build a 26 foot wide drivewa with curb and tter to serve
their develo ment
Staff is reconnnending approval ofthe site plan for the parking expansion driveway connection and
West 78th Street extension and the wetland alteration permit
BACKGROUND
On September 27 2001 the Chanhassen City Council approved the following
Land use amendment from Residential Low Density to Public Semi Public based on
the findings in the staff report and contingent upon Metropolitan Council review and
approval
Rezoning ofthe property from Rural Residential RR to Office and Institutional 01
based on the findings in the staff report
Site Plan 2001 10 plans prepared by Hannnel Green and Abrahamson Inc dated July
6 2001 with a one story variance from the Office and Institutional district regulations
and a 2 5 foot variance from the 40 foot building height Highway Corridor District
regulations
Wetland Alteration Permit to alter and fill 34 900 square feet 0 8 acres of wetlands
However only part ofthe wetland alteration occurred for the extension ofthe sewer and
construction ofthe storm water pond
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Chapter 20 Article II Division 6 Site Plan Review
Chapter 20 Article VI Wetlands
Chapter 20 Article XXI Of Office and Institutional District
Planning Commission
Westwood Community Church Case No 04 20
June 15 2004
Page 3
GENERAL SITE PLAN ARCHITECTURE
The applicant is proposing the ex ansion ofthe parking lot by 166 spaces extension of a
driveway to the proposed West 78 Street extension and construction ofthe West 78th Street
extension No additional buildings are proposed as part ofthe cWTent site plan
LANDSCAPING
The applicant is proposing parking lot landscaping consistent with the existing lots The center
island landscaping uses crabapples in a mass organized planting Plantings along the entryway
drive are the same species as the existing lot creating a uniform view into the site
Vehicular use landsc
Trees parking lot
Re uired
area 5 952 s ft
240verstory
12 islands peninsulas
Pro sed
5 952 s ft
12 overstory
60 understory
2 islands ninsulas
Proposed landscaping meets minimum ordinance requirements The applicant is consistent with
the parking lot landscaping previously approved for the existing lots As before the applicant is
installing trees that are smaller than ordinance requirements but planting more than are required
The smaller sizes are acceptable to staffbecause the applicant is meeting the minimum
requirements for caliper inches rather than quantities of materials For example there are 24
overstory trees required for the parking lot At the required size of2 W diameter a total of 60
inches is required The applicant is proposing 72 trees measuring 1 1 W diameter for a total
of 85 diameter inches Staff supports this approach for two reasons Firstly it has been
documented that planting smaller sized materials often results in healthier less stressed plants
due to the reduction in root loss and transplant stress Secondly the site ultimately gets nearly
twice the number ofplants as it would have had the applicant proposed the standard required size
ofmaterials
Ordinance requires boulevard trees along all collector roads The extension ofWest 78th Street
will require an overstory tree every 30 feet
WETLANDS
Existing Wetlands
There are two aglurban wetlands present on site Svoboda Ecological Resources SER
delineated the wetlands in May 1997 and reexamined the site on May 9 2001
Wetland 1 is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion ofthe property just south of
the existing building The northern part ofthe wetland is dominated by reed canary grass while
the southern part of the wetland supports forest vegetation such as box elder The applicant is
proposing wetland fill for a road in order to provide circular vehicular movement around the
Planning Commission
Westwood Community Church Case No 04 20
June 15 2004
Page 4
campus This road is proposed to cross Wetland 1 just north ofthe southern property line The
width and height ofthe road have been minimized in order to reduce the amount ofwetland
impact required The total proposed impact to Wetland 1 is 30 033 square feet 0 70 acres
Wetland 2 is a Type 1 wetland located at the far west end ofthe parcel It is dominated by
American elm and green ash with an understory of greater straw sedge No wetland impact is
proposed for this basin
Wetland Replacement
The applicant is proposing the construction of31 650 square feet 0 73 acres ofnew wetland
credit NWC adjacent to Wetland 1 The applicant has proposed employing storm water ponds
constructed with this phase 14 500 square feet as public value credit PVC for a portion ofthe
required 2 1 replacement ratio
The applicant has also proposed using 13 916 square feet ofPVC that was created with the first
phase ofthis project Minnesota Rule 8420 0740 Subp 1 F states that In cases where excess
wetland acreage is expected to result from a specific replacement plan the owner must
indicate on the replacement plan that the excess acreage is to be considered available for wetland
banking or lose the opportunity to use the excess credits for future projects Since this was not
done with the initial wetland alteration permit these public value credits are not available The
applicant should develop an amendment to the wetland replacement plan to achieve the required
2 I replacement provide the additional required 13 916 square feet without employing credits
constructed during the first phase
Wetland replacement must occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland
Conservation Act MR 8420 The applicant must receive the City s approval of awetland
replacement plan prior to any wetland impact occurring The applicant should provide proof of
recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland
A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width with a minimum average of 10 feet must be maintained
around all existing and proposed wetlands Wetland buffers proposed for PVC must maintain a
width of 16 5 feet Wetland buffer areas should be preserved surveyed and staked in
accordance with the City s wetland ordinance The applicant will install wetland buffer edge
signs under the direction of City staff before construction begins and will pay the City 20 per
sign All structures must maintain a 40 foot setback from the edge ofthe wetland buffer
GRADING DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL
The grading for this site can be broken into two separate operations one is for the additional
parking lot on the north side ofthe site and the other is for the extension of West 78th Street at
the south end of the site The additional parking area was previously rough graded with the
original Westwood Church project The applicant is now proposing to finish grade the area for
paving At the south end ofthe site the entire south property line will be graded for the
extension of West 78th Street from Highway 41 In addition two driveways will be graded to the
Planning Commission
Westwood Community Church Case No 04 20
June 15 2004
Page 5
north ofWest 78th Street for access to the new road The applicant will also be grading for the
construction of a new pond and wetland mitigation area
To avoid significant grading into the Landscape Arboretum s property at the southeast corner of
the site a retaining wall ranging in height from 4 to 9 is proposed A permit for the proposed
retaining wall is required to be obtained from the Building Department and the wall must be
designed by a registered structural engineer Even with the wall there is a small amount of
grading that is proposed on the northeast corner ofthe Arboretum s property This off site
grading will require a temporary easement or right of entry agreement from the Arboretum
Should earthwork quantities not balance on site and materials need to be imported or exported
from the site the developer will need to supply the City with a detailed haul route for review and
approval by staff In addition if material is proposed to be exported to another location in
Chanhassen it should be noted that the properties would be required to obtain an earthwork
permit from the City All areas disturbed as a result of construction related activity must be
sodded and or seeded and disc mulched within two weeks of disturbance
Drainage from the new parking lot will be conveyed via storm sewer to an existing public pond
off the northeast corner of the site This existing pond has been previously sized for the
additional impervious drainage so no further improvements are required A new pond at the
south end ofthe site is proposed to treat a large majority ofthe drainage from the new public
street private driveways and future parking lots on the church property The pond will discharge
the treated stormwater to the existing wetland just east ofthe pond This wetland then drains
south into the Arboretum s property The outlet rate from this wetland is required to be the same
or less than the existing flow rate ofstormwater onto the Arboretum s property The eastern 300
feet of new West 78th Street is proposed to drain to the Highway 41 ditch at the northwest comer
of the intersection This will require a MnDOT drainage permit In addition an NPDES permit
and Watershed district permit will be required for the project grading
Drainage calculations for the existing and proposed conditions including the 10 and 100 year
runoff rates along with storm sewer sizing data has been submitted for staff review Staff has
reviewed the calculations and found that only minor modifications are needed Drainage and
utility easements will be required over the wetland pond and the adjacent mitigation areas An
easement for access purposes will also be required for future maintenance of the wetlands
Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City s
Best Management Practice Handbook BMPH Staff recommends that the City s Type II silt
fence which is a heavy duty fence be used adjacent to all existing wetlands and ponds In
addition erosion control blankets should be used on all slopes 3 1 or greater with heights of 6 or
more
Stonn Water Management
According to July 18 2001 correspondence from Peter Olin with regard to the previous phase
the Arboretum has reviewed the plans for the Westwood Church Development The Arboretum
is concerned that the culverts under the West 78th Street extension will affect the volume and
Planning Commission
Westwood Community Church Case No 04 20
June 15 2004
Page 6
rate ofrunoff from the site and that this in turn will affect the research plots on the Arboretum
property The proposed development is required to maintain existing runoffrates Staffwill
review the storm water calculations to ensure runoff rates will not increase as aresult of the
proposed development The applicant may want to work with the Arboretum to ensure their
concerns are addressed
Easements
Drainage and utility easements should be provided over all existing wetlands wetland mitigation
areas buffer areas used for mitigation credit and storm water ponds
Erosion Control
Erosion control blanket should be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3 1 All exposed
soil areas must have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round according to
the following table of slopes and time frames
Steeper than 3 1
10 lt03 1
Flatter than 10 1
7 days
14 days
21 days
Maximum time an area can
remain open when the area
is not actively being worked
Type of Slope Time
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes and any exposed soil
areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system such as a curb and gutter system
storm sewer inlet temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems
that discharge to a surface water
Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets should include daily street scraping and street
sweeping as needed
Surface Water Management Fees
Since the proposed project does not require the subdivision ofproperty it is not subject to water
quality and water quantity connection charges
Other Agencies
The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies e g
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnesota
Department ofNatural Resources for dewatering and Army Corps of Engineers and comply
with their conditions of approval
Planning Commission
Westwood Community Church Case No 04 20
June 15 2004
Page 7
UTILITIES
With no building expansion being proposed at this time no utility improvements are proposed
except for a short watennain extension under new West 7Sth Street at the southeast comer of the
site This watennain is meant for future development purposes
STREETS ACCESS
As a condition of approval for the development ofthe original Westwood Church project a
second driveway access at the intersection of West 7Sth Street was required to be constructed
prior to any further development of the site As such Westwood Church is now Proposing to
construct a secondary access to the site with the expansion oftheir parking area To accompnthisWestwoodChurchhasacuiredthetwo0ertiesatthesoutheastcomeroftheirsite
The City is in
favor ofhaving a public street for a few reasons it will provide an alternate access for church
traffic to exit the site it will provide a future access for the development of the property
CarlsonBrandt west ofthe church s site and it will provide a secondary access for the
Dogwood Road residents in the future
The extension of West 7Sth Street is proposed as a 3 I foot wide public street with concrete curb
and gutter The street has been shown within an SO foot easement A 10 foot wide bituminous
trail is also included to provide pedestrianlbike access from future development to the west The
proposed trail will connect with the existing trail system on the east side ofHighway 41 A
financial security will be required to guarantee installation ofthe public improvements
In 2001 when staffwas previously considering the extension of West 7Sth Street the Landscape
Arboretum expressed no interest in the project or of having the road on their property Because
of this the entire length ofthe proposed West 7Sth Street extension has been shown on the
Church s ProPerty This also necessitates the re alignment ofthe existing West 7Sth
StreetlHighway 41 intersection on the east side ofthe highway The existing intersection does
not line up with the proposed extension of West 7Sth Street All of the necessary intersection and
turn lane improvements will be completed with this project The City has retained the services
of a traffic engineer to look at the proposed intersection layout and ensure that it will operate
effectively based on the uhimate development of the area Staff hopes to have the results of this
traffic study in time for the June 15 2004 Planning Commission meeting
As previously mentioned Westwood Church is required to construct a 26 foot wide driveway
with concrete curb and gutter per City Code The proposed access driveway to the existing
church site from West 7Sth Street is labeled as a Temporary Parking Drive that is 24 feet wide
with no curb and gutter It is staffs understanding that the church intends to expand within the
next five years but that there are no specific plans for future building locations andor elevations
As such staff would recommend that bituminous curb and gutter be added to the temporary
driveway Additionally a condition should be included with this approval that prior to any
future building expansion to the west side of the existing church building the temporary access
driveway from West 7Sth Street will be brought up to current standards in effect at the time
Planning Connnission
Westwood Connnunity Church Case No 04 20
June 15 2004
Page 8
RECOMMENDATION
Staff and the Planning Commission reconnnend that the Plannmg Commission Chanhassen
City Council adopt the following motions A B
A The Planning Commission recommends appro al of Chanhassen City Council approves
Planning Case 04 20 Site Plan Review for a l66 space parking lot expansion extension of
temporary drive and extension of West 78th Street plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated
May 14 2004 subject to the following conditions
1 The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary
security to guarantee erosion control site restoration and landscaping
2 Tree preservation fencing shall be installed around all existing landscaping at the edge of
grading limits
3 Any existing landscaping that is removed must be replaced when the parking lot
construction is completed
4 The landscape islands shall be filled with wood chips include mulch rings around the
trees and be seeded or sodded elsewhere
5 Overstory trees are required along West 78th St one every 30 feet
6 Three accessible parking spaces must be added to the existing accessible parking area
7 Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland
Conservation Act MR 8420 The applicant shall receive the City s approval of a wetland
replacement plan prior to any wetland impact occurring
8 A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width with a minimum average of 10 feet shall be
maintained around all existing and proposed wetlands wetland buffers proposed for PVC
must maintain a width of 165 feet Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved surveyed and
staked in accordance with the City s wetland ordinance The applicant shall install wetland
buffer edge signs under the direction of City staff before construction begins and will pay the
City 20 per sign
9 All structures shall maintain a 40 foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer
10 The proposed development shall maintain existing runoffrates Storm water calculations
shall be submitted to staff to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the
proposed development The applicant may work with the Arboretum to ensure their
concerns are addressed
Planning Commission
Westwood Community Church Case No 04 20
June 15 2004
Page 9
11 Drainage and utility easements shall be provided over all existing wetlands wetland
mitigation areas buffer areas used for mitigation credit and storm water ponds
12 Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3 1 All
exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round
according to the following table ofslopes and time frames
Type of Slope Time Maximum time an area can
remain open when the area
is not actively being workedSteeperthan31
10 1t03 1
Flatter than 10 1
7 days
14 days
21 days
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes and any
exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system such as a curb
and gutter system storm sewer inlet temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other
natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water
13 Street cleaning ofsoil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street
sweeping as needed
14 The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies e g
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnesota
Department ofNatural Resources for dewatering and Army Corps ofEngineers and comply
with their conditions ofapproval
15 All final plans must be signed by a registered civil engineer
16 Use the latest version 2004 ofthe City s Standard Detail Plates
17 The twin storm sewer culverts under West 78th Street must be RCP Class 5
18 The existing driveway from Highway 41 to the existing homes in the northwest comer of
the West 78th Street intersection must be removed and seeded or sodded
19 Include concrete drive vay aprons and pedestrian ramps for both proposed driveways off of
new Nest 78th Street
20 The new painted median for the eastbound West 78th Street traffic on the east side of
Highway 41 must be a raised concrete median with pedestrian ramps
21 Install a temporary turnaround with barricades and a sign stating This street to be
extended at the west end ofnew West 78th Street
Planning Commission
Westwood Community Church Case No 04 20
June 15 2004
Page 10
22 Provide a pedestrian ramp at the northeast comer of the new West 78th StreetlHighway 41
intersection for connection to the future city trail
23 InCOrPOrate the conditions ofthe MnDOT review letter dated June 1 2004 into the plans
24 Show all of the proposed grades for the new driveway to the existing home in the southeast
comer ofthe site
25 A permit for the proposed retaining wall is required to be obtained from the Building
Department and the wall must be designed by a registered structural engineer
26 Off site grading will require a temporary easement or right of entry agreement from the
Arboretum
27 Should earthwork quantities not balance on site and materials need to be imported or
exported from the site the developer will need to supply the City with a detailed haul route
for review and approval by staff In addition if material is proposed to be exported to
another location in Chanhassen it should be noted that the properties would be required to
obtain an earthwork permit from the City
28 All areas disturbed as a result of construction related activity must be sodded andor seeded
and disc mulched within two weeks of disturbance
29 A MnDOT drainage permit will be required In addition an NPDES permit and Watershed
district permit will be required for the project grading
30 Drainage and utility easements will be required over the wetland pond and the adjacent
mitigation areas An easement for access purposes will also be required for future
maintenance ofthe wetlands
31 Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the
City s Best Management Practice Handbook BMPH Staff recommends that the City s
Type II silt fence which is a heavy duty fence be used adjacent to all existing wetlands
and ponds In addition erosion control blankets should be used on all slopes 3 1 or greater
with heights of 6 or more
32 A financial security will be required to guarantee installation ofthe public improvements
33 Bituminous curb and gutter must be added to the temporary driveway
34 Prior to any future building expansion to the west side of the existing church building the
temporary access driveway from West 78th Street must be brought up to current standards
in effect at the time
Planning Commission
Westwood Community Church Case No 04 20
June 15 2004
Page 11
35 The raised mediaB OB Vest 78th Street OB the east side ofTH 41 whim is proposed to
be removed shaD be replaeed iR the eeFFeet aligBmeBt with tile westward exteBsioB
of West 78th
36 A sidewalk shall be extended along the main driveway from the main entrance of the
church on the east side to the northern end of the driveway where the new parking
lot ends and two diagoBal walkways similar to the Borthwest parkiBg let sidewalks
shall be extended to the east through the landscape islands of the new parking lot
37 Additional landscaping along the north side on Tanadoona Drive
38 Require pub lie safety omeer to eOBtiBue workiBg the two iBtersemoBs as diFeeted by
pub lie safety The church shall continue to use a public safety officer to monitor and
direct traffic from the church for three months following the completion of West 78th
Street After three months of observation traffic operations shall be reevaluated
and the use of public safety officer shall be required as needed
B The Plaflfling COtIHlliSSiOfl recommeBds approval of Chanhassen City Council approves
Planning Case 04 20 Wetland Alteration Permit to alter and fill wetlands on site plans prepared
by Pioneer Engineering dated May 14 2004 subject to the following conditions
1 The applicant shall develop an amendment to the wetland replacement plan to achieve the
required 2 1 replacement without employing credits constructed during the first phase
2 Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland
Conservation Act MR 8420 The applicant shall receive the City s approval ofa wetland
replacement plan prior to any wetland impact occurring The applicant shall provide proof
of recording of a Declaration ofRestrlctions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland
3 A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width with a minimum average of 10 feet shall be
maintained around all existing and proposed wetlands Wetland buffers proposed for PVC
must maintain a width of 16 5 feet Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved surveyed and
staked in accordance with the City s wetland ordinance The applicant shall install wetland
buffer edge signs under the direction of City staff before construction begins and will pay the
City 20 per sign
4 All structures shall maintain a 40 foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer
5 The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates Storm water calculations
shall be submitted to staff to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the
proposed development The applicant may work with the Arboretum to ensure their
concerns are addressed
Planning Connnission
Westwood Connnunity Church Case No 04 20
June 15 2004
Page 12
6 Drainage and utility easements shall be provided over all existing wetlands wetland
mitigation areas buffer areas used for mitigation credit and storm water ponds
7 Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3 1 All
exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round
according to the following table ofslopes and time frames
Type of Slope Time Maximum time an area can
remain open when the area
is not actively being workedSteeperthan31
10 1 to 3 1
Flatter than 10 1
7 days
14 days
21 days
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes and any
exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system such as a curb
and gutter system storm sewer inlet temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other
natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water
8 Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street
sweeping as needed
9 The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies e g
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnesota
Department ofNatural Resources for dewatering and Army Corps ofEngineers and comply
with their conditions of approval
ATTACHMENTS
1 Findings of Fact and Reconnnendation
2 Development Review Application
3 Reduced Copy Site Survey
4 Reduced Copy Site Plan
5 Reduced Copy Parking Lot Construction
6 Reduced Copy Grading Drainage Erosion Control Plan G l
7 Reduced Copy Grading Drainage Erosion Control Plan G 2
8 Reduced Copy Landscape Plan
9 Letter from Juanita Voigt MnDOT to Kate Aanenson dated June 1 2004
10 Public Hearing Notice Affidavit ofMailing
g plan2004 planning cases04 20 westwood community church spr wapstaff report westwood doc
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
Administration
Phone 952227 1100
Fax 9522271110
Building Inspections
Phone 9522271180
Fax 9522271190
Engineering
Phone 952227 1160
Fax 952227 1170
Finance
Phone 952 227 1140
Fax 952227 1110
Park Recreation
Phone 952 227 1120
Fax 952 227 1110
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
Phone 952 227 1400
Fax 952227 1404
Planning
Natural Resources
Phone 952 227 1130
Fax 952 227 1110
Public Works
1591 Park Road
Phone 952227 1300
Fax 952 227 1310
Senior Center
Phone 952227 1125
Fax 952 227 1110
Web Site
www ci chanhassen mn us
November 15 2004
Mr Bill Eggert
Westwood Community Church
3121 Westwood Drive
Excelsior MN 55331
Re W 78th Street Oversizing Project No 04 14
Dear Bill
In accordance with previous discussions between the City and Westwood Church
representatives the City has agreed to reimburse the Church for the extra width or
oversizing of new West 78th Street This reimbursement will include costs for
1 Oversizing W 78th Street from a 26 foot driveway with concrete curb and
gutter to a 31 foot bituminous street with concrete curb and gutter
2 Ten foot wide bituminous trail
3 Additional wetland fill mitigation due to street widening
4 Additional ponding due to street widening
5 Landscaping along W 78th Street
6 Additional engineering cost
Based on the attached construction bid from Midwest Asphalt Corp the
reimbursement total has been calculated below
1 Five Foot Street Widening from Stat 0 20 to Stat 14 29
a Additional area calculation
Length 1429 ft 20 ft 1409ft
Area length x width
1409 ft x 5 ft x 1 sq yd 783 sq yds
9 sq ft
b Total road section cost for additional area
Bid Item
Subgrade Prep
24 Select Granular
12 Class 5 Agg
2 Bituminous Base
15 Bituminous Base
CostSq Yd
035
10 50
5 85
3 65
2 85
2320
The City 01 Chanhassen A growing community with clean lakes quality schools a charming downtown thriving businesses winding trails and beautiful parks A great place to live work and play
W 78th Street Oversizing
November 15 2004
Page 2
Pavement Cost 783 sq yds x 23 20 18 165 60
sq yd
Tack Coat Cost 783 sq yds x 05 gal x 1 85 7243
sq yd gal
Total 18165 60 7243 18 238 03
2 Ten Foot Wide Bituminous Trail from Stat 0 40 to Stat 13 75
a Trail length 1 375 ft 40 ft 1 335 ft
b Total trail cost 10 bituminous trail 1 335 ft x 12 00 16 020
ft
1 ped Ramp 425
Total 16 020 425 16 445
3 Wetland FillMitigation
a Increase in street section width from driveway to street
Width of driveway section 26 drive 4 shoulder
4 shoulder 34 ft
Width of street section 31 street 4 shoulder 9 blvd
10 trl 54 ft
Width increase 54 ft 34 ft 20 ft
b Increase in fill area
Length of wetland at W 78th St 295 ft
Area length x width
295 ft x 20 ft 5 900 sq ft
c Increase
Total amount of wetland fill 30 033 sq ft
increase 5 900 sq ft 196 or 19 6 of the total fill area
30 033 sq ft
d Unit volume cost for grading
Total grading bid cost 122 800
Total amount of cut volume 55 000 cu yds
Volume Cost 122 800 2 23 cu yd
55 000 cu yd
e Cost for additional mitigation
Total cut volume in mitigation area 12 750 cu yds
W 78th Street Oversizing
November 15 2004
Page 3
Total cost Total cut vol x Vol cost x increase
12 750 cu yds x 223 x 196 5 572 77
cu yd
4 Additional Ponding
a Dead storage pond volume required for 26 wide driveway from pond
calculations of Doug Stahl at Pioneer Engineering
Drainage area 9 36 ac CN 86
Runoff Q P 0 2S 2 where P 2 5 in
P 0 8S S 1 000 10
CN
1 000 10
86
1 63 in
So Q r2 5 0 20 63 12 124 in
2 5 0 8 163
Total pond volume Q area 1 24 in 9 36 ac x
12 in
0 97 ac ft
b Dead storage pond volume required for 31 street from pond
calculations of Doug Stahl
Drainage area 9 65 ac CN 87
Runoff Q P 0 2S 2 where P 2 5 in
P 0 8S S 1000 10
CN
1 000 149 in
87
149 in
So Q r2 5 0 2 149 12 1 31 in
2 5 0 8 149
Total pond volume Q area 1 31 in 9 65 ac x
12 in
1 05 ac ft
c increase in pond volume
increase Vol Street Vol Drivewav x 100
V 01 Street
W 78th Street Oversizing
November 15 2004
Page 4
1 05 0 97 x 100 7 6
1 05
d Cost for additional ponding
Total pond excavation 10 800 cu yd
Unit vol cost see above 3 d 2 23 cu yd
Total cost total pond excavation x vol cost x increase
10 800 cu yds x 2 23 x 076
cu yd
1 830 38
5 W 78th Street Landscaping
Since this is not on the attached bid the City will reimburse at typical
prices for the trees below
Tree
2 Hackberry
2 Red Maple
Quantity
23
21
Price
225
247
Total Cost
Total
5175
5 187
10 362
6 Additional Engineering
Engineering costs are typically 12 of the project construction cost so
Total additional construction cost 18 238 03
16445 00
5 572 77
1 830 38
10362 00
52448 18
Total Engineering costs 52448 18 x 12
6 293 78
Total Reimbursement 52448 18
6293 78
58 741 96 or 58 742
Based on the above calculations the City will reimburse the Church 58 742 for
the oversizing of W 78th Street Please review these calculations and let me
know of any concerns you have Upon hearing from you I will schedule the
request on a future Council agenda for approval
W 78th Street Oversizing
November 15 2004
Page 5
If you have any questions please contact me at 952 227 1164 or by email at
msaam@ci chanhassen mn us
Sincerely
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
Matt Saam P E
Assistant City Engineer
MS js
Attachment Midwest Asphalt Bid dated July 30 2004
c Paul Oehme City EngineerDir of Public Works
g eng projects westwood church w 78th sL extension 04 14reimbursemenLdoc
October 24 2005
Dan Russ
Welsh Development
7807 Creekridge Circle
Minneapolis Minnesota 55439 2609
Re WESTWOOD CHURCH
West 78th Street
P E Job 104049
Dear Dan
We have reviewed the November 15 2004 City of Chanhassen letter regarding the West 78th Street
oversizing We feel there are a couple of additional items that should be included in the oversizing costs
1 The grading costs for the increased size of the treatment basin and wetland mitigation areas have
been included in the oversizing costs The grading cost to build the extra 20 width to the
roadway and trail was not We calculated the additional fill required for the 20 extra width to be
3 889 cubic yards
Roadway grading cost 3 889 cu yds x 2 23 Cu Yd 8 671 91
2 Due to soft subgrade the City of Chanhassen required additional subgrade correction and sand
for the constlUction of West 781h Street Ifthe roadway were to remain private this additional
cost may not have been required The Midwest Asphalt invoice for the removal and replacement
for the unsuitable material is 14 329 00
Cost of 5 oversize on 31 roadway 5 31 x 14 329 00 2 311 13
3 The additional 20 width required for the 31 roadway and trail will restrict the amount of parking
and developable land for the future phase of the site The loss of the 20 and associated setback
from the right of way will result in the loss of future parking The value of this land should be
considered The area of the total West 7801 Street right of way is 3 500 Acres The area of the
20 oversizing width is 0 804 Acres
Cost of20 oversizing 0 804 x 100 000 80400 00
Please give me a call with any questions at 651 681 1914
Sincerely
PIONEER ENGINEERING P A
Douglas A Stahl P E
DAS jas
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
Administration
Phone 952227 1100
Fax 952 227 1110
Building Inspections
Phone 952227 1180
Fax 9522271190
Engineering
Phone 952 227 1160
Fax 9522271170
Finance
Phone 952227 1140
Fax 952227 1110
Park Recreation
Phone 952 227 1120
Fax 952 227 1110
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
Phone 952227 1400
Fax 952 227 1404
Planning
Natural Resources
Phone 952227 1130
Fax 952227 1110
Public Works
1591 Park Road
Phone 9522271300
Fax 952 227 1310
Senior Center
Phone 952 227 1125
Fax 952227 1110
Web Site
www ci chanhassen mn us
December 12 2005
Dan Russ
Welsh Development
7807 Creekridge Circle
Minneapolis MN 55439 2609
Re Westwood ChurchWest nili Street Extension Project No 04 14
Dear Dan
On October 24 2005 you forwarded a copy of Pioneer Engineering s letter regarding
additional costs that Pioneer Engineering feels that the church should be reimbursed Having
not been involved in this project from the beginning I looked through the files to find
documentation stating what the City would reimburse The three requests per the October 24
2005 letter and the City s response are as follows
1 Road grading costs 8 67191
The City s West nili Street widening reimbursement was based on the information
submitted by Pioneer Engineering on August 4 2004 which does not include grading
costs The City has money budgeted for the agreed upon reimbursable items only
and therefore will not reimburse any money for the grading costs
2 Additional subgrade cOlTection 2 311 13
This is a reasonable request that staff will take to City Council for formal approval
3 West nili Street right of way reimbursement 80400 00
Documentation in the City s file indicates that Westwood agreed to be the
responsible party for the right of way acquisition required to extend West 78ili Street
Further the Permanent Drainage Utility and Roadway Easement signed by
yourself and the City states that the reimbursement amount for the easement is 1 00
therefore the City will not reimburse 80400 00 for the easement acquisition
If you have any questions please call me at 952 227 1164
Sincerely
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
iu
Alyson lauske P E
Assistant City Engineer
c Paul Oehme City EngineerPublic Works Director
Bill Bement Engineering Teclmician IV
The City 01 Chanhassen A growing colii wRjro maRi 81i PJ falmirlif MIfIffitW Ir@H winding trails and beautiful parks A great place to live work and play
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT
AGREEMENT made this day of 2006 by and
between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN a Minnesota municipal corporation City and
WESTWOOD COMMUNITY CHURCH Developer
RECITALS
A On July 12 2004 the City approved Site Plan Permit 04 20 for a 166
space parking lot expansion extension ofa temporary drive and extension of West 78th
Street
B The City has agreed to reimburse the Developer certain costs for the
construction of West 78th Street Street Project
C The Developer has completed construction of the Street Project and has
conveyed an easement for the street to the City
NOW THEREFORE IN CONSIDERATION OF THEm MUTUAL
COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS
1 REIMBURSEMENT In satisfaction of the City s obligation to
reimburse the Developer for the Street Project the City shall pay the Developer
61 053 09 and the Developer accepts as payment in full 61 053 09
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY
Thomas A Furlong Mayor
AND
Todd Gerhardt City Manager
BY
122787
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
Administration
Phone 952227 1100
Fax 952 227 1110
Building Inspections
Phone 952227 1180
Fax 952227 1190
Engineering
Phone 952227 1160
Fax 952227 1170
Finance
Phone 952 227 1140
Fax 952227 1110
Park Recreation
Phone 952227 1120
Fax 952227 1110
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
Phone 952227 1400
Fax 952227 1404
Planning
Natural Resources
Phone 952 227 1130
Fax 952 227 1110
Public Works
1591 Park Road
Phone 952227 1300
Fax 952227 1310
Senior Center
Phone 952 227 1125
Fax 952227 1110
Web Site
www ci chanhassen mn us
it
MEMORANDUM 0
TO Paul Oehme City EngineerPublic Works Director
FROM Alyson Fauske Assistant City Engineer Gl
DATE January 23 2006
SUBJ Approve Assignment of Development Contract for Frontier 3rd
Addition Project No 03 07 Simple Majority Vote Required
On November 8 2004 the City Council approved the development contract for
Frontier 3rd Addition Subdivision In conjunction with the sale of the property
the developers Charles R Stinson and Robert G Bolling have requested that the
development contract be assigned to Boyer Building Corporation
The developer has met the terms of Paragraph 8 Part A having paid the
9 517 00 cash fee on February 23 2004
RECOMMENDA TION
Staff recommends that City Council approve the assignment of the development
subject to the following conditions
1 Boyer Building Corporation is required to submit a letter of credit in the
amount of 54 109 00 before the Agreement is executed by the City
2 Before the Agreement is executed by the City the Mortgage Holder
Consent to Assignment of Development Contract if applicable
3 A 56 cash fee for recording purposes must be submitted before the City
executes the Agreement
4 The conditions of approval stipulated in the November 8 2004
development contract remain as stated with the exception of Paragraph 8
Part A regarding payment of cash fees
5 Boyer Building Corporation is required to submit a request to extend the
time of performance for the proposed public improvements for City
Council consideration at a future meeting
Attachments January 4 2006 fax from Charles Stinson
Assignment of Development Contract
c Charles Stinson
John Boyer
G ENGPROJECTS Frontier 3rd formerly Lahaye Addition Assign DC BoyeLdoc
The City of Chanhassen A growing community with clean lakes quality schools a charming downtown thriving businesses Winding trails and beautilul parks A great place to live work and play
e O 1 50a CHARLES STINSON 612 473 4371
CHARLES R STINSON ARCHITECTSWWWCRURCHCOM
2 200 F5
Ms Alyson Fauske
Assistant City Engineer
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
Dear Ms Fauske
I am requesting that the Development Contract for Frontier 3rdAddition
be placed on the January 23 2006 City Council agenda for amodificationspecificallychangingthenameofthedeveloper fromCHARLESRSTINSONROBERTGBOLLINGtoBoyerBuildingCorporation
The conditions of approval remain as previously approved
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at9524739503
Sincerely
1i1952 473 9503 11952 473 4371 IJINFO@CRSARCH COM18304MINNETONKABOULEVARDDEEPHAVENIIIN55391
p l
fAl
reservedfor recording information
ASSIGNMENT OF
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
AGREEMENT dated 20 by between and among the
CITY OF CHANHASSEN a Minnesota municipal corporation City Charles Stinson
Charles R Stinson Architects the Developer and Boyer Building Corporation the
Successor Developer
RECITALS
A The City and the Developer have entered into a Development Contract dated
November 8 2004 concerning the plat ofFrontier Third Addition recorded with the Carver CountyRecordersofficeonAugust42005asDocumentNoA420380theDevelopmentContract
B The Developer has asked the City to approve the assignment of its rights and
obligations under the Development Contract to the Successor Developer
C Paragraph K of the Development Contract authorizes the City to approve the
assignment ofthe Development Contract
NOW THEREFORE IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS
THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS
1 ASSIGNMENT The Developer s rights and obligations under the DevelopmentContractareassignedtotheSuccessorDevelopersubjecttothetermsofthisAssignmentThe
Successor Developer accepts the assignment and agrees to be bound by its terms
2 EFFECTIVE DATE OF ASSIGNMENT This Assignment shall be effective
when the Successor Developer furnishes the City the security required by the DevelopmentContract
122852vOl
RNK OlllO 2006
1
3 BINDING EFFECTIRECORDING This Assignment may be recorded againstthetitletothelanddescribedintheDevelopmentContractandisbindinguponthepartiestheir
successors heirs and assigns
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY
Thomas A Furlong Mayor
SEAL
AND
Todd Gerhardt City Manager Clerk
DEVELOPER
BY
Charles R Stinson
BY
Robert G Bolling
SUCCESSOR DEVELOPER
BY
John Boyer Owner and Treasurer
Boyer Building Corporation
STATEOFMlNNESOTA
ss
COUNTY OF CARVER
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
20 by Thomas A Furlong and by Todd Gerhardt the Mayor and CityManagerClerkoftheCityofChanhassenaMinnesotamunicipalcorporationonbehalfofthe
corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council
NOTARYPUBUC
122852vOl
RNK O 1 1 0 2006 2
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ss
COUNTY OF
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
20 by
of on
day of
the
behalf of the
corporationcompany
STATEOFMINNESOTA
ss
COUNTY OF
NOTARY PUBLIC
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
20 by
of
corporation company
DRAFfED BY
CAMPBELL KNuTSON
Professional Association
317 Eagandale Office Center
1380 Corporate Center Curve
Eagan Minnesota 55121
651 452 5000
RNK
122852vOl
RNK OlllO 2006
day of
the
on behalf of the
NOTARY PUBLIC
3
MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT
TO ASSIGNMENT OF DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
which holds a mortgage on the
property described in the Development Contract referenced in the foregoing Assignment for good
and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged does
hereby join in consents and is subject to the foregoing Assignment of Development Contract and
agrees that the Development Contract referenced therein shall remain in full force and effect even if
it forecloses on its mortgage
Dated this day of 20
BY
Its
AND
Its
STATEOFMINNESOTA
ss
COUNTY OF
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
20 by
day of
and by
andthe
of
on behalf ofthe
NOTARY PUBLIC
122852vOl
RNK Ol 1O 2006
4
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
Administration
Phone 952 227 1100
Fax 952227 1110
Building Inspections
Phone 952227 1180
Fax 9522271190
Engineering
Phone 952227 1160
Fax 952227 1170
Finance
Phone 952227 1140
Fax 9522271110
Park Recreation
Phone 952227 1120
Fax 952227 1110
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
Phone 952 227 1400
Fax 952 227 1404
Planning
Natural Resources
Phone 952227 1130
Fax 952227 1110
Public Works
1591 Park Road
Phone 952227 1300
Fax 952 227 1310
Senior Center
Phone 952 227 1125
Fax 952227 1110
Web Site
www ci chanhassen mn us
1
MEMORANDUM
TO Paul Oehme City EngineerDir of Public Works
Alyson Fauske Assistant City Engineer
0
FROM
ci
DATE January 23 2006
SUBJ Approve Addendum to John Henry Development Contract
Project No 05 05
The developer of John Henry Addition has requested an extension for the time of
performance The development contract for John Henry Addition approved by
the City Council on April 11 2005 stipulates that the developer shall install all
required improvements by November 15 2005 Due to changes in the
construction and demolition plans the developer requests that the time of
performance be extended to July 31 2006
Attachment 1 January 3 2006 email message from Tim McGuire
2 Amendment
g eng projectsjohn henry addapprove addendum a doc
The City of Chanhassen A growing community with clean lakes quality schools a charming downtown thriving businesses winding trails and beautitul parks A great place to live work and play
Page 1 of 1
Fauske Alyson
From Tim P McGuire tim@mcguireandsons com
Sent Tuesday January 03 200610 16 AM
To Fauske Alyson
Regarding the extension request for the John Henry Addition I offer the following
Reason for the extension Development plans have changed from the original plan and now includes the
demolition of the existing house The property has been sold to 10Springs Construction and we anticipated
construction to start in the spring
Extension request date July of 2006
If you have any further questions please call at 852 292 5541
Pax Vobis
Tim McGuire
1 10 2006
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES MINNESOTA
ADDENDUM A
TO JOHN HENRY ADDITION
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
AGREEMENTS dated April 11 2005 by and between the CITY OF
CHANHASSEN a Minnesota municipal corporation City and Timothy P McGuire a
married person the Developer
1 BACKGROUND City Council approved the development contract for John Henry
Addition the Development Contract at the April 11 2005 City Council meeting
2 EXTENSION OF DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT The Development Contract
shall remain in full force and effect and shall also apply to John Henry Addition
3 SPECIAL CONDITIONS In addition to the terms and conditions outlined in the
development contract the following special conditions shall apply to John Henry Addition
A The amendment is to extend the time of performance to for the Developer to install
all required improvements by one year The amended time of performance shall be July 31 2006
The Developer may however request an extension of time from the City If an extension is
1
granted it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost
increases and the extended completion date
4 RECORDING The Development Contract and this Addendum A shall be
recorded against all lots blocks and outlots in John Henry Addition
IN WITNESS WHEREOF this Addendum A was executed by the parties the day and
year first above written
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
SEAL
BY
Thomas A Furlong Mayor
AND
Todd Gerhardt City Manager
BY
Timothy P McGuire
2
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ss
COUNTY OF CARVER
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
2006 by Thomas A Furlong and by Todd Gerhardt respectively the Mayor and City Manager of
the City of Chanhassen a Minnesota municipal corporation on behalf of the corporation and
pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ss
COUNTY OF
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
2006 by Timothy P McGuire
day of
Notary Public
Drafted by
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
P O Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
952 227 1100
G ENG DCJohn Henry Addendum A doc
3
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
Administration
Phone 952 227 1100
Fax 952227 1110
Building Inspections
Phone 952227 1180
Fax 952 227 1190
Engineering
Phone 952 227 1160
Fax 952 227 1170
Finance
Phone 952 2271140
Fax 952227 1110
Park Recreation
Phone 952227 1120
Fax 952227 1110
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
Phone 952227 1400
Fax 952 227 1404
Planning
Natural Resources
Phone 952227 1130
Fax 952227 1110
Public Works
1591 Park Road
Phone 952227 1300
Fax 952227 1310
Senior Center
Phone 952 227 1125
Fax 952 227 1110
Web Site
www ci chanhassen mn us
J4
MEMORANDUM
TO Todd Gerhardt City Manager
Paul Oehme P E Dir of Public Works City Engineer yFROM
DATE January 23 2006 o
SUBJ Approve Resolution Designating Yosemite A venue as an MSA
Route PW004
REQUESTED ACTION
Approve resolution
BACKGROUND
Staff is requesting Yosemite A venue from the north City limits to Lake Lucy
Road be designated as a State Aid Route By designating streets as state aid
routes the City can use state aid funds for street improvement projects Yosemite
is proposed to be reconstructed the summer of 2006 and staff has budgeted state
aid funds for these improvements In order for the state to accept the designation
of this route the roadway must intersect with another state aid route county road
or state or federal highway Lake Lucy Road is currently designated a state aid
route Apple Road in Shorewood to the north is currently not designated as a state
aid route but it does intersect with Mill Street Hennepin County Road 82 Staff
has discussed this issue with the City of Shorewood and they have verbally agreed
to designate Apple Road as a State Aid Route Staff has reviewed the state aid
routes in the system and finds it appropriate to designate Yosemite as a State Aid
Route at this time
Attachments
g lenglpubliclpw 004 municipal state aidlbkgd 12306 yoseIllite deslgnatlOn sa route doc
The City of Chanhassen A growing community with clean lakes quality schools a charming downtown thriving b uSlnesses winding trails and beautiful parks A great place to live work and play
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES MINNESOTA
DATE Januarv 23 2006 RESOLUTION NO 2006
MOTION BY SECONDED BY
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING YOSEMITE A VENUE AS A
MUNICIPAL STATE AID HIGHWAY
PW004
WHEREAS it appears to the City Council of the City of Chanhassen that the road
hereinafter described should be designated a Municipal State Aid Street under the provisions of
Minnesota Law
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Chanhassen City Council that the road
described as follows to wit
Yosemite A venue from North City Limits to Lake Lucy Road
be and hereby is established located and designated a Municipal State Aid Street of said City
subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Transportation of the State of Minnesota
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
forward two certified copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of Transportation for his
consideration and that upon his approval of the designation of said road or portion thereof that
same be constructed improved and maintained as a Municipal State Aid Street of the City of
Chanhassen
Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 23rd day of January 2006
ATTEST
Todd Gerhardt City Manager Thomas A Furlong Mayor
YES NO ABSENT
Designated State Aid Street
Yosemite
Lilac Lane
I I 1 I r l J III I 7 T 71 IjLJJJUIrILJL1IKoehnenCircleEast1QIvvIIrr1IllrvJlII1fJrJII1I1IIIIIj1IrlvC5eQI
I
I
r I i T I
l f t T I r J l
1 1 L L J I 1 I I I I r
I I I j I I I
I I lB j I I L 1IIILfIirjlicIall1JIIIIIIJIIIIIailIIJbLIIIr
L L J L 1 J J I L 1 1 I
West rd St
T Yest rd St j i y In
I I Ii r r I jIIIIIJII1IIIIII
1 J r I I kI1
I r r 1 I lIJIIrJ
J I I I
f r II L l
I yz I I I
di v I j I I0y1I1ljJI
I L j i 1iIII3iIfI
I WOOd DU m IIITITLIili
J r L
L L y JIIIIIIIIIIIIII1yCr r
I I I I G j I 1 z
r T r Lake Lucy Road 1
I T r I 1 1 rIriLIIIlcjI
I I j 1
I I r GrIIJllIi III101i7II
ja mary 2006 G ENGJoleen I engprojeds Pau nel1Staid rOJemite m d
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
Administration
Phone 9522271100
Fax 9522271110
Building Inspections
Phone 952 227 1180
Fax 952 2271190
Engineering
Phone 9522271160
Fax 952227 1170
Finance
Phone 952 2271140
Fax 9522271110
Park Recreation
Phone 952 2271120
Fax 952 227 1110
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
Phone 952227 1400
Fax 9522271404
Planning
Natural Resources
Phone 9522271130
Fax 952 2271110
Public Works
1591 Park Road
Phone 952227 1300
Fax 952 2271310
Senior Center
Phone 9522271125
Fax 952227 1110
Web Site
www cl chanhassen mn us
iJ
MEMORANDUM
TO Todd Gerhardt City Manager
FROM Karen Engelhardt Office Manager
i
DATE January 12 2006
SUBJ Approval of Temporary On Sale Beer Liquor License Chanhassen
Lions Club February 4 2006
Attached please find an application for a temporary on sale liquor license from the
Chanhassen Lions Club The Lions would like to sell beer at the city s annual
February Festival on Lake Ann on February 4th or February 5th in the event the
contest is rescheduled due to weather
RECOMMENDA TION
Staff recommends approval of the Chanhassen Lions Club request for a temporary
on sale liquor license to sell beer at the February Festival on Lake Ann on
February 4 or February 5 2006 for a fee of 1 00 This approval is contingent
upon receipt of a liquor liability insurance certificate covering this event
Approval of this item requires a simple majority vote of those City Council
members present
g userkaren liquor li ons doc
The City 01 Chanhassen A growing community with clean lakes quality schools a charming downtown thriving businesses winding trails and beautiful parks A great place to live work and play
Minnesota Departmcnt of Public Safety
ALCOHOL AND GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
444 Cedar Street Suite 133 St Paul MN 55101 5133
651 215 6209 Fax 651 297 5259 TTY 651 282 6555
WWW DPS STATE MN US
APPLICA nON AND PERMIT
FOR A 1 TO 4 DAY TEMPORARY ON SALE LIQUOR LICENSE
TYPE OR PRINT INFORMATION
NAME OF ORGANIZA nON DATE ORGANIZED
9ff
TAX EXEMPT NUMBER
STREET ADDRESS
f 0 80x
HOME PHONE
f5J 9 bI 7
ORGANIZATION OFFICER S NAME
7 oJ r v
ADDRESS
c1 Fla m n cVrive
ADDRESS
t naYl fvd
da 1
cJ a n
ch a
o
2 aY h 5 5 e JJ SS 17
Will the apPli ontract forintoxicating liquor service If so give the name and address of the liquor licensee providing the service
Will the applicant carry liquor liability insurance If so please provide the carrier s name and amount of coverage
IN tV 5 1li4 rc rJ NJ IEl IN
APROVAL
APPLICATION MUST BE APPROVED BY CITY OR COUNTY BEFORE SUBMITTING TO ALCOHOL GAMBLING
ENFORCEMENT
CITY COUNTY DA TE APPROVED
CITY FEE AMOUNT LICENSE DATES
VA TE FEE PAID
SIGNATURE CITY CLERK OR COUNTY OFFICIAL
NOTE Submit this form to the city or county 30 days prlor t tAPFPROVEdD DI C OR ALCOHOL AND GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT
b I
0 even orwar applIcation signed b t dl
a ove fthe application is approved the Alcohol and Ga bl E
Y CI yan or county to the address
m mg n orcement DIVISIOn Will return this application to be used as the License for the event
PS 09079 02 05
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
Administration
Phone 952227 1100
Fax 952227 1110
Building Inspections
Phone 952227 1180
Fax 952227 1190
Engineering
Phone 952227 1160
Fax 952227 1170
Finance
Phone 952 227 1140
Fax 952 227 1110
Park Recreation
Phone 952227 1120
Fax 952227 1110
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
Phone 952 227 1400
Fax 952 227 1404
Planning
Natural Resources
Phone 952 227 1130
Fax 952227 1110
Public Works
1591 Park Road
Phone 952227 1300
Fax 952 227 1310
Senior Center
Phone 952 227 1125
Fax 952 227 1110
Web Site
www ci chanhassen mn us
1
MEMORANDUM
TO Todd Gerhardt City Manager
FROM Justin Miller Assistant City Manager Ao
January 13 2005
c
DATE
RE 2006 Key Financial Strategies Strategic Plan Final Draft
BACKGROUND
During the past two work sessions the City Council and staff have prioritized
issues to be focused on with the 2006 Key Financial Strategies Strategic Plan
Attached to this report are the following documents
Key Financial Strategies Plan
City Council Issue Priorities and Rankings
Task sheets for each item that will be focused on in 2006
RECOMMENDA TION
Staff recommends that the Chanhassen City Council adopt the attached 2006 Key
Financial Strategies Strategic Plan and direct staff to begin implantation
immediately Approval of this item requires a majority vote of the city council
The City of Chanhassen A growing community with clean lakes quality schools a charming downtown thriving bUSinesses winding trails and beautiful parks A great place to live work and play
Ehlers Associates
e EHLERS
ASSOCIATES INC
KEY FINANCIAL STRATEGIES
OVERVIEW
Ehlers Associates was engaged by the City of Chanhassen Minnesota the City to assist in
the preparation of the City s Key Financial Strategies The need to create a comprehensive
financial management plan was identified by the City Mayor Council Manager and Staff due to
growing demands for financial resources This strategic financial plan is the result of four
workshops with the Council and many hours of staff consultation One of the workshops
November 7 2002 focused on identifying potential financial needs of the City The results
from that session have been incorporated into this plan document
This plan was most recently updated in JanuaryFebruary 2006 during a series of workshops with
the City Council
OBJECTIVES FOR THE FINANCIAL PLANNING PROCESS
A financial plan is a necessary element of a City strategy to remain competitive in today s
demanding environment Other objectives of the City s Key Financial Strategies are
Establishing a common understanding among the elected officials and staff
of the City s needs and financial capacity
Developing a comprehensive view of financial resources and options
Identifying City issues and opportunities
Creating a framework in which elected officials and staff can make
immediate and long term investment decisions
Developing a consensus among the elected officials and staff on key actions
the City will take to remain competitive
Meeting the new standard presented in the Governmental Accounting
Standards Board Regulation 34 including its capital planning provisions
Through this workshop process we have examined the current and future ability to meet
these objectives to answer the question How do we get there The City s Key
Financial Strategies will provide a road map into the future and a framework for future
decision making
City of Chanhassen Key Financial Strategies
Ehlers Associates
FINANCIAL ASSESSMENT FINDINGS
The financial assessment conducted of the City was divided into seven areas
1 Community goalsinitiatives
2 Local tax base considerations
3 Financial Position
4 City owned infrastructure
5 Competitiveness
6 Credit position
7 Enterprise funds
As part of the financial assessment a number of findings were presented within the
workshops These findings are outlined in more detail within this report A summary of
these findings is as follows
1 COMMUNITY GOALSINITIA TIVES Establishing a strategic profile
including community vision purpose goals means to achieve the purpose and
strategies directed at accomplishing goals which are essential to the efficient
and effective use of scarce City resources
A Important Initiatives City Officials have identified several initiatives as
part of this financial planning process Key issues include
Maintaining city infrastructure This includes
o Pavement Management System
o Sewer and Water Infrastructure
o Park Pavement Maintenance
o Vehicle and Major Equipment Replacement
o Water System Improvements
o Public Facility Maintenance
Enhance and protect city environment This includes
o Update SWMP Storm Water Management Plan
o Watershed Improvements
o NPDES Phase II compliance
o Lake MonitoringImprovements
o 2007 Environmental Fund Solvency Issues
o Bluff Creek Improvements
Managing growth This includes
o Future staffing issues
o 2005 MUSA
o City Trails
o Comprehensive Plan Update
o Coordinating the construction of Highway 212 312
o Expansion of Public Works Facility
o Improving City Services
City ofChanhassen Key Financial Strategies Page 2
Ehlers Associates
o Quality Assurance for Law EnforcementPublic Safety
o City Archives and E City Hall
Explore support for new City facilities This includes without
limitation
o Public Works expansion
o Chanhassen School Campus site selected type of school
to be determined
o Southern Satellite Fire Station
Implication The City has identified a significant agenda for future needs
Developing a mechanism to regularly prioritize needs develop
implementation programs including resource requirements and evaluate
the City s capacity to implement the programs should be a high priority
Financial strategies should also include direction regarding the nature of
activities to be undertaken for each issue including
Assessing need for service or facility
Studying alternatives methods and cost and funding sources for
implementation
Implementation
B Facility Options City Officials are looking at options for public facilities
including a water treatment system Public Works facility expansion
satellite fire station and monitoring the decision making process for a new
school at the comer of Lyman Blvd and Audubon Road
Implication Involving the public with this process will be key to
progressing this issue to the implementation phase Careful consideration
should be given to the funding options and impacts including operating
costs While there are some issues impacting the timing of these decisions
it is essential that public understanding and support be developed
C Technology Ever growing demands for staff services and the need for
City departments to work together require ongoing investments in
computers and technology
Implication Further enhancements to the City s information technology
systems may require financial support from the City s General Fund There will
be more and better technology products available to cities Residents
customers and employees will likely create pressure to invest in improved and
new technology This will require the City to develop a disciplined approach to
reviewing the requests and needs for technology investments That approach
should address cost and benefits not limited to financial productivity
training support and potential obsolescence
City of Chanhassen Key Financial Strategies Page 3
Ehlers Associates
2 LOCAL TAXBASE CONSIDERATIONS Structure quality and size of a
community s tax base impact its ability to fund services and investments
A Development City land area is approximately 60 developed and has reached 65
of projected population How the community completes development will impact its
future
Implication The City will add additional residents and businesses to its population
and in addition will face new and additional requests for future services as
demographics and resident interests change as well as the need to address reinvestment
in existing facilities Understanding the dual impact of new service requests of existing
residents and the impact of additional new residents will be a key to future planning
B Market Value City market value of 2 5 billion has been increasing an between 7
10 per year for the past 5 years The City has a high per capita market value of
108 000
Implication The high per capita market value and strong commercial base provides
good opportunity for revenue diversification The tax rate should be evaluated in terms
of what rate creates the outcomes that the City seeks for itself The tax rate should be
set in conjunction with both the budget and the yearly costs identified in the capital
plan
C Tax Increment Districts Changes in State property tax law adversely impacted the
City s ability to cover debt service related to development A plan was been prepared
and implemented to cover potential shortfalls and as of December 31 2004 the
Downtown and Eden Trace TIP districts were de certified The Gateway TIP District
was decertified as of December 31 2005
Implication The City should continue to monitor existing TIP districts to ensure their
viability and to avoid any impacts to the City s general fund
D Diverse tax base The City has a diverse tax base with 69 residential and 28
commerciallindustrial The balance includes a variety of open space and institutional
uses
Implication Tax base diversification is a positive trend for stability in City services
requirements and property tax production Continued effort should be made to maintain
a ratio of residential to commerciallindustrial base with a target range of 67 to 75
residential and 25 to 33 commercial industrial
E Economic Development Policy The City has provided economic development
incentives in the form of tax increment financing
Implication Previously the City used economic development incentives to attract
targeted development This strategy is clearly responsible for the level of tax base
City ofChanhassen Key Financial Strategies Page 4
Ehlers Associates
diversification that exists today To encourage continued balanced community growth
the City will consider appropriate strategies
3 FINANCIAL POSITION Availability of funds to meet current and future needs adequate
fund balances for cash flow purposes and to meet emergency needs requires planning and
discipline
A Effective past financial management practices has left the City with a moderate
undesignated unreserved fund balance within the General Fund Water and Sewer
Fund and Storm Sewer Fund
Implication The City s General Fund Balance remains adequate Changes in State tax
structure and potential capital projects costs indicate the need to continue to carefully
monitor the fund balance
B The City faces growing demand and cost to provide services with limited ability to
increase short term tax base
Implication While State levy limits were not in place for the 2006 budget future
State actions may impact the City s ability to increase operating expenses without an
offsetting increase in non property tax revenues
C The City has developed effective loss reduction strategies accident review safety
committee Additional risk management efforts including review of risk retention
levels deductibles funding of loss reserves may be warranted
Implication Additional development of risk management policies will help reduce
exposure to financial risks
4 CITY INFRASTRUCTURE Communities need to regularly invest and reinvest in their
infrastructure roads buildings parks etc Regular deferral of investment can lead to
fiscal stress and community disinvestments
A The City has maintained a street reconstruction program since 2002
Implication Overall the streets are in acceptable condition but continued annual
investment will be needed Progress on maintenance should be carefully monitored
B The City is reviewing Public Works facility needs It is intended that facility needs will
be addressed with the adoption of the 2007 08 Capital Improvements Plan
Implication The City is reviewing the need for reinvestment in this facility
City ofChanhassen Key Financial Strategies Page 5
Ehlers Associates
C Potential needs for reinvestment in public facilities infrastructure continue to be seen
The City has major investments in buildings utility systems streets trails lighting
systems and related improvements
Implication Community involvement will be key to addressing need for major
investments The City should undertake a public participation process to involve the
community in understanding and then selecting options Preparing plans and schedules
for anticipated required maintenance and replacement will provide information need for
financial planning purposes
D The City has extensive vehicle replacement requirements for Public Works and Fire
equipment The City has a schedule of equipment replacement that forecasts these needs
for the expected life of the equipment
Implication Equipment replacement is often deferred as part of budget balancing
efforts In the long term this may increase maintenance costs increase downtime of
equipment and staff and lead to a funding problem in future years Maintaining an
equipment replacement schedule and funding source will help remedy this problem and
provide a more accurate measure of services
E The City faces potential major expenditures in its Water Fund for infrastructure
improvements in order to improve water quality standards and distribution system needs
Implication Enterprise funds are generally expected to support system needs The City
should continue to identify future major enterprise expenditures within the next five to
ten years This will permit the development of a utility rate plan to facilitate the required
improvements A water and sewer rate study was implemented in 2004 and reinforced
in 2005 The City should continue to monitor the balance in the enterprise funds and re
evaluate each year
5 COMPETITIVENESS Communities compete for people to live work and do business
Understanding and responding to the elements of competition is an important role for the
City
A The City s overall City tax rate remains competitive with other comparable communities
in the metro area 55th out of 112 metro communities in 2005
Implication Given the competitive tax rate and the high level of services the City
would be in position to increase tax rates when conditions permit However this
increase should come only upon completion of a comprehensive analysis of competing
demands and priorities with community involvement in setting and funding these
priorities
B The City offers a full complement of services to residents and businesses
Implication Services offered by the City appear to be consistent or superior to
surrounding communities
City of Chanhassen Key Financial Strategies Page 6
Ehlers Associates
C Chanhassen appears to be well maintained with no typical signs of disinvestments or
deterioration
Implication Careful attention should be paid to monitoring the condition of public and
private property
D Chanhassen s open space and trail system appear to be equal or greater than many other
communities in the metropolitan area A new state of art library was opened in 2003
The City does not have some amenities typical for comparable communities including a
community center but the construction of a new Lifetime Fitness facility may meet this
need Trail maintenance was included in the 2005 pavement management program
Implication Planning and investments in these areas has provided a sound foundation
for creating a community with amenities that will attract and retain residents visitors
and businesses Careful attention should be paid to the operating costs of recreation and
cultural amenities Community involvement in discussions regarding the cost to build
and maintain new facilities will be a key factor for future considerations
6 CREDIT POSITION Maintaining a strong credit rating helps reduce the cost of borrowing
required to develop and maintain the community
A The City was upgraded to AA by Standard Poor s Investors Service in 2004 This
is an above average rating reflecting the City s strong property value growth and
maintenance of a strong financial position while making progress in mitigating the
impact of a tax increment district negatively impacted by tax rate changes
Implication This strong credit rating has helped the City successfully issue debt at very
competitive interest rates in the commercial marketplace
B The City s general obligation debt burden has been reduced to 717 per capita due
mainly to paying off tax increment debt 85 of this debt will be paid off in ten years
A plan is in place to transfer excess reserves to the debt service fund for the next several
years to level out debt service payments
Implication The City has successfully implemented a plan to address tax increment
debt issues Careful attention should be paid to mapping out future debt issues for the
next five to ten years The aggressive debt repayment schedule will enable the City to
continue to invest as needed
C The City currently has a moderate undesignated fund balance
Implication This strong fund reserve helps the City to maintain its current rating The
City should be careful to maintain this strong fund balance
City ofChanhassen Key Financial Strategies Page 7
Ehlers Associates
7 ENTERPRISE Operating enterprise funds as businesses is key to avoiding
transferring the burden of operations to general taxpayers In addition some enterprise
operations can help reduce the cost of general government
A The City has improved cost recovery for water and sewer services over the past few
years A new rate study was conducted and increases for water and sewer rates have
been implemented for both 2005 and 2006
Implication Fluctuations in water demand due to weather has provided challenges in
establishing water and sewer rates However rates should be established to assure
recovery of operating costs and adjusted annually
City ofChanhassen Key Financial Strategies Page 8
Ehlers Associates
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings and analysis conducted in the workshops Ehlers developed a list of
recommendations for the City their Key Financial Strategies listed in the seven categories below
1 0 COMMUNITY GOALSINITIA TIVES
1 1 GOAL SETTING
The Mayor and City Council should continue annual goal setting sessions prior to
budget preparation The goal setting session should prioritize needs This
information should be used by staff to develop programs service options and
resource requirements for consideration within the budget process The goals
should specifically address the major issue categories
Financial strategies should be incorporated into the annual goal setting program
1 2 FACILITY NEEDS
The City should continue the deliberate and careful approach to addressing facility
needs for future growth reinvestment and quality of life services and capital
investments The Mayor and City Council should consider authorizing a study to
address future facility needs
1 3 COMMUNICATION PLAN
A communications plan should be developed in order to inform and seek community
feedback on important financial issues including future needs and financial
constraints The plan should also forecast the process that will be used to seek
community participation for significant community investment decisions
A community survey was conducted in 2005 which will help identify the types of
services vital to attract and retain residents Consideration should be given to
expanding the survey to collect information regarding improving the City s
competitive position economic development quality of life school funding inequity
and possible intergovernmental tax sharing solutions
Consideration should be given to continuing the use of the Funding Public
Facilities Public Participation Process model in City facilities planning
14 TECHNOLOGY PLAN
A technology plan has been prepared with projected needs for the next five year
period The plan should also include a basis for evaluating the requests for
technology investments that address cost and benefits not limited to financial
productivity training support and potential obsolescence and funding source
1 5 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Annual budgets should be prepared with budget options of at least 10 of total
budget expenditures Budget presentations should be supported with a balance of
input and resources and outcome materials
City ofChanhassen Key Financial Strategies Page 9
Ehlers Associates
2 0 LOCAL TAX BASE
2 1 Growth planning should address continued attention to balancing commercial and residential
development Special attention should be paid to assessing housing types to reflect life
cycle financial ranges and life style choices
22 The use of city assistance to encourage the type of development needed to maintain
community competitiveness and balanced tax base should be continued The public
assistance policy should be reviewed to assure flexibility to meet broad based community
needs
3 0 FINANCIAL POSITION
3 1 FINANCIAL POLICIES
The Mayor and City Council should consider a Fund Balance Policy for the Special Revenue
Funds Debt Service Funds Capital Project Funds Enterprise Funds and Internal Service
Funds
3 2 City staff should prepare an alternative revenue source report for the City Council These
options should be reviewed annually as part of the Key Financial Strategies update
33 The City should adjust all user fees and utility rates on an annual basis to reflect changes in
the cost of services
34 The City should review assessment practices to include pavement management cost recovery
through special assessments to benefiting property owners i e increasing assessments to
property owners and including street maintenance such as crack sealing and to address
increased cost of pavement management projects
3 5 The City should establish a schedule for increasing developer fees that is determined
annually The current method of tying fees to increases in construction cost index does not
accurately reflect the City s cost of services
3 6 The City should use this report as part of its annual goal setting framework
4 0 CITY OWNED INFRASTRUCTURE CAPITAL EQUIPMENT
4 1 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT
The Manager and Finance Director should review the final list of items which were
recommended as part of the vehicle equipment replacement program and develop a funding
program to provide a more level annual replacement contribution The City could establish
an internally funded equipment rental program to level out annual replacement costs
42 INFRASTRUCTURE
The City staff should enact each annual capital improvement program based on review of the
multi year capital improvement needs
The City staff should coordinate development of the capital improvement budget with the
development of the operating budget Future operating costs associated with new capital
City of Chanhassen Key Financial Strategies Page 10
Ehlers Associates
improvements will be projected and included in operating budget forecasts
The City should prepare a non annual recurring maintenance schedule for City facilities
5 0 COMPETITIVENESS
5 1 PROPERTY TAXES
The City s tax rate is currently significantly below the state limit In managing property
taxes the City will seek a balance between providing an appropriate level of service
maintaining infrastructure and affordability for residents Having the lowest property taxes
is not always the final measure of this balance
Given these limits and demands on property taxes the City should review and implement a
revenue enhancement study for additional revenue options including utility franchise fees
utility bill preparation fees and similar alternatives The information should be prepared to
identify options prior to their need
Continued long range financial planning creates the opportunity for managing property taxes
and providing the greatest stability in tax rates Staff should annually prepare three year
projections of tax levies Community involvement in the long range planning process will
allow build support for the development of resources to achieve goals the public has
supported
The City should continue to meet and confer with overlapping local government units
county schools etc to discuss operating and capital funding issues that will impact
residents overall taxes
52 BUDGET
The current five year projections show only an inflationary increase in the following year s
operating budget In order to provide direction to staff the Mayor and City Council should
review and select the appropriate items from the Budget Option Impact Worksheets that
would be included in next year s budget This budget should then be constructed by
balancing resources with current and future needs
The Financial Strategies should be reviewed and updated annually as part of the City s
budget process
Annual budgets should include budget option analysis for 5 to 10 of total projected
expenditures
Budget presentations and discussions should be supported with a balance of inputresources
and outcome options
53 Risk Management
The City has initiated development of a risk management program Additional effort to
reduce risk exposure including review of retentions levels deductible levels funding of
reserves for retained risks should be undertaken
City of Chanhassen Key Financial Strategies Page 11
Ehlers Associates
6 0 CREDIT POSITION
6 1 The approval of Key Financial Strategies by the Mayor and City Council will help
document the future City plan to bonding agencies
6 2 The City should endeavor to keep the total maturity length of general obligation
bonds below 20 years and at least 50 of the principal shall be retired within ten
years In all cases the maturity shall be shorter than the life of the related assets
63 The City should work to minimize the amount of debt supported by property taxes
and will seek maximum use of special assessments utility revenues and other non
tax sources to support debt
64 City staff working with the City s independent financial advisor shall monitor
outstanding debt and advise the City Council on ways to reduce the debt burden
through refinancing at lower interest rates and the early retirement of bonds
7 0 ENTERPRISE FUNDS
7 1 Annually the Manager and Finance Director should review and recommend
necessary adjustments to water and sewer rates sufficient to recover cost of
operations and provide for capital needs for consideration by the Mayor and City
Council
72 City staff should annually review the cost of general fund services provided to
enterprise activities including insurance financial and accounting services
management legal and related expenses These costs should be evaluated by the
City Council for inclusion in the rates for enterprise services
7 3 City staff should prepare a utility rate policy that addresses the need for fees to
recover operating costs and provide for operating cash reserves non annual
recurring maintenance and debt service completed in 20042005
74 City staff should identify the costs to meet mandated water quality standards and
the impact on water rates
7 5 City staff should continue to monitor storm water management program SWMP
to ensure compliance with state and federal regulations
City ofChanhassen Key Financial Strategies Page 12
Ehlers Associates
ACTION PLAN
This section describes the actions needed to implement the City s Key Financial Strategies Actions
fall into two categories Tasks for immediate action and tasks that reflect on going financial
management actions The following is a recommendation on the tasks that require attention over the
next five year period Implementation of these Key Financial Strategies requires annual review and
updating the Plan and revision of the schedule prior to initiating the budget process Careful attention
should be paid to developing realistic time frames and work plans
Projected Start Projected
Activity Date Level Status Completion Date
1 0 Community Goals Initiatives
1 1 Goal setting Annual 11 N A
1 2 Facility needs study 2006 2 S 2007
1 22 School District 112 Secondary School 2003 3 A 2008
Partnership
14 Expand e city hall services phase 1 2004 11 Ongoing
1 41 Develop digitized document archives 2003 3 1 Ongoing
1 5 Annual CIP Annual 11 Annual
16 Create plan to deal with public safety issues 2004 2 1 Ongoing
as growth continues
1 7 Establish benchmarks to evaluate police 2006 11 2006
contract
1 8 Hwy 212 312 update on design land use 2004 2 1 2007
and vision of corridor landscape plan
1 9 Communicate what City Council does 2004 41 Ongoing
191 Locate a license center in City 2005 3 S 2006
192 Downtown Park and Ride expansion 2005 3 S 2007
1 93 Review housing trends with McComb market 2006 2 S 2006
study
1 94 Educate public on new planned growth 2006 4 S 2006
1 95 Monitor state and county financial 2006 2 S Ongoing
positions establish legislative platform
1 97 Develop relationships with other agencies Ongoing 4 1 Ongoing
1 98 Review design standards 2006 4 S 2006
1 99 Zoning issues related with higher densities 2006 4 S 2006
2 0 Local Tax Base
2 12 Complete McComb market study 2006 2 S 2006
2 13 Begin comprehensive plan update 2006 2 S 2008
City ofChanhassen Key Financial Strategies Page 13
Projected Start Projected
Activity Date LeveVStatus Completion Date
23 Support marketplace driven development of 2004 4 S Ongoing
industrial land
3 0 Financial Position
3 12 Update debt management plan 2005 liS 2006
3 13 EstablishlUpdate Investment Policy 2006 2 S 2006
34 Review assessment practice to address Annual liS Annual
pavement management and consider
increasing assessed portions and interest rate
3 6 Better council direction in the budget process Ongoing 2 1 Ongoing
3 7 Review decisions based on costsbenefits Ongoing 2 1 Ongoing
3 8 Incorporate strategic planning into budget Ongoing 2 1 Ongoing
process
3 9 Improve monthly financial reports 2005 2 1 Ongoing
3 91 Implement ACH for utility customers 2006 2 1 2006
4 0 Infrastructure Capital Equipment
4 21 Develop estimates for public facilities 2006 2 S 2007
maintenance
422 Prepare non annual recurring maintenance 2006 liS 2006
schedule
423 Prepare funding options for major equipment 2004 liS Ongoing
sources
4 24 Construct trail additions Ongoing 111 Ongoing
425 Expand Public Works Facility 2007 2 A 2008
4 3 Highway 10 1 gap project 2004 liS 2006
44 Highway 101 South Turnback south of 2005 2 S 2006
Lyman
4 5 Monitor Highway 41 river crossing study 2005 3 S 2007
4 6 Highway 41 trail and underpass funding 2005 2 S 2007
options
5 0 Competitiveness
5 1 Property tax review Annual liS Annual
5 11 Prepare five year budget CIP and debt Annual 2 S Annual
forecasts including revenue forecasts
5 12 Prepare alternate revenue analysis 2004 liS Ongoing
5 13 Identify and fund future staffing requirement Annual liS Annual
to match growth
City of Chanhassen Key Financial Strategies Page 14
Projected Start Projected
Activity Date LeveVStatus Completion Date
5 2 Identify a limited number 1 3 of selected Annual 2 S Annual
services for potential competitive pricing on
annual basis
5 21 Review budget option analysis as part of Annual 2 S Annual
budget process
53 EstablishUpdate Risk Management Policy 2006 2 S 2006
54 Evaluate KFS Projections Annual 2 S Annual
6 0 Credit
6 1 AcceptEvaluate Key Financial Strategies Annual 2 1 Annual
62 Review professional services contracts As scheduled 2 1 As scheduled
7 0 Enterprise
7 1 Adjust user fees on annual basis to reflect Annual 1S Annual
changes in cost of services
72 Review enterprise funds for cost 2004 2 S Ongoing
savings efficiencies
7 5 Update Storm Water Management Plan Underway 11 Ongoing
1 Watershed improvement impacts
2 Bluff Creek improvements
3 Lake MonitoringImprovement
7 51 NPDES Phase II Compliance Underway 1A 2007
PRIORITY DEFINITIONS
LEVEL 1 Critical to continued operation of city baseline services at present levels This includes
restoration of services identified as baseline
LEVEL 2 Provides opportunity for increased efficiency in baseline level of services This includes ability to
continue to serve existing level of services without staff increases
LEVEL 3 Provides opportunity for expansion of services to meet existing demand as evidenced
by Council direction or staff analysis
LEVEL 4 Provides opportunity to increase services that improve quality of life within City
I
S
A
Implementation
Study Need
Assess Need
City of Chanhassen Key Financial Strategies Page 15
2006 Strategic Plan Priorities
KFS
Topic Furlong Labatt Peterson Tjornbom Lundquist Average
Public Safety
Establish benchmarks for the police contract 17 2006 I 2 I 2 I 140
Create plan to deal with public safety issues as growth continues ongoing 16 2004 I I 2 2 2 160
Traffic Management Pleasantview Lake Lucv Powers 2121312 2005 2 2 3 3 2 240
More council interaction incrime preventionneighborhood watch ongoing 2003 3 3 3 3 3 3 00
Economic Development
Complete McComb retail market studv 2 12 2006 I 3 I I I 140
Support the marketplace driven develooment of industrial land ongoing 2 3 2003 1 2 2 2 I 160
Hwy 212 update on design and land use vision of corridor ongoinl 18 2003 2 2 3 I 2 2 00
Belinreview of 2010 2015 MUSA and Comp Plan Updates 2 13 2005 3 I 2 2 2 2 00
LeveraleCityproperty as much as possible Marketinlofland ongoing 2003 2 2 2 3 4 2 60
Develop town center into a more full service inviting central business district 2003 3 4 3 2 3 3 00
BudgeUTaxation
Improve monthly financial reports 3 9 2005 1 3 I 2 1 160
Implement ACH automatic withdrawals for utility customers 3 91 2006 1 2 2 2 I 160
Monitor state and county financial situationsllegislative platform 195 2004 2 2 2 1 I 160
Evaluate outside consultant use contract model for other services 2003 3 4 3 3 3 3 20
City Organization
Adopt and implement SWMP Plan 75 2006 I I 2 2 I 140
Develop relationships with outside agencies state county etc ongoing 197 2003 2 2 2 2 2 2 00
Evaluate potential satellite fire station CIP 2008 2005 2 2 3 2 2 2 20
Public Works facilitv exoansion CIP 2007 08 2004 2 2 3 3 3 2 60
Evaluate park needs based on comp plan service areas 2005 3 3 3 3 2 2 80
Community Wide Issues
Highway 101 South of Lyman Blvd 4 4 2006 I I 2 I 2 140
Highway 101 gap proiect ongoing 4 3 2004 I I 3 I I 140
Locating a license service center in the city 191 2005 I 2 2 2 I 160
Highway 41 trail and underpass funding OPtions 4 6 2006 I 2 2 I 2 160
Monitor Hilhway 41 river crossing study 4 5 2004 2 I 3 I I 160
Downtown Park and Ride expansion 192 2005 2 2 I 3 I 180
District 112 secondary school site partnership 122 2005 I 2 2 2 2 180
Educating the public on new growth 194 2006 2 3 2 2 2 2 20
Rice Marsh Lake Trail loop 2006 2 2 3 2 2 2 20
Allocation of athletic field soace 2004 3 1 3 3 2 240
Highway 5 upgrade west of Highway 41 2004 2 3 3 3 2 2 60
Seminary Fen 2004 3 2 4 I 3 2 60
Consider expansion of cultural activities 2006 3 4 3 3 3 3 20
Amphitheater gathering place 2003 4 4 3 4 3 3 60
HousingILand Use
Review of current housing trends with McComb retail market study 1 93 2006 I 3 I 2 I 160
Begin 2008 Comprehensive Plan update 2 13 2006 1 I I 3 2 160
Review design standards 1 98 2006 2 2 I 2 2 180
Zoning issues related with higher densities 1 99 2003 2 2 2 2 2 2 00
Explore creative multifamily housing projects inthe downtown area 2005 2 3 3 2 2 240
Analyze costs imposed by City to developers 2004 3 3 3 2 3 2 80
Serve as convener of private and non profit sectors to develop housing strategies 2003 3 4 4 3 2 3 20
Explore tax credits other financial support programs that support this issue 2003 2 4 4 3 3 3 20
Ooo Vt W N
l
S
1 lZl
lZl l
r
o 0
e
o 0
0 en
en Ei
l l
g
o a
4 lZl
2 0
1
lZl
l
o 1
l 1
0
o
1
o
a
o
0
o
lZl
r
l
3
Cl
o
0
j
o
Z
rJJ
tfi
rJJ
3
Cl
rJJ
Oaz
ra
lot
tfi
o
t
rJJ
j
O
w
o t
O tfitfi tfi
o
z
j
z
rJJ
n
g tfi
r1 z
g 0 tfi
g g 0
o
at0
j
j
0
Era
0
o t0OrJJ
o
o Z
g
r
I
l
r
o
o
o
en
1
l
N
S
0
l
1
0
l
o
o
1
lZl
1
l
o
0
el
lZl
l
r
o
o
o
cr
1
cr
S
1 11l
g
9tfi
4
0
NNN
lZl
1l
o
0
lZl
l
r
o
e
1
l
lZl
r
j
NOgg
0
o
n
o 03
Cl
o
lZl
2
o
1
lZl
0 00 J lJ W
O
0 n n
s 0 0
s s s
s 0 en 04ss
g0 gCiln
g 10
G rn en
Cil 0 0sGtZsG0enQ00Sl
s r2 trj
G 0 G Ci4i000r
0s
0 en
i G
en
Coo
trl trl Crr
l l
en en
c
trj
3 3 3 Z
9 9 9 3Q
0
0 0 0
00
1
o
J tv
2500 trj0lJlJlJtrjtrj
0
z
1
n n n 0000
g
G G G
ZGGG000
00
0 noo n
G trj Cil 0 0SG
3 s
s
i trj i
G 11
ij
s 0 o QCiO0
0 G renCI
t 1
1 0
r
i 0 2GCG0
en
0 G00en
r
G
0S Z
S
s
2
lCi0
0 r
S 0iji
G SSs
JQ G
en
en
s
0
0
s
i
G
i
0
8
G
S
G
i
i
JQG
SGi
r
00 l VI f w N
0 CJ 0 ljrren
0 0 0 Ccrn
0 CJ CJ
l CJ 0 c rOrn3nrn
e Q
p rprn0r n1
3 en CJ 03rn0r0
0 000l
CJ 3 B z
0 0 c 00crn8
0 03
CJ g D
rn d
r CJ 00
0 0
p
0
d
03
0
t
z90
0 0
en 0 g00r
0
l t
00
n
003
0 VI 0 w o
t0000030000
03 030
Z
n
0
Z
03
00
enlj 0rogn
o
rn 300
n 0CJ1o0
3 t
0
nrn
nr0
CJ
d
trr
0 00
c
rn
0
p
0 Z
p 03
0
0
a
0
0
C
e
0
0
0
a
0
rn
0
1
CJ
0rn
@
CJ
0
0p
r
1
0
C
fQ
r
r
0
0
2
CJ
0
CJ
0
1
CJ
r
n
e
0
1
n
0
c
mooa03g
rn 03r
rr
g
g II
3
e J
rn
0
1
o
C
o
o
2
CJ
o
CJ
o
1
n
o 03g
oo
rn
p
8
o
rn
UJ N
tie 1 l
0 Dtl tifr Daens
e ct a e 0
D n o e30D
D r
t s r D
g s
en s s s
tI 0 tI El0sNO
0 ll tiss3 ti 0
Tj en Zsen
S 3 ll s 3 rJ1
ll E s 0
ll D
tI 0 D trjl
D
en r rD rJ1
JQ o 0 en
s l
0 JQ e llD
en sest
N ti
N
2
0 0 0 0 o a0000z
t
trj
z
0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 g
t
rJ1
0 0 0 0
o
s s s s o
a a a a t
0 0 0 0 trjtrj trjsss
JQ JQ JQ 0
z
0
z
rJ1
o
D trjD
tl
D
goo
t
a
JQti
i2 0
rtD
I rJ1
e
z
l
2
D
t
oo
b
l
otl
tl
o
4
t
s
0
en
o
en
D
2
t
l
D
en
ll
D
ti
en
ll
o
s
en
o
t
r
o
t
3
I rJ1
e
N
NtrjI
t
0
D 00
o
s
0
D
s
0
t
en
D
n
o 03
g
s
ao
e
en
ll
s
0
e
ll
D
en
0 00 l 01 VI w V
o
0 1 lloI
o I I 4 rn
I
n n ns
o 0 0 0 no111
o n O n no0o00 0os
s s s Z
J
S S S
0 0
0 J
0
S0JQ s
il JQ
s
z
j
a
c
tC
z
jj
9 9
tC
J
n
o
01 VIN tCC000
01 01 VI
0
z
C
hl
ne JQ ngI0
o 0
1 0
n3 s
o 0
0 il Zso3JgJ
0
0
l
o
Z
l
no
o tC
1
Qn
ngo8
tCo
J
Zg
I
o
I
o
1
o
o
s
o
1
I
o
3
o
l
o
Cti
l
S
l
o
n
o
n
l
l
I
I
o
s
J
g
o
CS
g
o C
s
o
1
s
n
l
l
I
I
o
s
n
NQ
8
01
Q
n
o 03
s
o
o
I
8
o
o
I
I 0 00 J 0 VI fo tJ J I
tI n
QCl a 0
n rn Scllrn8rn
2 r
rn enp8 nS
QCl
0 t 0
ll Z
o 00
0
0 trjgs
r llg
a
ll
I
g d
s
Co Co
a
trj
n n
P Z
a 0
o
0 c en
4 Co
S D o S o
r e
F rn r
op 00
n
o
0 I o
N
0
0 0 trjCVItrjtrj
0
z
9 nrn
0llc
1 rn
0 rn
QCl 0il
rn rn
Zrna00
o
o trj
rCeno
1 n
no0
p 00
r
zl
o
ll
p
I
p
rn
o
p
tI 00
0
0
trj
Cil
1
ic
p N
0
0
tTl
rn
0
Ql
l
n
N
0
0
J l
0Ql
l
n
o 0S
g
ao
8
o
o
rn
OOOl Vlf w N
r n4 ig n
0 0 0 0 iSOOD
5 a Q s I a 0 et
D D 0letrnro
1 D Dl o l PcDOl0D
cr l rn g OC E
r r 0 rnD9DlEIDDI
D C rDc0D rn
O C l ID rntgSljD
0 cr 0
Ii tf en 0lDcrI0D
o D 0 l l
3 et rn I 0 S
f2
o 0 0lDrn
2 oS
4i
1
3
oZ
rJ1
3
rJ1
rJ1
o
z
Z
g
rJ1
1
030
N l NN25JQ25o0 30101S01
3JQ 30Z
1
o
Z
3
rJ1
nti
o aS
0
I 0
D D
rl
D D
l rn
0 0D
D l
tirn
0
l
0 1
0 1
0 00
4
C ts2
rJ1
0
i
z
3D
0
D
e
D
0
S
0
3
0
l
0
l
2
C
i
0
D
D
00
S
D
l
rn
0
S
S
D
I
a
0
i
rn
0
D
l
c
a
l
0
C
0
0
D
rn
0
r
D
tr1rJ1
0 3g
c 3Jg
ti
C
gt
o cl
Z
D
ClI
o
r
f
1
NQgs
OI
Q
n
o 0S
g
l
q
Cl
o
0
If
2
c
D
rn
3
i
OOOJO VI Ws
e trl tl
o s
2 s 2
rn ll
Q rn rn
e
p ll rn
rJQ o 0llrnobvll
rn v 0
ll l
O 0 p 0
rn O
ll o 7
rn ll
ll 0 ll
0
rn s 0
o llO
l om@
p
l
3
o
3
o
0
o
0
1
o
z
00
tlj
00
3
o
oo
t
tlj
g
00
1
o
N
o
O tljtljtlj
o
z
1
Z
00
P trl0
0 p J
l
rn s
rn Zlltfj0
0 1rOll
rl
ll 0
rn p
S
t3101
O
rn rn
0
s
ll oo6
Z
o
3
rn
p
ll
p
l
0
o
s
l
tl
l
g
e
o
ll
rn
o
l
rn
0
o
Nll
ll
JQ
rn
ll
rn
rn
s
ll
rn
rll
l
llll
0
rn
o
rE 00
p 0
lo
3 g
rn tlj
p
ll
g 11
0 e
0 VI
s
l
tl
l
g
e
rn
s
p
o
l
rn
ll
rn
rn
r
b
JQ
rn
ll
0 1
QlrJQ0
r
JQ
Q
j
o 03
l
Q
o
o
p
en
2
p
ll
rn
10 00 l VI w VN0
I
3 0 1
i 3 0
3 ii1
3 1
1 l
l VJ r t
Q n t
1
0 r l 1VJ
i VJ 3 VJ 33crI
i VJ 1 l 0
0 l 0 ZVJ01l000030VJ
r C
VJ 00
fq VJ
1
VJ l
g Coo
CO
Z
t
Z
9
n
n Cl Cl
C
n t
00
1
03
N N N
0 0 0 t0003000330Z
o lo
g 1
cr 3r 0
1
lfqr0113VJ
1 l Zl1lo3tQ00
0 1
ii
Z
t
0
o t
1
fl
1
VJ 1
o
0 C
atVJCij
0
l
3
g z
3
o
3
3
1
a
e
l
0
S
0
t
VJ
l
0
t
VJ
1
VJ
S
r
1
00
1 3
ii
3
0
t
VJ
00
IlclQCI
0
VJ I
Q
0 I
tJ c
1
l
VJ
1
VJ
3
aD
1
N Q
0
0
0 D
Q
I
D
n
o 0
g
q
Clo
VJ
l
0
I
2
o
1
VJ
10 00 l 0 VI io w tv
o
e tTl C rJ
0 rJ a rJ
00 e rJ
1
s1
o c 00ss0rorJsE1
0 1ss
o
rJ 0
rJ z
o 1 r
S a 0 00
0
0 S tfj10r1S0CgsS00
s 1 er ols1
0 1 s
1 0
C 0
s
s rJ
CSsoaz
0
s c
er
tfj
s
C 3 0
p ser
3 gsp
s 00
1
o
tv jo jo o
0 0 0000 tfj0tfj tfj
0
Z
O0
1gerro0s
o e r
er1 rJ
s 1
1
so ZrJQ1
s a 00
1 0
tTlO
tfje
z1tfj
9
0
rJ
a 1
e 1
0
1
1 00
s
z
2
0
1
S
0
r
o
rJ
S
JQ
1
1
s
0
rJ
ot
S
1
S
0
rJ
I
e
o
o
s
rJ
100
oa
ttfj
s
o NS
erN
s
1
1
s
ql
rJ
1
tv
80
o
r
g 0e
3
ttlN
rJ
1
r I
L
g Qa
a 0i oOQ 0
a L rn e 1
0 10 9 0
rn 1 4 i
III III
i c
v
0 i l a i r
9 s g
r l i
rn tj
iO rllll NO
titi1nrlO
o e 30 ij 2 1ll
l o i
2 CT OQ N 0
7 e S
i 0 Jl
l 0 e S j n
7 @ OQ O
l g
en 1
iI
o
9
tll
o
tll
9
o
w
tll
o
n
o
3
ij
l
en
t
ij
0
III
l
iI
n
3 Ro
l ntnrn
o
1
0
rn
l
rn
rn
o
i
o
a
l
1
3
00
3
tj
rn
rn
l
3
t
tj
0 g
t
00
N N
1
0
0
0 iI 8 03
0
0
I
0 N nNo
N
I 0
0
N 0 000 t
0
0 0
0i 3
J
0 OVll tjtj
J 0 3tj
III 30
Z
el l
e E r
o
rn 00 1
rn0 ll
0
rn 0 rn
III
l
3
i i 1 l
III S III i
r8l g
o ij
Z
a S a S
3
I
o l 0 l
00
i 1 i
I I I
Illg rtj
0 l ijQ2
l 3 trj
a ij
3 a
l r0
O g
1 t
a l
iI 1
l 1
0
III
i rn
t
t
CT 0 00
Ill
rl
rl l
o 0
3Sz3CT3
l l
i tij
ijolIII
Q CD0
o
III
i
o N
o 0
ij0
o 00
o
P en
III
rn
CT
l
OQ
S
i
i
OQ
rl
ij1
o
rl
l
rn
rn
CT
f
IIIt
S
OQ
r
o
rn
l
l
l
g
i
rn
o
OQ
l
tlloo
l 3
S
3gtj
Q
3
a
r
l
i
l
iI
i
c
0
III
l
t
g 0
tt
tllN
III
rn
l
WNO ooJ VI
g
j
O
l
CT
1
E S cgO2
1 l 0
O jj
en e
o O CT
1 0
C t n
1 0 l
1 l 1
l JQ
j rt
e 0 1 l
JQ
l en
JQ 0
renj
1 ge1r
0 0
0 e
t en
JQ 1
o 1
en
g o
0
n
o
el
8
ttl 9
9 d
d n o
0 nttl
9
a dn
Tj
0
0 l
JQ
N
0
0 S
0 JQ
00
s g en J
l 0 DnoaaeO 1
o c l n
e e 1 1
l O en 1 tl
8 g a 1 l g Z
O l 0 1
a 0 0 tl en j l leSpj1 1
e 1 tl en 1 0 e 7 g
1 p l JQ
0 g Jg Jg
lO o 1
O P 0
OOlO Ul WJ
lttlOoIcssOQcDcr
8 2l
oo0s
0 ell
0
g
r
o 0oell
s s e
0
o
ell
00
ell 0s
g 0
ell Jg
gO
0
60 ell
s
ell
0 o
s
s
0
r
l
0
gcs
ell
r
0 0
0
c
ell s
l a
eIlQ
j
o
z
Vl
Vl
S
ra
t
t
p
Z
g
t
Vl
j
O
l
to
0 l l
o
z
j
Z
Vl
tI1
c j
l
0
0
ts
0 j
j
0p
ell
t
g Vl
ell a8Z
q
r
0
p
0
0
0
a
r
0
0
ell
0
s
r
r
l
Q
ell
cr
ell
CIlV l tc0
o
0e
4 t4
IgttlN
a ell
lS
0
0
a
s
0
s
g
ell
I
s
0
0 00 J 0 VI j W
d a d C C
g a a0CDI
Eo1 0 0CDtnCDCDe3dr0CDs 1CDr13s
C 0 tn 0CDcrzgc
0 0 rJ1JQtn
CD CD 13s
1j g gCD
s 0 rJ1
0 d @
cd CD tn
s
c
CD
e
Cl Cl Cl
en en en
c
t
Z
13 13 39ClCl
a a a
t
rJ1
1
a a 013
0 0t2ss t013
0 r r
130 130
Z
El 5 en eno
CD C
1tn0
tn CD s Jg 0OJQi11jSS
00 g g ZJCc
ttlttl e 13
c C 0 rJ1
O 0 0
CD 0 0
C
a
z
10
o tQ
c 1
1
o
5
rtcr
CD rJ1ft
S zn13
e
d
1j
o
1
tn
o
CD
s
tn
c
d
1j
1o
1j
CD
1
3
p
s
p
JQCD3
CD
s
o
Q
0
2
s
0
I rJ1
13
a
13CD
3
0s
r 11
w
tl ie
s
g
p
1
g0
1
tn
13
QI
lll
1
IV Q
0
0
0 lll
Q
QI
lll
g 0
P
o
tn
0
s
I I I I 0 00 J 0 VI f w I
W I O
c tll en
D
D j
0 S j
D
l
I E0 Den 1en
en
g D 0
r5 0 ZC
D rJJ
0 4 trlJlen
S C
rJJ
0j c
D en
a
el s
C
rJJ 5
0 0 0 tC
en en en trlo
z
t1 t1 t1
g
t
rJJ
1
en oc
cCen tenD
l trlc 1
tv tv tv trl trl000
0 0 0
J 0 0 0
Z
1
0
z
rJJ
od8 trl
I
ODZotrj
o g c1
00E4c
C j t
c
01
08
j D t1iij
c1iirJJ
fl 8 c
og g
znD
c e
rStll
g
D
C
D
el 0
o
tt
2 E
en JciQeljJQID
go
0 0
JDD
J
D
t3
j
JQ
o
l
en
S
JQ
en
o
c
j
n
c
7
0
J
D
3
o
3
g trl
c1
n
c
8 ic
l
e
n
c
en
o
3
D
len
I1S 0j
d
0
en
o
j
W N
CIl n I1
c 0 rcrsernrn
g a tJ
1
rn
o
n s s
0 CIl ngg0
D I
0 D 0oZs01
I I rJ
0 0s
0 0 0 trl
Zg1 g rJ
0 0
Z Z
1 0 1
0 0
C C C
0 0 0
COot
trl
Z0
C C C
0 0 0 00
t
rJ
o
00 0 o
0 0 0 t000trlltrltrl
0
z
0
z
rJ
cotrl
1
g 08
S t
s
os 0
JQtg
rJ
s
O
g trl
rn Zg
1
g
o
a tI
c a
n
rE
c
S1
s
V w V
Cl s tI1 il nc1s00cVss
O d
s Cl o s St33 0
c o 0 s
o sn 0
0 tj 1
0 V
g V 3 0 So
V
n ci900 00s1
0 Cl 0 0
s D V V c s Z
0 q rJiH00
Cl 3 V
0Ec
00 V
0
n
s 0
0 s
N V
E
CrJiillC
il il il il il
0 0 0 0 0
ill0tl
il
il il 0 il il
0 0 0 0 o
tl
rJi
O
J 0 W
25 25 tlill00000000
0
Z
0
Z
rJi
n
o
g
il
O
tl
s
e
O
s tl8
1 rJi
2
c
l j
Z
3
0
d
o
3
o
s
V
o
H
n
o
3
0
o
nI rJi
o
5o
ils1
g 0
s tI
S
e
tj
0
V
ciCi
s
Cl
C
0
Cl
0
C
0
H
3
0
Cl
0
N Q
0 r0
0
Q
s
5
rO
2 tl
c
ln
E
a
fc
3
o
s
UI W N I
I1 0 I I0 Ii1fta0DD
s s s
tI1 0 0 0 0
tI CZl D gCg01creD
P s
CZl 0atI1s r
D 0
cr S 0sC 1
g tI CZl
CZl D 3D1CZl
0 0 DcrD P 01CZl
g C tI1 Z
r 00DDCtDD3
trl
Jg0 CZl
D
a
D
oo
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
trl
0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 OJ S
1c 1c 1c 1c 0
0 9 0 0 b
l 0
0 00
1
I 03CZl
I I I CZl
N N 0 00 Ir
D 0 0000 3trl00g00trl 3trl3D
0 0
Z
1
0
Z
3
00
o 0 trl
8
oZ1tj3g
011
101
0
D
o 1
1
ro 00
s
g Jg
C trl
D 8 ZSoI
o
s 0
DDsaCZl
CZl
e @
D @
7 0
s @oCZl
D
D
CZl
1
D
e
D
o
CZl
0
0
CZl
@
D
s
i
0
S
o
I
D
s
0
S
D
D
r
Q
CZl
0
oo 5
o 3 t0gCZl
s 3 2
c trl
i
l 0 8
D a
1 Z10
CZl rgCZl
s
s
0 00 l VI W
w 0
CIl tI J sla 101
3 a 1 1
1 11eeee0nrgl3srr
1 0 CIl CIl 1
s asl
r
5 b 0 0 0 n
0 2
s 9 0sZSIs00iss
o 1 G
o s 0 tvls01l
o iso
s
0
s
00
c c c c c o
zra
s s s s s s z
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 gCIlCIlCIlCIlCIlCIlCIl
c c c c c c c
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00
n
0 0 oltv02500010000
01 01 VI W
I I I 2500001001 01
25 0 01
0
l 01 0 001Z
n
0
z
00
fS
00Q
g
i
n2n
0
o
00
Sl z
8
3
0
1
S
0C1
r
1
CIl
1
t
0C1r
e
l
S
0
e
s
0
1
a
tIl
g
1
t
lS
c
0
e
s
0
1
os
O
o
0
e
s
8
3
1
s
S
s
t
2
l
1
1
Q
1
0 00 J 0 VI w tv
tv O
I1 0 tl lZl nS0DD0
III 0 rr i
0 0Da30
D
D III
i D D
l rr i 0 gIII00ltoaIII
0 III r i jioD30iCIlCIl
0
tl 0 tl 0 0
l to Z
i 0 n III 0 J00i
e 3
i trlol
tl Ci0
i J
C
r
J
Crr
to r
a
t
trl
r r Z
r r lZltltri
tl n n n lZl rtrion0nr gtjitl
n t
J
j
030
J 0 w tv ts25250000
0 0 0 0 0 0 3trl0trl 3trl30
Z
0 0 j00
0 0 0
6 g i888383
3 3 Z
tl tl 3iiJ
0 trl0
l
0
III
rr
0
III t
IJQtl
i j
j j
Y 0
III
0 C00t
J0
i
rr
trl
r Ztl30
n
0
i
0
3
0
tl
3
tl
i
III
o
i
0
r
tl
0
3
3tl
i
0
III
o
i
n
tri J
0 3tl0
30tl
i III 3itrlo0
3
rO tItl
ntl I
o 3 U
gltl
rr
tl tl
lZl
0
tl a
g
a
tl
l
III
IJQ
tl
3
tl
i
c0
0
III
tl
3
j
tv Q
0 g0
0
Q
roeCIl
tl
I1J
i
0
CIl
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
Administration
Phone 952227 1100
Fax 952227 1110
Building Inspections
Phone 952227 1180
Fax 952227 1190
Engineering
Phone 952227 1160
Fax 952227 1170
Finance
Phone 952227 1140
Fax 952 227 1110
Park Recreation
Phone 9522271120
Fax 952227 1110
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
Phone 952227 1400
Fax 952227 1404
Planning
Natural Resources
Phone 952227 1130
Fax 952227 1110
Public Works
1591 Park Road
Phone 952227 1300
Fax 952227 1310
Senior Center
Phone 952 227 1125
Fax 952227 1110
Web Site
www ci chanhassen mn us
Ji
MEMORANDUM
TO Mayor
City Council Members
FROM Greg Sticha Finance Director Oh
DA TE January 13 2006
SUBJ Approve Increase of Storm Water User Charge
BACKGROUND
In December of 2005 Council discussed and adopted an ordinance amending fees
for the 2006 fiscal year After review of the ordinance by staff it was noticed that
the fee increase for the Storm Water Usage charge was not included as part of that
ordinance As you know we had several discussions with our financial advisors
about all of our utility fees late in 2005 Based on staff s and our financial
advisor s recommendations Council directed staff to follow the recommended fee
schedule set forth in the Utility Rate Study The 50 increase in the Storm Water
Usage charge means an increase from 5 00 per quarter to 7 50 per quarter for
residential property owners In reviewing the quarterly fees for 67 commercial
and industrial properties the average current fee is 156 09 quarter With the
proposed increase to the base rate the average fee would now become
234 14 quarter
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached ordinance increasing
the Storm Water Usage Charge as recommended in the Utility Rate Study This
action requires a simple majority vote of those present at the meeting
ATTACHMENT
1 Ordinance Amending Chapters 4 19 Surface Water Management Fees
2 Excerpts from the Utility Rate Study
The City of Chanhassen A growing community with clean lakes quality schools a charming downtown thriVing businesses winding Irails and beautitul parks A great place 10 live work and play
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 4 AND 19
CHANHASSEN CITY CODE
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT FEES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN MINNESOTA ORDAINS
Section 1 The City Code City of Chanhassen Minnesota is hereby amended by adding
a section to be numbered 4 50 which shall read as follows
Surface Water Management Fees
Classi lcation
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Land Use
Sin 1e famil and Rural residential
Agricultural
Undeve10 ed
Medium density residential
High density residential Industrial Office Institutions
churches schools ovemment buildin s hos itals
Business Commercial
Parks cemeteries olf courses arboretum
Parking lots as a rinci al use
Utili Factor
Not A licable
Not A plicable
Not A licable
222
330
4 23
046
6 14
The surface water management fee for each tax parcel classified 1 2 and 3 shall be 7 50
The surface water management fee for each tax parcel classified 4 through 8 shall be
calculated as follows 14 64 multiplied by the utility factor multiplied by the acreage of
the parcel
Section 2 Section 19 142 of the City Code City ofChanhassen Minnesota is hereby
amended to read as follows
The surface water management fees for tax parcels shall be calculated in accordance with
Section 4 50
Section 3 This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and
publication
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of 200 by the City Council of
the City of Chanhassen Minnesota
Todd Gerhardt City Manager Thomas A Furlong Mayor
Published in the Chanhassen Villager on
Findin2 s
Attached as Exhibit A is a chart that shows the projected rate increases Keep in mind
that most developers only experience h ater ualit fee
becau fthe credit for on site ondin erefore the recommended 50 rate increas
or 2006 is experienced as a 25 rate increase once the credit is applied
A survey of surface water utility fees in 2005 indicates that the quarterly fees range from
3 00 in Eden Prairie to 21 80 in Golden Valley and the median quarterly fee is 9 26
Furthermore the median fee has increased 21 since 2003 The projected 2006 increase
for Chanhassen s stormwater utility would bring the fee up to 7 50 per quarter
The attached Exhibit B is a comparison of storm water fees for single family residential
development It is very difficult to get an accurate comparison of surface water area
charges between cities because they calculate developable acres differently and often
apply ponding and piping credits on a site specific basis Therefore the fees in Exhibit B
assume 3 single family units are developed per acre and there is no on site ponding In
actuality a Chanhassen developer would typically develop 24 units per acre and get a
ponding credit
The fees projected in Exhibit A will allow the City to maintain and expand its surface
water utility as required by state regulation The proposed fee structure also improves the
equity in the system by matching the level of the fee to the costs for which it is intended
to pay
J
3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Roseville MN 551 3 1105
651 697 8546 Fax 651 697 8555
jcook@ehlers inc com
http www ehlers inc com
l
III
CD
CD
LL
J
e
t lIS
w3
CD
l
en
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
co
o
o
N
u
E8
1
Gl
a
E
S
CI
m
10 0
VN
cO
o
10 0
ON
r
1OeJ
1 0
CON
0
Dtft
CJ 0
CON
j
ocf
CO 0
ON
j
ocf
00
VN
l 0
CO N
N
00
l N
N
t cf
00
N
o
VO
IO
l
CJ
o
Iii
c
8
1
Gl
a
E
o
S
CI
Gl
Gl Gl
C u C
0 g II
tij 5i
5 55
1 Q C Q C
f f
o
N 10
0
j
tDtfl010
Vj
CDi
CJ 10
j
r
CJ 10
CJ
CD
010
CO
Ill
NIO
0
10 10
V
co
CO 10
N
y ft
l 10
N
CO 10
N
o
V
CO
N
ik
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
DATE
Todd Gerhardt City Manager
Todd Hoffman Park Recreation Director I
o
January 13 2006
TO
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
FROM
Administration
Phone 952 227 1100
Fax 952227 1110
SUBJ Old Village Hall Plaza Approve Contract Additions Associated
with ADA Ramp Including Railing and Modifications to Back
StoopBuildingInspections
Phone 952227 1180
Fax 952 227 1190
Engineering
Phone 952 227 1160
Fax 952 227 1170
The original scope of the Old Village Hall Plaza project did not include an ADA
ramp at the front entrance to the building In consultation with the city s
Building Official it was decided that since we were in the midst of a
construction project the installation of a ramp would be a good idea
Finance
Phone 952227 1140
Fax 952 227 1110
Park Recreation
Phone 952227 1120
Fax 952227 1110
Attached to this report is a copy of a sketch provided by the contractor depicting
the ramp design The ramp extends 12 feet from the front door turns 90 degrees
and extends another 16 feet to the east The cost to prepare the site form the
ramp and associated steps install reinforcing bars and pour and finish the
concrete is 3 685
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
Phone 952227 1400
Fax 952227 1404
Planning
Natural Resources
Phone 952227 1130
Fax 952227 1110
The contractor secured two quotes for the construction of 52 feet of handrail for
the ramp Rolberg Manufacturing quoted 1 950 A lower quote of 1 605 09
was received from Double B Repair and Manufacturing With the addition of
tax delivery and installation the total cost of the railing is 4 100
Public Works
1591 Park Road
Phone 952227 1300
Fax 952227 1310
Significant modifications to the back stoop were also recommended by the
Building Official including the installation of footings and construction of a
larger landing and stairway The more modest stoop included in the bid
documents was priced at 563 76 The first quote submitted by the contractor
for an additional 2 181 74 to construct the newly designed back stoop was
rejected A second quote of 1 950 in additional compensation was accepted
bringing the total cost of the back stoop to 2 513 76SeniorCenter
Phone 952227 1125
Fax 952227 1110
In the interest of keeping the Old Village Hall project on track and to minimize
disruption to the Chamber of Commerce operations prices for these additional
work items were negotiated with the contractor All of these additional items
have been completed with the exception of a portion of the concrete anchors on
the railing and touch up painting The contractor also has a small punch list to
complete on the paving brick portion of the project
Web Site
www ci chanhassen mn us
The City of Chanhassen A growing community with clean lakes quality schools a charming downtown thriVing businesses winding trails and beautltul parks A great place to live work and play
Mr Todd Gerhardt
January 13 2006
Page 2
RECOMMENDA TION
It is recommended that the City Council approve the aforementioned additions
to the Old Village Hall Plaza Project totaling 9 735 Payment for these
additions will be split between the project budget and the park and recreation
building repair and maintenance budget
Original contract amount 44 932 21
Additions to contract
ADA concrete ramp
Revised rear stoop
Metal handrails for ramp
Total Additions
3 685
1 950
4100
9 735 00
New Contract Amount 54 667 21
ATTACHMENTS
1 ADA Sketch Plan
2 Back Stoop and Stairway Sketch Plan
G park th Old village haJl contract additions doc
11 21 2005 15 47 GLACIAL RIDGE
J Jy IJlj6 lt
4LI
R Ie 10 v6r
3202311546
I
r
I Il
T
PAGE 02 02
A I17 I
I0
0
1 I r l5PH
IE I
1 I
t t Jj 9VI
4 J I
2 c C
y YfA e le ra p 7 j
J 4 1 r 1 1 t
r
J
4
r o
J r fI
J
M
I
M
f a tI If l
or 7 M
r
i 5 Id
I or
I 4lL
I I
12111i
JD5
t tW
with
J1atl 0MI
1 D fs I
I tt lh
11 6 If J i fiP1
1 2 i m TirL L t ia T
fM H L i t Vt i 1 Dt tA i Jl r t
i I i tfXftJf ft rr i JI v1 L i l j
t r MT i 6s i r i7r T L i t 1 1 y
1 1 1 l f i J L J l1hL LW j llttL f e t L L j i
It Lt lr
4 t 1
i
l t l
L J L 11
i
f L J t L LIi
I 1 I I 1 I i 1 I I I I
l tf r J I l j I j l f l l I
T l Nal 2J0 ri Tr ri TT r K i T1 n
j tJtr 1 T t j t Lr rx tli d 1 lio r j jr
I k tz Lrll i I i 14 jl i it 1 I i L ltfII1YiZftrrI11irititriI
I att I I I ii I Iii I i I
t r7tn d t1tJ I 1hrrJitraa R t Plt rtil i ii
I J Ie 1frl I llj J6 ir t t I l 1 J
r tt 1
I
jO qll T t7fwIntJIIiiiIiiIIlCI sj I
i r Vi I I J i t r I r T I I
ii I I L I II I Iii I I I I I HlIII4IIiill
LT K 1lj
l1 i t 4 l i tfl I 1 r 11oilld11Cl5TJllIJIIx1Iii1171IIIIIiI
l I I l I t q t 11 d l I I c I J j
r I r rr i 11 i r I r 1 7 if J y r i t l ll T I i
i I i L i l J r i 1 I
I J J I L
4 j j t 1 T r t t 4 f 1
1 i I i i It I It I I l J I I ill j I I
I i ii I I i I i t I I I I I
t t t I i r r t 1 r t i f r I t i t IIIIIliiiI1HKIi I
1 tL IL 1 i i t J 1 L I 1 1 1 L f L L L
I I I I
I 1 1 I I I I ill I I I I l I I
I f 1 If i 1 j I I 1 j I 1
t r r r 1 r r 1 l i r L l I 1
I I t I t I J I
I I I I S 1 I 1
I I j I I I I I I 1 I I l ill I I
i I I I i I I I I Iii
r E
L
f r f l
j i b LItj ft l I i J 4Ul
i i i i I 1 i I i r i I I
t lo a I i
I r r t t LL Htft1 lL IZrr j v s gH s t J t I
i i i i i Jt1fi Ii I l 1 i i V 1 i L il Iff J e
r0 t i rbi rll 1 Ii i I i I IOf 1 I r i ii 1
i i i IiI I rl N i i i i t I I i I I i i I
b 1 I I r i t 21 b r
u uf
JG I QJ I I I I J
IL
i 1 I I I 1 i I I mi i i i I
j r ev er I r r t i J t i T u t r i 11
t i 1 1 r rr I I I I It 1 j
l l i kk ixt l J
i 10 d ti i I i I
r6 otkt4 4 ir t i 1 t 1
I ph t f bir J7 if 1
I i Iii J I J I I f v
T FrlarsJ rtru 1 r J 1 4 1 1 hi A i T
1 tG 1 1 1 u
t
ii o L j iiJCi T 2 Ti rA i
l t L U lTt yl
i i lt r iA A
I
L J L lylltn
JOB NAME JOB
LOCATION SHEET OF
SALESMAN BY DATE
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
Administration
Phone 952227 1100
Fax 952 2271110
Building Inspections
Phone 952227 1180
Fax 952227 1190
Engineering
Phone 952227 1160
Fax 952227 1170
Finance
Phone 952227 1140
Fax 952 227 1110
Park Recreation
Phone 952 227 1120
Fax 952 227 1110
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
Phone 952227 1400
Fax 952227 1404
Planning
Natural Resources
Phone 952227 1130
Fax 952227 1110
Public Works
1591 Park Road
Phone 952227 1300
Fax 952227 1310
Senior Center
Phone 952227 1125
Fax 952227 1110
Web Site
WWII ci chanhassen mn us
1L
MEMORANDUM
TO Todd Gerhardt City Manager
FROM Justin Miller Assistant City Managers AI
January 11 2006 oDATE
RE 2005 Pay Equity Report
BACKGROUND
In 1984 the Minnesota Legislature passed the Local Government Pay Equity Act
Basically the intent of the law is to ensure that men and women performing
similar jobs are compensated in an equal manner Local governments were given
until December 31 1991 to comply with the law and were required to file reports
with the Department of Employee Relations DOER by January 31 1992 All
jurisdictions were then placed on a three year reporting cycle for future reports
The City of Chanhassen is required to submit a report by January 31 2006 for
payroll information as of December 31 2005
Attached to this report is a copy of what will be submitted to the State The report
is a computer generated report based on inputs supplied by the City of
Chanhassen The report is fairly confusing but the figure which denotes
compliance is the underpayment ratio under Roman numeral II on the Compliance
Report According to DOER jurisdictions must maintain a ratio of 80 or higher
to comply with the statute As can be seen on the compliance report the City of
Chanhassen is at 111 4 so it is believed that we will achieve compliance once
the report is submitted
RECOMMENDA TION
Staff recommends that the Chanhassen City Council approve the attached 2005
Pay Equity Implementation Report and direct staff to submit the report to the
Department of Employee Relations by January 31 2006 Approval of this item
requires a majority vote of the city council
The City 01 Chanhassen A growing community with clean lakes quality schools a charming downtown thriving businesses Winding trails and beautiful parks A great place to live work and play
Pay Equity Implementation Report
For Department Use Only u uu
Send completed report to
Pay Equity Coordinator
Department of Employee Relations
200 Centennial Building
658 Cedar Street
St Paul MN 55155 1603 651 296 2653 Voice
651 282 2699 TOO
u
Postmark Date of Report
o J Jurisdiction 10 Number J
Part A Jurisdiction Identification
Jurisdiction City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Blvd
P O Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
Jurisdiction Type CITY
Contact Assistant City Manager Justin Miller
Fax 9522271110
Email jmiller@cLchanhassen mn us
Phone 952 227 1118
Part B Official Verification
The job evaluation system used measured skill effort
responsibility and working conditions and the same
system was used for all classes of employees
e No salary ranges performance differences
o Leave blank unless BOTH of the following apply
The system used was IState Job Match I a Jurisdiction does not have a salary range for any job
class
b Upon request jurisdiction will supply documentation
showing that inequities between male and female
classes are due to performance differences
e Health Insurance benefits for male and female
classes of comparable value have been evaluated and
rrhere is no difference Band
female classes are not at a disadvantage
Note Do not include any documentation regarding
performance with this form
o 0 Information in this report is complete and accurate
o An official notice has been posted at
Chanhassen City Hall Administration Copy Room
prominent location
informing employees that the Pay Equity Implementation
Report has been filed and is available to employees upon
request A copy of the notice has been sent to each exclusive
representative if any and also to the public library
The report was approved by
Chanhassen City Council
governing body
0 The report includes all classes of employees over
which the jurisdiction has final budgetary approval
authority
Tom Furlong
chief elected official
Part C Total Payroll Mayor
I 4 396 366 00 I
is the annual payroll for the calendar year just ended December 31
title
o Checking this box indicates legal signature by above official
Compliance Report
Jurisdiction City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Blvd
Contact Justin Miller
Assistant City Manager
Insurance Added Job Evaluation System Used
01 11 200E
Phone 952 227 1118
The statistical analysis salary range and exceptional service pay test results are shown below Part I is general information from
your pay equity Report data Parts II III and IV give you the test results
For more detail on each test refer to the guidebook
IGENERAL JOB CLASS INFORMATION
Male
Classes
Female
Classes
Job Classes
Employees
Avg Max Monthly
Pay per Employee
35
51
5 547 41
13
19
5 231 53
II STATISTICAL ANALYSIS TEST
A UNDERPAYMENT RATIO 1114
a at or above Predicted Pay
b Below Predicted Pay
c TOTAL
Balanced All Job
Classes Classes
1 49
2 72
5478 18
Male Female
Classes Classes
20 8
15 5
35 13
42 86 3846dBelowPredictedPay
b divided by c d
Result is of male classes below predicted pay divided by of female classes below predicted pay
B T TEST RESULTS
Degrees of Freedom DF 68 Value of T
a Avg diff in pay from predicted pay for male jobs
b Avg ditto in pay from predicted pay for female jobs
III SALARY RANGE TEST 0 00 Result is A divided by B
A Avg of years to max salary for male jobs 0 00
B Avg of years to max salary for female jobs 0 00
IV EXCEPTIONAL SERVICE PAY TEST 100 00
A of male classes receiving ESP
B of female classes receiving ESP
if 20 or less test result will be 0 00
100 00
100 00
1 299
42
284
o OS
ttO
11
a
0
tI
CI
Uc
S86 llI
iii
m
0
8S
c 9 L 11
Q a
en 0
en
III CIciiic
III
c
0 en
0 0 9 c
15 03Q
0
III
Q
tl
Q t SU
cQ 11
0 a
Q 0
CI
iii
E
CI
SOt lL
0 D
08
0
D X
5 tI
96 CIti
i
11
06
Cl ex 0 t Cl 0 ex 0 t Cl 0
l N Ci t Lri I m cO en ex
0 co 10 0 C C U 10 0 C 0
0 0 0 Cl 0 0 I 0 Cl
0 ex ex I 10 t C Cl
Jeles
PC DATE Jan 3 2006
CCDATE Jan 23 2006CITYOFCHANHASSENREVIEWDEADLINEWaivedCASEPlanningCase0530
BY Al Jaff
STAFF REPORT
PROPOSAL Environmental AssessmentPublicHearingtoreviewan addressing
potential environmental impacts oftheproposed development andmaking the
appropriate findings and decisions on the needfor an Environmental ImpactAPPLICANTConditionalUsePermitVariancesStatementRequestforawithandaSitePlanReviewapplicationtoconstructalocalelectricdistributionsubstationonpropertyzonedIndustrialOfficeParkMinnesotaValley
Electric
LOCATION East ofthe Gedney Pickle plant northofStoughton Avenue and south of
Flying CloudDrive
APPLICANT Minnesota Valley ElectricCooperative MAGedney
125 MVEC Drive 2100 Stoughton Avenue
Jordan MN 55352 Chaska MN 55318
Attn Ron Jabs Attn Kevin Talbot95249282449524486460
rjabs@mvec net ktalbot@gedneypickle com
PRESENTZONING IOP Industrial OfficeParkDistrict
2020 LAND USEPLAN ACREAGEOfficeIndustrial 2 35 acres
SUMMARYOF REQUEST Request toconduct apublic hearing toreviewanSITEDATAEnvironmentalAssessmentaddressingpotentialenvironmentalimpactsoftheproposeddevelopmentandmakingtheappropriatefindingsanddecisionsontheneedforan
Conditional Use PermitVariancesEnvironmentalImpactStatementRequestforawith and
Site Plan Reviewa application toconstruct a localelectric distribution substation with a
10 foot high wall fence ona 2 35 acre lot zoned IOP Notice ofthis publichearing hasbeen
mailed toall property owners within 500feet Staffis recommending approval ofthe request
LEVEL OF CITYDISCRETION IN DECISIONMAKING The City s discretion
in approving ordenying a site plan is limited towhether or notthe proposed project
complies with Zoning Ordinance requirements If itmeets these standards theCity must
then approve thesite plan This is a quasi judicialdecision
The City s discretion in approving ordenying a varianceis limited towhether ornot the
proposed projectmeets the standards in theZoningOrdinance for variance The City hasa
relatively high levelofdiscretion with a variance because the burden ofproofison the applicant
toshowthat theymeetthe standards in the ordinance
Minnesota Valley ElectricSubstation
Planning Case No05 30
January 3 2006
Page 2
The City haslimited discretion in approvingordenying conditionalusepermits based on
whetherornot theproposal meetsthe conditional usepermit standards outlined inthe Zoning
Ordinance If the City finds thatall theapplicable conditional usepermit standardsare met the
permit must beapproved This isa quasi judicialdecision
PROPOSAL SUMMARY
MinnesotaValley
Electric Cooperative
MVEC isproposingto
construct a local
115 kilovolt electric
distribution
substation onpropertylocatedeast
oftheGedney Pickle
plant northof
Stoughton Avenue
andXcel ElectricSubstationsouth of
FlyingCloudDrive
and east ofa
cemeterylocated in
the CityofChaskaThesiteiszoned
Industrial Office
Park IOP
XcelEnergy Electrical
Towersare locatedin the
City ofChaska southofthe
proposedMVEC site This
entiresubstation waspurchasedbyMVEC and
willbe completely
dismantledand removed
Theexisting drivewayservingtheXcelElectrical
Towers will be extended to
the north toserve the
proposedMVECsubstation
Any transmission line over
100 kilovoltsrequires an
Environmental Assessment
Minnesota Valley ElectricSubstation
Planning Case No05 30
January 3 2006
Page 3
EA The EA contains informationon the human and environmental impacts oftheproposed
project and addresses methods tomitigatesuch impacts The applicanthaspreparedan
environmental assessment EA thatreviewsthe proposal for the siteas well as the surrounding
area Staff hasreviewedthe EA thatis complete andis recommending approval ofa resolutionNegativeDeclarationofoftheNeedforanEnvironmentalImpactStatementfortheMinnesotaValleyElectricSubstationsite
The applicantis requesting site plan approval for the construction ofan electric substation The
substation will consistof alow profile modular facility thatwill be screened byaconcrete tip up
wall on three sides anda chainlink fence alongthe east sideofthe site The wall is proposed tohaveaheightof10feetCommercialorindustrialfencesovereightfeetrequireaconditionaluse
permit This fence wall is forsecurity as well as aesthetic purposes Staffis recommending
approval ofthe conditionalusepermit toallow a10 foot wall
The zoning ordinance allows electric substations inthe IOP districtas a ConditionalUse PermitTherearespecialrequirementsforanelectricsubstationoneofwhichisthesizeoftheproperty
The ordinance requires a minimum of5 acres The applicant is proposingtobuild the facilityon a
2 35 acre parcel The secondrequirement stipulatesthatsubstations maintain a500 footsetback
from single familyresidences The subject site islocatedapproximately 200 feetfrom a mobile
homepark located southofStoughton Avenue The applicant isremoving an existing substationXcelsubstationandreplacingitwiththeproposedsubstationwhichwillmaintainalarger
distance from thesehomes The ordinance requires thesite tobe served via a collectoror major
arterial streetasdesignated in the comprehensiveplan Stoughton Avenue isnot classified as
either but functions as acollector Forthis use the current locationis mostidealand causes the
least disturbance and impact tothearea Staff is recommending approval ofthe varianceand theconditionalusepermittoallowtheelectricsubstation
Staffis recommendingapproval ofthe site plan conditional usepermit with variances and
resolution ofNegativeDeclaration ofthe needfor an Environmental Impact Statement for the
Minnesota Valley ElectricSubstation sitewith conditionsoutlined inthe staff report
BACKGROUND
On March 14 2005 the City Council approved anordinance amendmentregulating and defining
Electric Substations
On November15 2005 thePlanning Commission conductedaPublic Hearing todetermine
the scopeofan Environmental Assessment request for a Conditional UsePermit with
variancesand SitePlan Review application toconstructa local electricdistribution substation
on property zoned IndustrialOffice Park Minnesota Valley Electric Planning CaseNo0530ThePlanningCommissionrecommendedapprovaloftheEnvironmental
AssessmentScoping directed stafftoprepare the EAconsistent with the scoping and tabled
further proceedingson theConditional Use Permit SitePlan and Varianceuntil such time as
the EA is completedand submittedtothe Planning Commission
Minnesota Valley ElectricSubstation
Planning Case No05 30
January 3 2006
Page 4
GENERAL SITEPLANARCHITECTURE
Theproposed electric substation will belocatedon approximately2 35 acres Staffhasbeen
working with the applicant for overa yeartobringforth the bestdevelopment alternative Staffandtheapplicantbothagreedthatthe
substation needed tobe screened from
views Enclosing the utility structures
insidea building was notan option The
applicantproposed tobuild atip updecorativeconcretefenceonthreesides of
the substation and achain link fenceon the
easterly side Staff agreedthat this
alternativewas acceptable
Thewall shown inthe photo tothe right is
anexample ofthetype ofwall thatis
proposed tobe used alongtheparameter of
the substation
There isarowofexistingmature
evergreens that will screen thesite
from the east Additional
landscaping willbe added alongthe
entire fencetobreak up thewallvisuallyandaddsomeinterest
This operation willgenerate minimal
traffic Consequently there will be
an area for a maintenance truck toparkandturnaround
There isno trashenclosureproposed
with this development
ARCHITECTURAL COMPLIANCE
Typically staff prepares an architectural complianceanalysis ofanyproposed development The
analyses addressesissuessuch assize portion and placement entries articulation material anddetailcolorheightandroofdesignfacadetransparencyloadingareasrefuseareasetcThis
proposal doesnot contain atypical building therefore there isno analysis required The
applicant hasmade aconsiderable efforttoscreen the electric substation The applicant is also
proposing totakedown the existing Xcel Energy electric substationwhich willimprove the
appearance ofthe area considerably
Minnesota Valley ElectricSubstation
Planning Case No05 30
January 3 2006
Page 5
SITEPLANFINDINGS
Inevaluating a siteplan andbuildingplan the City shall considerthe developments compliance
withthe following
1 Consistency with the elements andobjectives ofthe citysdevelopment guides
including the comprehensive plan officialroad mapping andother plans that
may beadopted
2 Consistency with thisdivision
3 Preservationofthe site in itsnatural state totheextent practicable byminimizing
treeand soilremoval and designing grade changes tobe in keepingwith the
general appearance of theneighboring developedordeveloping areas
4 Creation ofaharmoniousrelationship ofbuildingand openspacewith naturalsite
features andwith existing andfuture buildings having a visual relationshiptothe
development
5 Creation offunctional and harmonious designfor structures and sitefeatures with
special attentiontothe following
a Aninternalsense oforder for thebuildings and useon thesite and
provision ofadesirable environment for occupants visitorsand generalcommunity
b The amount andlocation ofopenspace andlandscaping
c Materials textures colorsand detailsofconstruction asan expressionofthedesignconceptandthecompatibilityofthesamewithadjacentand
neighboringstructures anduses and
d Vehicular andpedestriancirculation including walkways interiordrives
and parking in terms oflocationand number ofaccesspoints tothepublicstreetswidthofinteriordrivesandaccesspointsgeneralinterior
circulation separationofpedestrianand vehicular trafficand arrangement
andamount ofparking
6 Protection ofadjacentand neighboringproperties through reasonableprovisionforsurfacewaterdrainagesoundandsightbufferspreservationofviewslight
and air and thoseaspects ofdesignnot adequately covered byother regulations
which may have substantialeffects on neighboring landuses
Finding The proposed development is consistent with the citys comprehensive planandthezoningordinanceifthevariancestotheconditionalusepermitwereapproved
The site design iscompatible with the surrounding development It is functional andwill
Minnesota Valley ElectricSubstation
Planning Case No05 30
January 3 2006
Page 6
improve thesurrounding area Minorrevisions arerequired and are outlinedin the
conditions ofapproval
COMPLIANCETABLE
Ordinance Proposed
Minimum Setbackfrom aResidential Area 500Feet 200 Feet
LotArea 5 Acres 2 35 Acres
HardSurface Coverage 70 31 5
WETLANDS
Upon review ofthe plans itis concluded thatthere are no wetlandson this site
STORMWATER GRADING AND EROSIONCONTROL
The northernportion ofthe property currently drains tothe north Thecentral portion drains
towardsthe depression locatedin the middle ofthesite The southernportion ofthesite drains
tothe south The 155 x 200 substation padwill sheetdrain tothe west The plansmustidentifytheproposedoutletforthebuildingpadsincethewestaestheticwallwillimpede
The developer must submit a constructiondetail for the proposedrock pad thatdrainage
shows howthe pad facilitates drainage under the decorativewall
The proposedgrading plan identifies shallow depressions on the north and southends ofthepropertyandaninfiltrationbasinonthewestsideofthepropertyThesoutherndepressionwill
overflow tothewest and thenorthern depression willoverflow tothe north The infiltration
basin storagecapacity exceedsthe 100 year runoffvolume Based on theCarver County soils
data the infiltrationbasin willinfiltrate within 60 hours the PCArecommends infiltrationwithin
72 hours
The 100 year post development dischargerate and volumetothe north will notincrease The
100 year post development dischargerate tothe southwestwill decreaseand the post
development dischargevolume will increase slightly
The runoff tothe infiltration basin may carryparticulate matter from the gravel substationpad
Staff recommends thatannualmaintenance beperformed on the infiltration basin so thatitwill
function as modeled
LANDSCAPING
Minimum requirementsfor landscaping include bufferyard plantingsalong propertylines The
submitted revisedplansTheapplicant proposed landscapingascompared totherequirements
is shownin the following table
Minnesota Valley ElectricSubstation
Planning Case No05 30
January 3 2006
Page 7
Required Proposed
Northproperty line 2 overstory trees 0 overstory6bufferyardB3204understorytrees3understory
99shrubs2 shrubs
Southproperty line 1 overstory trees 0 overstory6BufferyardB1402understorytrees2understory
84shrubs2 shrubs
East property line bufferyard 3 overstory trees 0 overstory11C2208understorytrees6understory1211shrubs0shrubs
West property line 1 overstory trees 0 overstory
8bufferyardB2804understorytrees4 Understory108shrubs3shrubs
Duetothe presenceofoverhead power lineson thesite onlyunderstory trees are recommended
for planting Thetotals for overstoryspecies should be transferredtothe understory totals The
applicantdoes notmeet minimum ordinance requirements forthe buffer yardplantings Staffrecommendsthattheapplicantincreaseplantingtotalsinordertomeetordinancerequirements
LIGHTING
The applicantis not showing anylightfixtures on the plans Detailedlighting plans shallbesubmittedincludingphotometricsandtypeoflightfixtureTheordinancerequiresnomorethan
0 5 foot candle atthe propertyline Only downcast shielded fixturesareallowedasrequired by
ordinance Any security motiondetection lighting should also be shown
CONDITIONALUSEPERMIT
ANALYSIS
The applicant isrequesting a conditional usepermit forthe construction ofan electricsubstation and
a10 foot highfence wall in theIndustrial OfficePark District The substation will better servetheresidentsofChanhassenandthesurroundingareaChanhassenhasexperiencedrapidgrowthand
thecompletion ofHighway 212isanticipated tosignificantlydrive newgrowth intothe area
FINDINGS
The Planning Commissionshall recommenda conditionalusepermit andthe councilshall issue
such conditional usepermits only ifitfindsthatsuch useatthe proposedlocation
1 Willnot be detrimental toordamage the publichealth safety comfort convenienceor general
welfare oftheneighborhood ofthecity
Finding The substation will providea basicutility tothe residents ofChanhassen andthe
surrounding area The wallwill provide screening and act asa securityfence
Minnesota Valley ElectricSubstation
Planning Case No05 30
January 3 2006
Page 8
2 Willbe consistent with theobjectives ofthecity s comprehensive planand this chapter
Finding This useis consistent with the objectives ofthecity scomprehensive plan and this
chapterprovided thevariances areapproved
3 Willbe designed constructed operatedand maintained sotobe compatiblein appearance with
the existing or intended character ofthe general vicinityand willnot change the essential
character ofthatarea
Finding The proposed concretefence designwill screen the substation Theapplicant willremovetheexistingXcelsubstationwhichwillimprovetheaestheticsofthearea
drastically
4 Willnot be hazardousor disturbing toexisting or planned neighboringuses
Finding The new substation will improve the areaon manylevels The substation willtap
intoexistingelectric linesand willnot increasethe electromagneticfields alongthe
propertylines The existing XcelEnergy substation willbe removed This
substation is closerthan the proposedMVEC substation toa residentialarea located
southof StoughtonAvenue The proposal willbe an improvement tothe plannedneighboringuses
5 Willbe served adequatelyby essentialpublicfacilities and services including streets police and
fire protection drainage structures refusedisposal water andsewer systemsand schools or
will beserved adequately bysuch facilities and servicesprovided by the personsor agenciesresponsiblefortheestablishmentoftheproposeduse
Finding Willbeserved adequatelybyfacilities andservices providedbythe persons
responsible for theestablishment oftheproposeduse
6 Willnotcreate excessive requirements for publicfacilities and servicesandwill not be
detrimental tothe economic welfareofthecommunity
Finding Willnotcreate excessive requirementsfor public facilities and services and willnot
be detrimental to the economic welfareofthe community It will provideanecessaryutility
7 Willnot involve uses activities processes materials equipment and condition ofoperation that
will be detrimental toanypersons property orthe general welfarebecauseofexcessive
production oftraffic noise smoke fumes glare odors rodents or trash
Finding Willnotinvolve uses activities processes materials equipmentand conditionof
operationthatwill be detrimentalto anypersons property orthe general welfare
becauseofexcessive production oftraffic noise smoke fumes glare odors
rodents or trash
Minnesota Valley ElectricSubstation
Planning Case No05 30
January 3 2006
Page 9
8 Willhave vehicular approaches tothe property whichdo not createtrafficcongestion or
interfere with trafficor surrounding public thoroughfares
Finding Willhave vehicular approachestothe propertywhich do not createtraffic
congestionor interfere withtraffic or surrounding public thoroughfares
9 Willnotresult in thedestruction loss or damageofsolar access natural scenic or historic
featuresofmajor significance
Finding Willnot resultin the destruction loss ordamage ofsolar access natural scenicorhistoricfeaturesofmajorsignificance
10 Willbe aestheticallycompatible with thearea
Finding Willbe aestheticallycompatible with thearea
11 Willnot depreciate surrounding property values
Finding Willnot depreciate surrounding property values
12 Willmeetstandardsprescribed forcertain uses asprovidedin this article
Finding Electrical Distribution andUndergroundElectric Distribution Substationsare
subject tothe following conditions
a The Distribution andUndergroundElectricDistribution Substationsmust be
served bya collector ormajor arterialstreet asdesignatedin the comprehensive
plan
Finding StoughtonAvenue isnot designatedasacollector oran arterial street TheproposedusewillgenerateminimaltrafficStaffdidnotwantto
encourage anyaccess pointsonto Highway 212
b The Distribution and UndergroundElectric Distribution Substations willnot have
sanitary facilities andwill not be usedforhabitation
Finding Thesubstation will not havesanitary facilitiesnorwillitbeused for
habitation
c The Distribution and UndergroundElectric Distribution Substations willbelocatedonatleastfive5acresofproperty
Finding The facility isproposed tobe locatedon 2 35 acres This isa fairlysmall
substation and theproposed acreage isadequatetoaccommodate the
proposed facility
Minnesota Valley ElectricSubstation
Planning Case No05 30
January 3 2006
Page 10
d Asecurity fence asspecified in the NationalElectric Safety Codeshall surround
the DistributionandUndergroundElectric Distribution Substations
Finding The applicantis proposing a fencearound the substation
e Alandscaping planshallbesubmitted forcity approval
Finding The applicanthassubmitted alandscaping plan for cityreview and
approval
f Distribution and Underground ElectricDistribution Substationsshallbe a
minimum offive hundred 500 feet fromsingle familyresidences
Finding The proposedsubstation will be locatedapproximately 200feet north ofan
existing mobile home parklocatedsouth ofStoughton Avenue There isanexistingsubstationacrossthestreetfromthemobilehomewhich
MVEC haspurchased and isproposing todismantle and remove The new
substation willmaintain alarger setback from themobile homes thanthe
existing substation
g Asummaryofcurrent researchregardingthe health effects ofEMF levels
conducted byhealthand scientificprofessionals includingthosewhodo and do
not receiveutility sponsorship
Finding The applicant provided the following information
Electric and Magnetic Fields
Questions oftenarise about electric and magnetic fields EMF which areinvisible
lines offorcethat surround anyelectrical device The term EMF refers toelectricandmagneticfieldsthatarecoupledtogethersuchasinhighfrequencyradiating
fields For lower frequencies suchas for power lines EMFshould be separated into
electricfields andmagnetic fields Transmission linesoperate ata frequency of
60hertz cycles persecond which is inthe nonionizing portion ofthe
electromagnetic frequencyspectrum Fieldsareconsidered ionizing when theycauseelectronstoejectfromtheirorbitsaroundanormalatomThiswilltypicallyoccur1622withfrequenciesintherangeof10to10hertz
Magnetic fields result from the flow ofelectricity current in the transmission line
Theintensity ofthe magneticfieldis relatedtothe current flow through theconductorsThemagneticfieldassociatedwiththetransmissionlinesurroundsthe
conductor and rapidlydecreaseswith the distancefromthe conductor The value of
the magnetic fielddensity isexpressed in the unitofgauss ormilligauss
The mostrecent and exhaustivestudies ofthe health effectsfrom power frequencyfieldsconcludethattheevidenceofhealthriskisweakSomeofthesestudiesare
listed below
Minnesota Valley ElectricSubstation
Planning Case No05 30
January 3 2006
Page 11
National InstituteofEnvironmental HealthSciences 2002 EMF Electric and
Magnetic Fields Associated withthe Use ofElectricPower National Institutes of
Health
NationalResearch Council 1997 PossibleHealth Effects ofExposure to
Residential Electric and Magnetic Fields
Minnesota Department ofHealth 2002 EMFWhite Paper on ElectricandMagneticFieldEMFPolicyandMitigationOptions
Electric andMagneticFields EMF EnvironmentalHealth in Minnesota
http www health statemn usdivs eh radiation emf
Forthis project the overallEMF impact will not change atthe property lines With
the retirementoftheXcel Energy East ChaskaSwitching Station theoverall EMF
readings on theproperty areanticipated todecreasecloser tothe road Inthe area ofthenewsubstationtheEMFwillincreaseslightlywithnewtransformerand
distribution facilities
h Provide EMF levelsunder maximum andaverage anticipatedloading at the base
ofthe utilitypoles underneath the wires between the poles atground level aboveundergroundwiresattheedgeofthepropertylineattheedgeoftheclosest
habitablebuilding and atthepoint above groundwhere therewouldbethe
greatest EMF level
Finding See sheetlabeled Estimated EMF Levels Chanhassen SubstationiReasonableandprudentmeasurestominimizeEMFlevelsalongallalternative
routes
Finding The applicant is removingan existing substation thatis located closertoa
residential area and building anewonethatwill havelessimpact on theresidentialareaandwillbelocatedfurtherfromtheresidentialarea
j Depictionsofthe views ofthe proposedfacility ifaboveground from atleast two
directions selected bycity staff
Finding See sheetslabeled ProfileView and ProfileView withExterior Fence
k The site isguided OfficeIndustrial on the CityofChanhassen LandUse Plan
Finding The site is guidedOffice Industrial on the CityofChanhassenLandUsePlan
Minnesota Valley ElectricSubstation
Planning Case No05 30
January 3 2006
Page 12
VARIANCE
ANALYSIS
Underthe conditional userequirements for a substation therearethreerequirements that theproposeddevelopmentdoesnotmeetFirsttheordinancerequiresaminimumofa5acreparcel
The proposalis showing 2 35 acres The second dealswith distance from residential areas The
ordinance requires a 500 footsetback There is a residential neighborhood located 200feet from the
proposed site Third the ordinance requiresthefacility tobe accessedoff ofacollector orarterial
street The site will be accessedoff ofStoughton Avenue which is not a collector or an arterial
FINDINGS
The Planning Commission shall not granta variance unless they findthefollowing facts
a Thatthe literal enforcement ofthis chapter wouldcause unduehardship Undue hardship
means that the property cannot be put toreasonable usebecauseofits size physical
surroundings shape ortopography Reasonable useincludes a usemade bya majority of
comparablepropertywithin 500feet ofit The intent ofthis provision is nottoallow a
proliferationofvariances buttorecognize thatand developneighborhoods where preexistingstandardsexistVariancesthatblendwiththesepreexistingstandardswithout
departing downwardfrom them meetthis criteria
The applicant hasbeenable tolocatea site thatwillcause minimal disruptionto
neighboring properties reduceelectromagnetic fields impacting adjacent residentialareasandimprovingtheaestheticsoftheareaThesitedoesnotmeetthedistance
lotarea andstreetdesignation requirements It is increasing its setback from
neighboringresidential properties byremoving the existingXcel energy site The
2 35 acresare adequate toaccommodate the needs oftheproposed facility and the
access issue Staffdiscouraged theapplicant fromaccessing the site off ofHighway212TheexistingaccesspointoffofStoughtonAvenueisadequateInlookingat
the areawithin 500 feet theXcel energy site islocated ona 5 acre parcel is located
less than 150feetfrom theresidential neighborhoodtothesouth and gains itsaccess
off ofStoughtonAvenue
b The conditions upon which a petitionfor a variance isbased arenot applicable generally to
other property within thesame zoningclassification
The conditionsuponwhich thispetition fora varianceis based arenot applicable
generally tootherproperties within thesame zoningclassification
c Thepurposeofthevariation is notbased upona desiretoincrease thevalue or income
potential oftheparcel ofland
Thepurposeofthisvariation is notbased upona desiretoincrease thevalue orincomepotentialoftheparcelbutactuallyistoprovideaservicefortheresidentsof
Chanhassen and thesurrounding area
Minnesota Valley ElectricSubstation
Planning Case No05 30
January 3 2006
Page 13
d Thealleged difficultyor hardship isnot aself created hardship
Thedifficultyor hardship isnot self created
e The grantingofthe variance will not bedetrimental tothe publicwelfare orinjurious to
other landor improvements in theneighborhood inwhich theparcel islocated
Granting ofthe variance will not be detrimental tothepublicwelfare or injurious to
otherlandor improvements inthe neighborhood in which the parcel oflandislocated
f The proposed variationwill not impair an adequate supply oflightand air toadjacent
property or substantially increase thecongestionofthepublic streets or increases thedanger
offire orendanger thepublic safetyor substantiallydiminish orimpairproperty valueswithintheneighborhood
The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply oflightand air toadjacent
property or substantially increase thecongestionofthepublic streets
Staff isrecommending approval ofthisvariance based uponthe findings listed above
RECOMMENDATION
City Council approvesThePlanningCommissionrecommendsapprovalofSite Plan 05 30 foranelectricsubstationasshowninplansdatedreceivedSeptember2andNovember302005
with variances toallowaccess off ofStoughtonAvenue maintaina 200 foot setback froman
existing residential neighborhood andconstruct the facility on a 2 35 acre parcel based onthe
findings ofthe staff report subject tothe following conditions
1 BuildingOfficial Conditions
a Permits are required toconstruct the perimeterwall and fence
b The plansmust be preparedandsigned bydesign professionalslicensed inthe State of
Minnesota
2 Theplans must identify the proposed outletfor thebuildingpadsince the westaesthetic wall
The developer must submit a construction detailfor the proposedwillimpededrainage
rock padthatshows howthe padfacilitates drainage underthe decorativewall
3 Annual maintenance shallbe performed on the infiltration basin sothatitwill function as
modeled
4 The applicantmust meetminimum ordinance requirements for bufferyards and submit a
revisedlandscape plan tothe cityfor approval
5 Overstoryplantings shallbe added tothe understorytotals for bufferyard plantings
Minnesota Valley ElectricSubstation
Planning Case No05 30
January 3 2006
Page 14
6 Detailedlighting plans shall besubmittedincluding photometrics andtype oflightfixture
The ordinance requires no more than0 5 footcandle atthe propertyline Onlydowncast
shielded fixtures are allowedas required byordinance Any security motion detection
lighting should alsobe shown
CONDITIONALUSEPERMIT
City Council approvesThePlanningCommissionrecommendsapprovalforConditional Use
Permit 05 30 for the constructionoftheElectric substation and a10 foot wall with thefollowingcondition
1 Asecurity fenceas specifiedin the NationalElectric SafetyCode shall surroundthe
Distributionand UndergroundElectric DistributionSubstations
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
City Council approvesThePlanningCommissionrecommendsthe a Resolution DeclaringNo
Needfor anEnvironmental Impact Statementfor the MinnesotaValley Electric Substation
ATTACHMENTS
1 Findings ofFact
2 Application
3 Affidavit ofMailing NoticeofPublic Hearing4EnvironmentalAssessment
5 Plansdated Received September 2 andNovember30 2005
g plan 2005planning cases 05 30mvec substation staff reportpc doc
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND RECOMMENDATION
IN RE Application of Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative for Site Plan Review with
Variances and Conditional Use Permit for an Electric Substation Planning Case No 05
30
On January 3 2006 the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled
meeting to consider the application of Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative for a site
plan review with Variances and Conditional Use Permit for an Electric Substation for the
property located East of the Gedney Pickle plant north of Stoughton A venue and south
of Flying Cloud Drive The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the
proposed site plan with variances and conditional use permit which were preceded by
published and mailed notice The Planning Commission heard testimony from all
interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
1 The property is currently zoned Industrial Office Park District
2 The property is guided for Office Industrial by the Land Use Plan
3 The legal description of the property is attached as exhibit A
4 Section 20 110
1 Is consistent with the elements and objectives of the city s development
guides including the comprehensive plan official road mapping and
other plans that may be adopted
2 Is consistent with this division
3 Preserves the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by
minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in
keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or
developing or developing areas
4 Creates a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural
site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual
relationship to the development
5 Creates a functional and harmonious design for structures and site
features with special attention to the following
a An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and
provision of a desirable environment for occupants visitors and
general community
1
b The amount and location of open space and landscaping
c Materials textures colors and details of construction as an
expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same
with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses and
d Vehicular and pedestrian circulation including walkways interior
drives and parking in terms of location and number of access
points to the public streets width of interior drives and access
points general interior circulation separation of pedestrian and
vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking
6 Protects adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision
for surface water drainage sound and sight buffers preservation of views
light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other
regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses
5 Section 20 232
1 Sec Will not be detrimental to or damage the public health safety comfort
convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood of the city
2 Will be consistent with the objectives of the city s comprehensive plan and this
chapter
3 Will be designed constructed operated and maintained so as to be compatible in
appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and
will not change the essential character of that area
4 Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses
5 Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services including
streets police and fire protection drainage structures refuse disposal water and
sewer systems and schools or will be served adequately by such facilities and
services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of
the proposed use
6 Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will
not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community
7 Will not involve uses activities processes materials equipment and condition
of operation that will be detrimental to any persons property or the general
welfare because of excessive production of traffic noise smoke fumes glare
odors rodents or trash
2
8 Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic
congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares
9 Will not result in the destruction loss or damage of solar access natural scenic
or historic features of major significance
10 Will be aesthetically compatible with the area
11 Will not depreciate surrounding property values
12 Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article
6 Section 20 58
1 That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause undue hardship Undue
hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its
size physical surroundings shape or topography Reasonable use includes a use
made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it The intent of
this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances but to recognize that
and develop neighborhoods where pre existing standards exist Variances that
blend with these pre existing standards without departing downward from them
meet this criteria
2 The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable
generally to other property within the same zoning classification
3 The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or
income potential of the parcel of land
4 The alleged difficulty or hardship is not aself created hardship
5 The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel
is located
6 The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to
adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or
increases the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially
diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood
7 The staff report dated January 3 2006 for Planning Case 2005 30 prepared by
Sharmin Al Jaff et aI is incorporated herein
3
RECOMMENDA TION
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the site
plan review with variances and conditional use permit
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 3rd day of January
2006
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
BY
VIi Sacchet Its Chairman
g plan2005 planning cases 05 30 mvec sub stationfinding of fact doc
4
MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPRATIVE
Findings of Fact Regarding
Decision on Need for Environmental Impact Statement
I PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Great River Energy GRE located in Elk River MN provides generation and
transmission to 28 member cooperatives in Minnesota GRE and one of its cooperatives
Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative MVEC are planning to construct a new
substation and high voltage transmission line tap in Chanhassen Carver County
Minnesota
The new substation and tap will be located on a 2 9 acre site east of Audubon Road and
north of Stoughton A venue in an industrial area adjacent to the MA Gedney Plant in
Chanhassen Section 3 T115N R23W Chaska Township Carver County The site
includes property previously owned by Xcel Energy The new single circuit 115 kV
transmission line will tap an existing 115 kV transmission line owned by and operated
by Xcel Energy just northeast of the proposed substation site
The proposed project includes three primary components
MVEC plans to construct a new 115 12 5 kilovolt kV substation to be named the
Chanhassen Substation The substation site will be owned by MVEC and all distribution
facilities will be constructed operated and maintained by MVEC
GRE proposes to construct own and operate approximately 80 feet of 115 kV
transmission line to energize the new substation Figure 1 2 The line will be a single
circuit design and will tap an existing 115 kV transmission line that is owned and
operated by Xcel Energy GRE will also own transmission switching facilities located in
the substation
The Xcel Energy East Chaska Switching Station will be removed
II REASONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project falls under the State of Minnesota s Power Plant Siting Act Minnesota Statutes
116C 51 69 and Minnesota Rules Chapter 4400 for transmission projects over 100 kV and
requires a permit from the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission Commission However for
eligible projects a utility may apply to the local unit of government that has jurisdiction over the
project for approval instead of applying to the Commission Minn Rules pt 4400 5000 This
proposed 115 kV substation project is eligible for local review
III ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
The Minnesota Valley Elecrric EA was submitted to the Environmental Quality Board on
December 22 2005 The EAW Notice of Availability was published in the January 2 2006 issue
of the Minnesota EOB Monitor Copies of the EAW were mailed to all of the agencies and
organizations on the EQB official EA distribution list The lO day comment period ended on
January 12 2005
IV COMMENTS ON THE EAW
During the comment period letters of comment were received from the following agencies
organizations and individuals
Status
Government Unit Type 11 Activitv
L u
USDA Rural Environmental Construction of 115 kV Environmental
Utilities Service Review transmission line and 115 125 Review for
RUS kV substation substation sent to
RUS on 9 8 05
approval in process
US Dept of Interior Threatened and Review of records for federally No federally listed
Fish and Wildlife Endangered Species threatened or endangered species species will be
Service Review that may exist at or near the affected by the
substation site or transmission project e mail
facilities dated
4 13 05
US Dept of the Wetland and Review navigable water and the Proposed work does
Army Waterways Review dredging or filling of US waters not require permit
Corps of Engineers including wetlands or other Corps of
Engineers
approval e mail of
825 05
MN Dept of Environmental Comprehensi ve review of The project will not
Natural Resources Review Wetlands substation site impacts affect rare features
DNR Water Threatened letter of 425105
and Endangered
Species
USDA Natural Environmental Prime farmlands and land of The construction
Resources Review Soil statewide importance will not affect
Conservation Resources prime farmlands or
Service land of statewide
importance letter
of 5 4 05
MN Historical SHPO Review of Historic preservation No historic
Society Nationally properties will be
State Historic Registered Historic affected by the
Preservation Office Places project letter of
SHPO 5 13 05
City of Chanhassen Conditional Use Construction of new facilities Application in
Permit process
City of Chaska Driveway Access Application will be
Permit made once project
is approved
Minnesota Pollution National Pollutant Stormwater Pollution Prevention Application will be
Control Agency Discharge Plan SWPPP and stormwater made once project
MPCA Elimination System permit required for disturbance is approved
NPDES Permit of one acre or more
v FINDINGS OF FACTDECISION ON NEED FOR EIS
Minnesota Rule 4410 1700 Subp 7 specifies the following criteria to be used in deciding
whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects
Type extent and reversibility of environmental effects
Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects
The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of
other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposers of an
EIS previously prepared on similar projects
Based on the information contained in the EA comments received on the EA and the criteria
listed above the City of Chanhassen as the RGU makes the following determinations
A The project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects
B The preparation of a State Environmental Impact Statement on the project is not needed
or recommended
C The City of Chanhassen may issue permits to allow construction in compliance with the
rules of the EA and in conformance with the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act
g plan200S planning cases OS 30 mvec sub station ea eaw findings doc
t
Chanhassen Substation CUP Application Index
1 Index
2 Payment Conditional Use Permit Variance Admin Subdivision and Escrow CITY OF CHANHASSTotal233500RECEIVED EN
3 Application Signed SEP 0 2 2005
4 Project Summary sheet CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPr
5 Orientation Map
6 Proposed site Aerial Site Map
7 CUP Narrative
8 Chanhassen Substation Standards Section 20 31 and Support
9 500 foot notification List
10 Pictures
Stoughton Ave Entrance also Showing Xcel Switching Station
Sub site from North Looking Southwest
Sub site from South looking North
Sub site Looking East toward cemetery
On site Close up
Comparable Gifford Sub facility for reference
Close up up modular switch gear unit
11 EMF strength Diagram
12 Sample Wall Material Picture
13 Site Survey of overall Gedney Property
14 MVEC Site Survey with topography existing transmission hard surface and grading sheet 2 of4
15 Detail Plan sheet 30f4
16 Grading Landscape and Original Tree Canopy Plan Sheet 4 of 4
17 Plan View
18 Profile
19 Estimated EMF levels and Reference
20 Wall Picture Profile Cross Sections
21 500 foot notification Map with contours extended 150 foot from site perimeter
Planning Case No
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard P O Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317 952 227 1100
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
PLEASE PRINT
Applica nt Name and Address
1 v J
b 1 4
D Lt tlcl sc J
Contact Kb b
Phone is qi l 4J Fax
Email ja Ci2 ec eo
Owner Name and Address
i
Contact l e7 N lAI of
Phone 44g 14l0 Fax
Email k Tt1lbo eJl r Ide I M
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Temporary Sales Permit
X Conditional Use Permit Vacation of Right of Way Easements
Interim Use Permit Variance
Non conforming Use Permit Wetland Alteration Permit
Planned Unit Development Zoning Appeal
Rezoning Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Sign Permits
Sign Plan Review Notification Sign 75 100 Damage Deposit
x Escrow for Filing Fees Attorney Cost
50 CUP SPRNACNARIWAP Metes Bounds
450 Minor SUB
Site Plan Review
X Subdivision vl II u TOTAL FEE taBS
I flC J1 6G IJ3t fl
An additional fee of 3 00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the applicant prior to
the public hearing
Twenty six 26 full size copies of the plans must be submitted including an aw x 11 reduced copy for each plan sheet
along with a dlaltal COpy in TIFF Group 4 tit format
Applicant to obtain notification sign from City of Chanhassen Public Works at 1591 Park Road and install upon submittal of
completed application 100 damage deposit to be refunded to applicant when sign is returned following City Council approvalEscrowwillberequiredforotherapplicationsthroughthedevelopmentcontract
Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews
NOTE When multiple applications are processed the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application
@
PROJECT NAME Chanhassen Substation
LOCATION Part of the M A Gedney property East of the plant North of Stoughton Ave
LEGAL DESCRIPTION P LD It 25030700 Part of the NW 1 4 of section 3 Twp 115
R 23
TOTAL ACREAGE 116 600 sq ft or approx 2 5 acres
WETLANDS PRESENT YEs x NO
PRESENT ZONING lOP Industrial Office Park District
REQUESTED ZONING Same
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION
REASON FOR REQUEST Electric Substations require a Conditional Use Pennit MVEC needs
to construct a local distribution substation to serve the demands of Chanhassen
surrounding area A variance is requested for the property size distance from
residential properties MVEC requests approval of the CUP as well as the property
subdivision As requested in the accompaning narranve drawings
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information
and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions Before filing this application you should confer with the
Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application
A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal A written
notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with
all City requirements with regard to this request This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom
the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application I have attached a copy of proof of ownership
either copy of Owners Duplicate Certificate of Title Abstract of Title or purchase agreement or I am the authorized person
to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application
I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application I further
understand that additional fees may be chargedfof consulting fees feasibility studies etc with an estimate prior to anyauthorizationtoproceedwiththestudyThedocumentsandinformationIhavesubmittedaretrueandcorrecttothebestof
m
3 It 7 J 5
I Date
jt7 G
Date
G lplanlformslDevelopment Review Application DOC Rev 4 05
Chanhassen 115 kV Substation Transmission Tap
t Touchstone Encrgyl
The powof human OIlri Ctil m
1fYI lBre11
1J1 npo n 1nU J t I trn r ppr tl
t HI I l r
GREAT RIVfR
ENf RGY
GREAT RIVER ENERGY
17845 East Hwy 10 P O Box 800
Elk River MN 553300800
763441 3121
www greatriverenergy com
Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative
125 Minnesota Valley Electric Drive
Jordan MN 55352
952492 2313
www mvec net
Project Goal and Need
Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative MVEC provides electric energy to a large portion of Chanhassen and the
surrounding areas as designated by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission The area has experienced rapid
growth in recent years and completion of the State Highway 312 project is anticipated to significantly drive more new
growth until land use is saturated
The Substation
A technical analysis of the transmission system identified the need for a new electrical distribution substation site
within the focused area This analysis considered the presence of existing distribution feeders and transmission lines
as well as existing and future load projections A location within an underutilized industrial area adjacent to the MA
Gedney Plant on Stoughton Avenue Section 3 T115N R23W situated directly under existing transmission lines
was found to be most conducive to the current and future electrical needs of the area The substation proposed is a
low profile modular facility that would be proposed with concrete tip up type walls on three of the four sides The new
proposed installation will provide considerably more system growth potential improve MVEC system reliability and
provide some backup capabilities to both the Bluff Creek and Chaska substations under emergency conditions
Transmission
Existing transmission lines cross the area near the proposed substation location and include voltages of 69 kV 115 kV
and 230 kV MVEC would utilize the 115 kV transmission line owned by Xcel Energy in partnership with Great River
Energy GRE who would tap the transmission line one span and bring it into the substation Minimal alterations to
the existing transmission system would be required
Permitting and Scheduling
MVEC and GRE are applying for necessary permits from the City of Chanhassen and will assist in the preparation of
the required environmental assessment The project will operate at the nominal voltage of 115 kV and is regulated
under the Power Plant Siting Act A provision of this law allows the utility to seek local approval Because this is a
local load serving project GRE and MVEC have elected to seek local approval
Contacts
Questions or concerns should be directed to one of the following
Ron Jabs
Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative
125 Minnesota Valley electric Drive
Jordan MN 55352
952 492 8244
Craig Poorker
Great River Energy
17845 East Highway 10
Elk River MN 55330 0800
763 241 2367
cpoorker@orenerov com
DATE LAST REVISED 8 222005
Map Print Output
f
Page 1 of 1
Carver County GIS Ma Jping Application
Legend
Rood r xt
US HigMays
I IIN HigMays
II CSAH
County Reads
L3lli
Palnls
RII I PIlCm2 D2
c
111
Carver
County
Map Created on
8 15 2005
This map was created using Carver County s Geographic Information
Systems GIS it is a compilation of information and data from various City
County State and Federal offices This map is not a surveyed or legolly
recorded map and is intended to be used as a reference Carver County is
not responsible for any inaccuracies contained herein
http 156 99 124 167 website parcel intemetJecap map asp 815 2005
VICINITY MAP
y
r
fir
APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Chanhassen MN
For the Chanhassen Substation
By
The Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative
The Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative MVEC provides electric energy to a large
portion of Chanhassen and the surrounding areas as designated by the Minnesota Public
Utilities Commission The area has experienced rapid growth in recent years
Completion ofthe St Highway 312 project is anticipated to significantly drive more new
growth until land use saturates
Technical analysis of the system targeted the need for a new electrical substation site
within the target area while accounting for the presence of existing distribution feeders
and transmission lines as well as existing and future load projections
The proposed site selected is a portion of unused property owned by M A Gedney and
zoned Industrial Office Park District lOP The site is located north of an existing Xcel
Energy switching station east of the M A Gedney plant west ofa St John s Lutheran
Cemetery and south of additional industrial office park property owned by MA Gedney
The specific legal description ofthe location under consideration is
Beginning in the Northwestern Quarter of Section 3 Township 115N Range 23W which
lies South 88 degrees 23 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of2313 94 feet from NW 3
monument located NW 3 in the Northwest Quarter of Section 3 Township 115N Range
23W Thence South 2 degrees 43 minutes 26 seconds West a distance of 193 29 feet
Thence South 0 degrees 18 minutes 10 seconds West a distance of 418 76 feet
Thence South 57 degrees 57 minutes 21 seconds West a distance of 149 63 feet
Thence South 0 degrees 38 minutes 38 seconds West a distance of171 50 feet
Thence South 62 degrees 53 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of35 77 feet
Thence North 1 degrees 5 minutes 52 seconds East a distance of 171 62 feet
Thence North 35 degrees 27 minutes 12 seconds West a distance of306 61 feet
Thence North 53 degrees 13 minutes 52 seconds East a distance of 42759 feet to point
oftermination The property consist of approximately 116 600 sq ft or about 2 acres
Currently a large portion ofMVEC s service area within Chanhassen and Eden Prairie is
serviced by the Bluff Creek Substation or the Chaska Substation Bluff Creek is a joint
facility with Xcel Energy and the City of Chaska Public Utilities with MVEC having a
secondary ownership position Further expansion capabilities are extremely limited for
MVEC within the facility and technical limitations also come into play The Chaska Sub
is a facility owned by Chaska Public Utilities also offers limited space rented for
MVEC s use The new proposed installation will provide considerably more system
growth potential improve MVEC system reliability and also provide some backup
capabilities to both the Bluff Creek and Chaska Substations under emergency conditions
11
A major benefit of this site is that existing Xce1 Energy 115KV transmission line crosses
the property and eliminates the need to extend new transmission lines to the site MVEC
is working jointly with Great River Energy GRE and Xce1 Energy to tap into this
location
The presence of existing MVEC distribution feeder lines also contributes to economical
construction maintenance and lower costs to electric customers Additional
underground distribution feeder lines will need to be installed to tie into other parts ofthe
system The proposed location provides adequate system capacity for the foreseeable
future and enhances system reliability for the area
MVEC is pursuing a Conditional Use Permit CUP for a Public Utility Structure as an
essential service permitted by Article IV Conditional Uses within standards set forth
within Division 4 Section 20313 with some special considerationThefacility proposed
would be a modem design low profile Distribution substation with a modular switching
unit surrounded by a 10 foot pillar and walled concrete fence enclosure on three sides
replacing the standard 8 foot high chain link fence and barbed wire enclosure that is
typical for this type offacility The enclosure measures 160 X 185 The remaining code
required fencing will be 8 feet high for safety and security and access gates will be
locked at all times or under the direct supervision of authorized personnel
MVEC proposes additional conifers and shrubs strategically placed on the perimeter of
the property to break up and screen the site per the plan All new vegetation will be
warranted for at least two years Naturally existing trees and dense vegetation exist along
the east side of the property will remain to screen to the east side Exit corridors for both
overhead and underground electrical feeders will be required to remain clear of tall
screening to assure system reliability MVEC will install and maintain screening in the
form of shrubbery to the extent that they will not interfere with the reliability of the
substation operation The substation will be maintained in a neat and orderly fashion
Storm water drainage will be controlled on site to meet or exceed the City and watershed
requirements The fenced in area will be maintained as a gravel surface The driveway
and parking area will be blacktopped Field inspection and available records indicate
significant wetlands will not be disturbed
MVEC is providing the new substation site plan as part of the application A purchase
option with M A Gedney Inc provides property interest to MVEC MVEC is making
application to the Watershed District to review the specific conditions of the Conditional
Use Permit
Signage will be limited to an identification sign on the fence of the substation and
warning signs to the public as required by the current National Electrical Safety Code
Within the fenced in area a minimal quantity of transformers may be stored to
accommodate the prompt response to local outage situations
I
7c
Additional information
The proposed substation will reduce the electric transmission line voltage from 115 KV
down to 1247 KV for distribution to the local service area A Local Distribution
Substation of this variety will contain transformation regulation metering and switching
capabilities A modular self contained control unit will be incorporated within the fenced
in area to monitor and regulate the functions ofthe facility
Many functions are monitored remotely and access is most prevalent to respond to outage
conditions or to maintain the grounds Most access is during daylight hours however 247
access is required Site visits typically are only for duration of a few minutes Once
constructed trips generated per day will vary but typically would average only a few trips
per week
Vehicles accessing the facility typically are pickup type trucks or utility bucket truck type
vehicles and not normally more than two at a time Short term parking will be provided
which will accommodate parking for up to 4 utility vehicles in front of the fence Some
units may occasionally pull trailers
No water or sewer will be utilized as part of the operations ofthe electrical substation
The substation design will comply with the State Building and Fire Code In addition
the design will comply with the current National Electrical Safety Code
MVEC s application includes provisions for variances and subdivision as noted
This project enhances the electrical distribution system capabilities and reliability for the
customers in the immediate area MVEC would intend to start construction as soon as
possible with the facility placed in service in late spring of2006
Any questions can be directed to Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative C O Ronald
Jabs at 952 492 8244 or email rjabs@mvec net
cz
Chanhassen Substation Standards
Sec 20 313 Electrical distribution and undemround electric distribution
substations
Electrical distribution and underground electric distribution substations are subject to the
following conditions
1 The distribution and underground electric distribution substations must be served
by a collector or major arterial street as designated in the comprehensive plan
The site is served by Stoughton Avenue The current street provides access to the
Gedney plant as well as other industrial facilities within the general area
2 The distribution and underground electric distribution substations will not have
sanitary facilities and will not be used for habitation
MVEC s on site operations short term require no habitation or extended presence
and has no need for sewer
3 The distribution and underground electric distribution substations will be located
on at least five acres ofproperty
Actual area within the fenced premises is less than 3 4 acre An over all area of
25 acres generously provides setbacks parking and any landscaping Highest and
best use ofthe property would not support the need for additional property for this
facility which would remain underutilized
4 A security fence as specified in the National Electric Safety Code shall surround
the distribution and underground electric distribution substations
Normally an 8 foot chain link fence with two strands of barbed wire would be
utilized for the entire enclosure MVEC proposes alO foot modular concrete wall
type enclosure for the most visible areas as noted on the plans with the standard
chain link fencing for the remainder as noted on the plan
5 A landscaping plan shall be submitted for city approval
Due to the addition of walled screening landscaping is confmed to the parking
areas the remainder of the chain link portions and strategically located alongwalledsections6Distributionandundergroundelectricdistributionsubstationsshallbeaminimum
of500 feet from single family residences
The facility is positioned approximately 400 feet away from the closest mobile
homes however the existing Xcel switch station is located closer and across the
street from the same homes and existing transmission lines cross above those
homes These homes would experience no increased impact from the proposed
substation facility
7 A summary of current research regarding the health effects ofEMF levels
conducted by health and scientific professionals including those who do and do not
receive utility sponsorship
A study by The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences The
Environmental Protection Agency EPA and the US Department of Labor
Occupational Safety and Health Administration has been provided along with
references to various other web sites In summary EMF levels generated within
Z6
the substation facility are projected to be reduced to near normal background
levels at the fence perimeter
8 Provide EMF levels under maximum and average anticipated loading at the base of
the utility poles underneath the wires between the poles at ground level above
underground wires at the edge ofthe property line at the edge ofthe closest habitable
building and at the point above ground where there would be the greatest EMF level
See diagram provided
9 Reasonable and prudent measures to minimize EMF levels along all alternative
electric line routes
Per EMF Rapid study the EMF levels within a substation drop off dramatically
as distance from equipment is increased At the substation fence EMF levels are
indistinguishable from background levels MVEC has verified this to be true by
taking our own measurements Distribution voltage lines both overhead and
underground have very low EMF levels and also are indistinguishable from
background levels at a short distance
10 Depictions of the views ofthe proposed facility ifabove ground from at least
two directions selected by city staff
Please reference plan views provided
11 The site is guided office industrial on the City ofChanhassen Land Use Plan
The Gedney site is so designated per staff and the current zoning map
Ownership List of Parcels within 500 feet
Proposed MVEC Sub Station Site Chanhassen MN
pm 301370090 and 250035300 and remaining part of 250030700
M A GEDNEY COMPANY
P O Box 8 Chaska MN 55318
PID 300031800
NORTHERN STATES POWER CO Xcel Energy
Attn Real Estate Dept
414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis MN 55401
pm 300030200 and 300030700
ALLEN L BRAKEMEIR
450 Lake Virginia Trail Excelsior MN 55331
pm 300032700
ST JOHNS LUTHERN CHURCH Church Cemetery
300 4th Street E Chaska MN 55318
pm 250340110
GARY W DUNGLEY GARY L BROWN LLP
1910 Stoughton Avenue Chaska MN 55318
pm 301370100
CHASKA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
1 City Hall Plaza Chaska MN 55318
PID 300032100 and 300340500
FERRELLGAS LP
Attn Real Estate Tax Dept 22
One Liberty Plaza Liberty MO 64068
pm 300341000
HARRI J RINTA MADELEINE J WEGNER
18025 Kelly Lake Road Carver MN 55315
pm 300341100
ALL STEEL PRODUCTS CO
1165 Highway 212 E
P O Box 73 Chaska MN 55318
r
I
I
I
o
cs
o
00
c
J 0
cJJ
J elloC
U
gz
C Ltn I
l1li
4it
I
Ij Ii
1il
i
Iii
J
III
t XIiil
tIiJ qXX i
t
sf
ill
i
C
Cl
Q
rJ1
Q
z
bll
Q
Q
J
J
ar
i i
1
Ii
r
t
6
I i I
lr il
j Ji ll
1 ll
l
o
i i
lI
J tl
I
l
I
g
fj Il
i l
tIl
bJJ
rii S
Q 0
Z j
JZ tftIt1Jt
v3I L
c
o
rJ1
o
o
Q
rJ1
o
J
1 1
B l
t 8
11
r t
1 t Jllf010lr
T r lillii t7jtlrif
ff
h
f
lIl
i
T
n
lltffie
ttfPHIJpI
i
dJ
i
l
I t
1IlIf
LJ
ij
l
f
Q
5
c
rJJ
0
u 1
j
IilI t1
j
tT
c
111
if
o
b
tI
II
III
III
1
dI
i OJ
lJ
iI
1
0
0lL
ei
rJJ
l
I
I
G
l
l
j
I
You cannot see a magnetic field but this illustration represents how
the strength of the magnetic field can diminish just 1 2 feet 30 61
centimeters from the source This magnetic field is a 60 Hz power
freq uency field
lII I
A Comparison of Electric and Magnetic Fields
Electric Fie Ids
Produced by voltage
t
Lamp plugged in but turnedoH
Voltage produces lq electric field
Measured in volts per meter VIm
or in kilovolts per meter kV m
Easily shielded weakened by
conducting objects such as trees and
pui Igings
Strength decreases rapidly with
increasing distance from the source
Magnetic Fields
Produced by current
Lamp plugged in and turned un Current
nO lj rJwduces a rl1agn tic field aho
Measured in gauss G or testa T
Not easily shielded weakened by
most material
Strength decreases rapidly INith
increasing distance from the source
An appliance that is plugged in and therefore connected to a source
of electricity has an electric field even when the appliance is turned
off To produce a magnetic field the appliance must be plugged in
and turned on so that the current is flowing
l
1
r F
I
r
Ulllll oO
l
lUIUIUUI
6 0
lI
b1
U
jlltll
IS 8 gJ
f
I r
g 0
r ftmffif 1 t I
I
d 1 l t j i
I I III 1
II l
j
ft t
1 1 I I J j
1 d
I I
I 1
1
3I
1
1 r
L
D
l
1
l
It
1 I
I
i
I
mrw il ijU
1 if
t I
I I
t
l t
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDA VIT OF MAILING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ss
COUNTY OF CARVER
I Todd Gerhardt being first duly sworn on oath deposes that he is and was on December
22 2005 the duly qualified and acting Clerk of the City of Chanhassen Minnesota that on said
date he caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing for MN Valley
Electric Substation Planning Case No 05 30 to the persons named on attached Exhibit A
by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner and depositing the
envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid
thereon that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such by the
records of the County Treasurer Carver County Minnesota and by other appropriate records
9 LDt
Todd Gerhardt City Clerk
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this dayofecervvbi Y 2005
ue
Notary Pu IIc
KIM T MEUWISSEN INotaryPublicMinnesotaMyCommissionExpiresJan312010
CC U D
Ol
I
I
I
OlS1Ul
Ul10
I EJE
0
CO
SOl01
o I
I
I 10
J 0
o I
ZI
Ul
Ul
10
s
I
10
s
o
Ol
I
I
I
I
OlO
1 Ul
Ul10IEJE
0
cO
SOl
0 1
IoI
I 10
J a
o I
ZIUl
Ul
10
s
I
10
s
o
g C
0enE
s
Ul EI0UlJUUlaIt5Ul
o Q Ul10
ffi Q
EeaSQuI nQIOEeocoE00I1Et5o0015eo
R a en S n
515Ii
co enJ u 1CDQca2coOooICoE000
CJco 3
M B c 3
1
0 6 5 g0
OCOo o
CO CQCOC
E C
0enl tQasQ 0JlenC01000I
J Q J 10IOaoen0
Qj
E
i 1
2
g B100
CJ
10
Ul
o
a
o
a
Q Q g
J c 0
C c o
co68
oc
C CO 0
o J Q 3
c 0 c
0 Q co
J Ec c
o ai O
U5 E E Q
o g g E
Q c Ul2 5gtSen0 0gO
Q CIl C E 3cQCco0ocoiijcoQQ0ocO
o 0 0 5l c 0
u 0 Qj 2 0 0 Q
J C Eu0CIl00uJCJc
n o 0 CO 0 gUJ00QClcenC0QUco2UlJQ
ea Q u 0 0 0CDQcoIaen0
coQ c Eo enencocl0QgJ2Ec
Q OO o u u
c enla J
cenogQ o ooctlIc00J
UJ COl 1 co co 0
1
t o
I
a m
o J
0
o J
1 5 Q g5c0
enJ c c ocoQQcoJ0QuiE8I0Ico0JuOJQ3aIc0ct5Ul0QcooOQUlJEcc
i 0 ai 0
c eas U5 E E Q enQuIn0eE03Q1002cii2ECOCOEJCen
ci E t5 S 0 0 0
o 0 I J eo c 0 O Q
QooonQCc
en Q CIl EIclQcCcoco 0
Ul 0 W u g jjj Q 15 Q 6COenJucE0005lc0E
CD Q ca 2 CO 0 u 0 Qj 2 0 0gES50
ca
s 6 6 a 0
CJ CO 3 u J C Jc
C c 0 3 n 0 0 co 0 g
0 UJ 0 0
Q Q Clc en
co 0 E c 0 Q uc
uO o2 Ul JQJcCO00eaQu0O 06CD0g
JOO CON coQ Eoen COcE0QIOOJlcccocoenaiaEen02JCOcOIQOQOenouu
en l enQ C c U J
g2 g J g UJ g2 8 g
I Oao en o COl l cocoo
I
E
i 1
s B
10 0
CJ
10
Ul
o
a
o
a
ga
I
I Q
1
t o
I
a m
o J
0
o J
en
Q
en
en
J
t5 u
Q en
0 0
Ci C
o eQ0 en
Q g E
o c c EOJoCiC00oQQencQ
c c c
EOooc3COa500
enQ Q
Q Q en
CiQ Q
0 u
C
co O
Q ccoc
co engc Q
0 Q c
3 g E 2 e
Q ECQ
en 8 E
CiC 5t
UlOl
a
a I
10 I
J
I
ms
s
3 iti
en
Q
en
en
J
t5 u
Q
0 0
Ci c
0 0 Q
Q
en 0 t5 EOQ
g E g E
c 0 0
o oQ O
Q en c Qccc
EOooc3cCO
Q 0 0
2 enQ Q
Q Q en
Q 0
O 0 U 13Q
C en
CO 3 Q
Q ceoc
CO en coOu
C Q j0Qc3gE2e
Q ECo
Sc 0J c
Q
CJ I On
CJC 5t
UlOlII1
a
a I
10 I
J
I
ms
s3 iti
Q
0 6 E 3
o c ECi5ctlr88I IQgjQSs
EO enOOUl iiiciQguCiCSI
o oEo c Q I E
C 0 u C
0 en ctlJ 03 oc I
0 0 Q I 2
Q5o CO CO Ul
Q 7 U5 iDEESeolcciE
Q ccio en 1
c c J 0 s
Oc Q C 2 mOo
Q en Q
E E 0 Q5 0
o co i Q Ul co
coC c EIOIQenJcQsCI
c 0 en Q IJcnencICl
O co caccUcc
Q SC oos o
0 u c CO c Q en I
Q co oi3Q uenms
c oQ u E C E IQuEco1 0Qguen@05EQccouCO0IenJgcocc0028000QQIctSc
c coc u en c 0
COI Q Q 02 1030coEO
CO E t enmUlJOOEcoQo0cenQo0010s0JQ0Qc
c EoenOu c
Ul
I I
o I
El3E
s 000
0 3
o
Q E
Q lj Q S Q
en CJ Q 0 5g8Sm
o oEo c Q I E
C 0 u C
cii encoJo3 0C1
0 0 Q 2
Q O co CO Ul
Q 7 en iDEESeolcciE
Q ccio en c
c c J 0 s
Oc Q C 2 mOo
Q en Q
E E 0 Q5 0
CO Ul co QE3eocEQIolQenJcQsCI
c g CJ 2enoco10ccUcc
Q SC Oos o
0 u c co c Q en I
Q COoi3Q uenmscoQuEcEI
Q uECO 1 0Qguen@05EQccouco0IenJgcoII002
80 0 0 Q Q I
ctS c u
c coc u en c 0
COI Q 3 Q o2m
3 0 CO E 0
CO E t enmUlJOOEcoQ00cenQcooms0JQ0Is
c Eoenou c
Ul
I I
o I
El3E
s 0
00
00 0 rn
c Ot 5m
g 5 rn 2 ID octJ0aca1aDcoQ3QuctStca00ctlC25ccc
Q gQ J 2 g u Q Q o
Q Q o ca a
g g E rn rn a g
8 0 g e 8 t a 2 rn
Q rno ecu roE gc 0 J C
5B rnc E E u
cnrn2 rn Q Q O Q O st rn C g
Q Q CC rn C
g u s E E g 8b
E C 02 ij u 5 0 5 rn c5 D
g rn OErn g c E
2C J mij L uQ Ee s Cij J u
E ca E t5 E E 2 c
g 8 a E
m o 5oo0co J 0 O DgcnEIDEQuuwct
c
Q eQ Q oO EmO rn o
o en2 e E O U Q rnc Q Cij 0 o
ceQ t crnecw OJ u
u Q e Q Q 5 nrn Q o3 0 Q CJ
cE Ea ij Q rn E ij oEL e 558gscQc
cn j Eu ti s
a5 U 00 0 og oi 2 g ClOa
5Q t 2UQ mg J SE Clr 2D
Q O Cl3gCl gErncJ oc r s rogSoc8esgcTIgEU
Oc O cQ o w g QoSc2ooOeocQmQU c
5a mO Q 8
c Q n Q o 5QrrQEUQQEc rnenEQiQucenroOSromD
cU c 3 c 2 J ucBUoeoQgc li
KEg g 5 e 8 U c g 0
B t5 rr g u gs c g DgEgmEg
Q 0 Q Eo 0 J Ol ctS Q U e ClcooEOouoaQ0QE5QQcOcecCEOc25cQQ5e2rnQOorn
o Ec Q Q 2 2 2 g ID 0 2 g
m Q t roE EQ ooQ Q Q O
8 g E E 8
C1 c e Q 0 g w og ws 5 e e S
go gE roroeg @
enO 5Q nm m 5 Boroo oo
S enO c rn co g Q g rn 0 E 5
g 8 m
e c Q nQ E Eo Q en c t meU 0
Oo t c E c g ffiQ Q caoW
frs IDQ 80 s a c
wOC rnW OU c mrnw3
en 0 rn
c 0t 5 Q u
g g m ID
0 f4 0 rn E 00 rn
Ci3Q m m 0 0 rncg ccc
Q g Q t 2 g a Q Q 0
CO ts IDE o c a a
E g E rn g en u a
8 0 e g 0 2 rn
m e E aroE ffi 0 c
rnC oEOOJ OE 5
t ij2 ctJQ O Q 5 9t ctS cg
ij ctS a
ou ro 5EcECij J D Q o
E e 02ij o sO rn
c5 Q
g g co EO g c E
2C t ij caQ Ea 5 J O
EcaQ Et5ro o Emr2 ut Q c
C 5 0 E o s ro s O o
5 Bo E 53 s
0 55 dc a E 1 I en c t i5
c eQ Q U EmO rn o
Q E g S5 8 s8Qa3c5cuQQo50QCJ
c E LO E c I Cl 5l E E e g 3 585Ci3Qc
l m EQ 9 5
g 0 g g 5 g a
Q t UO ctSEcJ E o 2Q
Q ctSC C Q rnctoc rogfiOC0005n0QQeuCJJ0Q
cO eoo gtEg oo 8ij Q o
25@ 5 ciffi g
O U Q 8
Q o Ec Q o o cQ55EUBcnroQ0OQoo
0Eg Q Q 05 fi m
E 0 C c 2 en J r u E B c
Q ffi u 2 tEgigijQe8UcctS
rn rr g Q g5 ne Q m
Q e 5Q Q cE e a Q o 5
a E J g E 0 5 ctS 5 C oJ
o ocQ o oO o OcQ E 5
Q cU ctJ c5 a E 5
c 5 e0 Q 5 g 2 U 0 co g 0 rn
c o
E Q
Q
E 22w 3 09 enIDt5 U 2 4
eg 0 5 a goJJQ g g
2 iro 9gaS S 8 2
rnnt Q Q coQ W oOt e
g rnrnrneg @ i
J O 5 5 g C Ci5 E 2 ro Q 8 95en0emcoeQ0rnu055ts1
Q U C oQ g Q 1 Q t 0 Co o Q 5
E Rm 8 t c gn o5C1ogtcEcgffiQQrooQ
DNcuc roIDQ Q 8 c cQ o E
0 g oo 5 85 ij g
3
I
Disclaimer
This map isneither alegally recorded map nor asurvey and is not intended to be used as one This
map is acompilation of records information and data located in various city county state and federal
offices and other sources regarding the area shown and isto be used for reference purposes only
The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System GIS Data used to prepare this
map are error free and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational
tracking or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction orprecision in
the depiction of geographic features If errorsordiscrepancies are found please contact 952 227 1107
The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 466 03 Subd 21 2000 and
the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages and expressly
waives all claims and agrees to defend indemnify and hold harmless the City from any and all claims
brought by User its employees or agents orthird parties which arise out of the use s access or useof
data provided
I
Disclaimer
This map is neither alegally recorded map nor asurvey and is not intended to be used as one This
map is acompilation of records information and data located in various city county state and federal
offices and other sources regarding the area shown and isto be used for reference purposes only
The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System GIS Data used to prepare this
map are error free and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational
tracking or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in
the depiction of geographic features If errorsordiscrepancies are found please contact 952 227 1107
The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 466 03 Subd 21 2000 and
the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages and expreSSly
waives all claims and agrees to defend indemnify and hold harmless the City from any and all claims
brought by User its employees or agents orthird parties which arise out of the use s access or use of
data provided
Public Hearing Notification Area 500 feet
Chanhassen Electric Substation
Planning Case No 05 30
2100 Stoughton Avenue
CityofChanhassen
D
Engler Blvd
0
0
IS0
o
o f
1
o
o 0
o 0
T
o III
T J
III T
en III
en
III en
CD
J
ALL STEEL PRODUCTS CO
1165HWY212E
PO BOX 73
CHASKA MN 55318
ALLEN L BRAKEMEIER
450 LAKE VIRGINIA TRL
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
CHASKA GATEWAY LLC
ATTN ALEX A YOUNG
350 ST PETER ST
SUITE 200
ST PAUL MN 55102
FERRELLGAS LP
ATTN TAX DEPT 22
ONE LIBERTY PLAZA
LIBERTY MO 64068
HARRI J RINTA
MADELEINE J WEGNER
18025 KELLY LAKE RD
CARVER MN 55315
ST JOHNS EVANG LUTH CHURCH
300 4TH ST E
CHASKA MN 55318
GARYW DUNGEY
GARY L BROWN LLP
1900 STOUGHTON AVE
CHASKA MN 55318
CHASKA ECONOMIC DEV AUTH
ATTN DAVE POKORNY
1 CITY HALL PLAZA
CHASKA MN 55318
NORTHERN STATES POWER CO
C O PROPERTY TAX DEPT
414 NICOLLET MALL
MINNEAPOLIS MN 55401
M A GEDNEY COMPANY
PO BOX 8
CHASKA MN 55318
Environmental Assessment
for the Proposed Chanhassen 115 kV Substation and
115 kV Transmission Line Tap
Carver County Minnesota
City of Chanhassen
December 2005
Table of Contents
1 0 Introduction 1 1
1 1 Project Location 1 1
1 2 Project Description 1 1
1 3 Project Need 1 5
14 Project Cost Estimate 1 5
1 5 Sources of Information 1 6
2 0 Reg ulatory Framework 2 1
2 1 Permit Requirement 2 1
2 2 Environmental Assessment Requirement 2 1
2 3 Scoping of Environmentallmpacts 2 1
24 Conditional Use Permit 2 2
3 0 Assessment of Impacts and Mitigation 3 1
3 1 Description of Environmental Setting 3 1
3 2 Impacts on Human Settlement 3 1
3 2 1 Socioeconomics 3 1
3 2 2 Displacement 3 1
3 2 3 Noise 3 1
3 2 4 Aesthetics 3 2
3 2 5 Human Health and Safety 3 2
3 3 Impacts on Land based Economies 3 3
3 3 1 Recreation 3 3
3 3 2 Prime Farmland 3 3
3 3 3 Transportation 3 3
3 34 Mining and Forestry 3 4
3 3 5 Archaeological and Historic Resources 3 4
3 4 Natural Environment 3 4
3 4 1 Air Quality 3 4
34 2 Water Resources Wetlands Stormwater and Soils3 4
34 3 Vegetation and Wildlife Rare and Unique Natural
Resources 3 6
4 0 Regulatory Permits and Approvals Required 4 1
5 0 Potential Future Areawide Infrastructure 5 1
5 1 Street Layout and Traffic Analysis 5 1
5 2 Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Service 5 4
5 3 Stormwater Management 5 6
6 0 Anticipated Staging of Various Developments 6 1
Figures
Figure 1 1
Figure 1 2
Figure 1 3
Figure 3 1
Figure 3 2
Figure 5 1
Figure 5 2
Figure 5 3
Figure 5 4
Figure 5 5
Tables
Table 4 1
Table 5 1
Table 5 2
Table 5 3
Appendices
General Vicinity Map 1 2
Project Map 1 3
Substation Plot Plan 1 4
DNR Public Waters Map 3 5
DNR Sensitive Areas Map 3 7
Study Area 5 1
Street Layout A 5 3
Street Layout B 5 4
Study Area Potential Utilities 5 5
Study Area Potential Drainage Plan 5 7
Regulatory Permits and Approvals Required 4 1
Development Assumptions 5 2
Trip Generation 5 2
Potential Pond Characteristics 5 8
Appendix A Legal Notices Correspondence Meeting Minutes
Appendix B Agency Correspondence
ii
List of Acronyms Used in this Document
ACRONYMS
ADT Average Daily Traffic
BMPs Best Management Practices
Commission Minnesota Public Utilities Commission
DNR Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
EA Environmental Assessment
EMF Electromagnetic fields
EQB Minnesota Environmental Quality Board
GRE Great River Energy
kV Kilovolt
LMRWD Lower Minnesota River Watershed District
MPCA Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
MVEC Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NURP Nationwide Urban Runoff Program
RUS Rural Utilities Service
SHPO State Historic Preservation Office
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS United States Geological Survey
Hi
1 0 Introduction
Great River Energy GRE located in Elk River MN provides generation and
transmission to 28 member cooperatives in Minnesota GRE and one of its
cooperatives Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative MVEC are planning to construct
a new substation and high voltage transmission line tap in Chanhassen Carver County
Minnesota Figure 1 1
1 1 Project Location
The new substation and tap will be located on a 2 9 acre site east of Audubon Road
and north of Stoughton Avenue in an industrial area adjacent to the MA Gedney Plant in
Chanhassen Section 3 T115N R23W Chaska Township Carver County The site
includes property previously owned by Xcel Energy The new single circuit 115 kV
transmission line will tap an existing 115 kV transmission line owned by and operated
by Xcel Energy just northeast of the proposed substation site Figure 1 2
1 2 Project Description
The proposed project includes three primary components
MVEC plans to construct a new 115 12 5 kilovolt kV substation to be named the
Chanhassen Substation The substation site will be owned by MVEC and all
distribution facilities will be constructed operated and maintained by MVEC
GRE proposes to construct own and operate approximately 80 feet of 115 kV
transmission line to energize the new substation Figure 1 2 The line will be a
single circuit design and will tap an existing 115 kV transmission line that is
owned and operated by Xcel Energy GRE will also own transmission switching
facilities located in the substation
The Xcel Energy East Chaska Switching Station will be removed
Each of these components is discussed in more detail below
Substation
Electric facilities in the substation will include a 115 12 5 kV distribution transformer
Figure 1 3
Some equipment within the substation is filled with mineral oil for cooling This
equipment will be sitting on concrete pads with three inches of crushed rock covering
the entire fenced in area in the event of an equipment leak Substation sites are
inspected on a monthly basis to check for leaks
1 1
Figure 1 1 General Vicinity Map
PROJECT VICINITY MAP
25
I
La e Rebocca P k eSfllve
I I
I
IFigure 1 11
Anxa Co n1y B f
i
I
al rIl f1
1
J
t aconia
Norooo VOSJlg Anuric J
Mmesolif kJUe RetJge J
F
I
J 1 r
J
I
II
Air1ake
I
2r
93
j
f 7
Jill I
I
I
N
A
No1P 5
1 2
Figure 1 2 Project Map
PROJECT MAP IFigUre 1 21
1
12 County
I c
GRE CoollU atiw Distribution Sub
Non GRE Ovnud Transmisssion Lino
6J kV and Bolow
115 161 kV
230 kV
J45 kV lnd Allovo
Sec
14
I mfb
A
005
2 h at
I
1 3
Figure 1 3 Substation Plot Plan
r aREIICOImD
1 HIliIlg
J
llISTRlllUllOll
SWIrcHc
BUILClIG
CO
200 x 155
a
PRELIMINARY
1 4
It
f MUllatIII
Lr Ii fIT 1LLLLLlIIIt
r J
JIEARTL1 VD
ENGI J RIj
L SFln o
lto4 f lilw IJj
FIGURE 13
SUBSTATlOI1 PLOT PLArt
CHAHHASSErt 5U65TA11orl
MIWlE50TA VALLEY ELECmlC COOPEfiATIlE
JOfiOAtt Mrt
101 RM
oc20505
lolll
Plot PI n d
The substation equipment will be enclosed in a 155 by 200 area situated inside the 2 9
acre parcel A decorative wall stone patterned concrete wall made up of panels and
pillars will be placed on three sides north west and south and a chain link fence will
be placed on the east side Additionally the site will be surrounded with 58 trees and
shrubs as well as various small plantings
The wall and fence will be designed to deter animals and to provide safety and security
Transmission Facilities
The transmission line serving the Chanhassen Substation will be a single circuit design
A single span of wires will run down the transmission corridor and terminate on two
deadend A Frame structures The line will then drop down through switches on to steel
buswork The two A Frame structures will be 65 75 feet tall to match the height of the
existing transmission circuit in the vicinity Each structure will carry three wires and a
separate shield wire for lightning protection
There will be self supporting tapered tubular steel poles and guyed wood structures to
route the transmission conductors in and around the substation
Switchinq Station Removal
The older existing lattice Xcel Energy East Chaska switching station located
immediately adjacent to Stoughton Avenue will be removed as part of the project The
old site will be converted to green space and provide driveway access to the new facility
located further north
All transmission wiring will be reconfigured to route in and around the new Chanhassen
Substation
1 3 Project Need
This project is needed due to rapid growth in the MVEC service territory and associated
increases in electrical load growth The project will improve MVEC system reliability
and provide some backup capabilities to the Bluff Creek and Chaska Tap substations
under emergency conditions The new substation will also help eliminate the present
capacity limitations of these substations
14 Project Cost Estimate
The estimated cost for the MVEC s distribution substation facilities is 1 6 million
including site acquisition site preparation equipment construction and demolition of
the Xcel Energy switching station The estimated costs for GRE s transmission and
substation facilities are 250 000 and 500 000 respectively Total project cost is
estimated to be 2 350 000
1 5
1 5 Sources of Information
Much of the information contained in this document was provided by the applicants or
the applicant s representatives Heartland Engineering Services and Bolton Menk
Inc in the form of the Application for Conditional Land Use Permit for the Chanhassen
Substation and subsequent correspondence
Additional sources of information are listed below
2020 Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan
City of Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance
City of Chaska 2020 Comprehensive Plan
City of Chaska Zoning Ordinance
Minnesota Department of Transportation 2003 Traffic Volumes
1 6
2 0 Regulatory Framework
2 1 Permit Requirement
This project falls under the State of Minnesota s Power Plant Siting Act Minnesota
Statutes 9 116C 51 69 and Minnesota Rules Chapter 4400 for transmission projects
over 100 kV and requires a permit from the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission
Commission However for eligible projects a utility may apply to the local unit of
government that has jurisdiction over the project for approval instead of applying to the
Commission Minn Rules pt 4400 5000 This proposed 115 kV substation project is
eligible for local review
The City of Chanhassen has agreed to act as the lead local unit of government with
jurisdiction to approve the project The City of Chanhassen was afforded the
opportunity to relinquish its jurisdiction by requesting that the Commission assume
jurisdiction but has elected to maintain jurisdiction of the project As required by Minn
Rules pt 4400 5000 Subp 3 a project notice was sent to those persons on the Power
Plant Siting General Notification list see Appendix A
2 2 Environmental Assessment Requirement
In accordance with Minn Rules pt 4400 5000 Subp 5 an environmental assessment
EA prepared by the local unit of government with jurisdiction over the project must be
completed The EA contains information on the human and environmental impacts of
the proposed project and addresses methods to mitigate such impacts
When the EA is complete the City of Chanhassen must publish a notice in the
Environmental Quality Board EQB Monitor that the EA is available for review how a
copy of the document may be reviewed that the public may comment on the document
and the procedure for submitting comments to the City A final decision on the project
cannot be made until at least ten days after the notice appears in the EQB Monitor
2 3 Scoping of Environmental Impacts
The rules require that the public be afforded the opportunity to participate in developing
the scope of the EA before it is prepared The City of Chanhassen held a meeting on
November 15 2005 to obtain input from the public on the scope of the EA A notice of
the meeting was published in the Chanhassen Villager and a copy of the notice was
direct mailed to interested parties and residents near the proposed project see
Appendix A One member of the public attended the meeting a member of the
Cemetery Board but did not offer comment on the project
2 1
24 Conditional Use Permit
The City of Chanhassen requires a Conditional Use Permit for this project MVEC
submitted a Conditional Use Permit Application to the City of Chanhassen on
September 2 2005 The City of Chanhassen will hold a public hearing on January 3
2006 regarding MVEC and GRE s request for a Conditional Use Permit The City of
Chanhassen will make a decision on the application after notice of the EA has been
published in the EQB Monitor and the comment period requirements have been met
2 2
3 0 Assessment of Impacts and Mitigation
This is a small project located in an industrial area and impacts to the environment are
expected to be minimal and short term therefore little mitigation will be required MVEC
and GRE will minimize negative environmental impacts during construction of the
project
Correspondence relative to environmental conditions at the proposed site and
responses received from state and federal agencies that reviewed the project are
provided in Appendix B
3 1 Description of Environmental Setting
The proposed substation project is located in an area zoned Office Industrial The
parcel purchased for the substation is currently undeveloped and land use in adjacent
parcels is as follows
West side of the property MA Gedney Plant
North side of the property undeveloped
East side of the property cemetery
South side of the property Stoughton Avenue
3 2 Impacts on Human Settlement
3 2 1 Socioeconomics
The local economy is based primarily on office industrial businesses which employ over
8 000 people Approximately 5 10 workers will be required for construction of the new
substation and tap line During construction there would be a small impact on the local
community due to revenue created from expenditures of the construction crew local
community services hotels restaurants construction materials No permanent jobs
will be created by this project
3 2 2 Displacement
The new substation and transmission line tap will not cause the displacement of any
residence and will not affect any public services The substation will be set back
approximately 200 feet north of Stoughton Avenue The only residences in the area are
south of Stoughton Avenue and are at a much lower elevation and therefore will not be
affected by the project
3 2 3 Noise
The proposed substation will be designed and constructed to comply with State of
Minnesota noise standards It has been determined that there will be negligible noise at
3 1
the property boundaries The substation transformer will be designed in accordance
with ANSI standards
3 24 Aesthetics
The substation and transmission line as designed will have little impact on aesthetics of
the area This is an industrial area with many transmission lines therefore the new
substation will not significantly alter the existing character of the area The site currently
consists of grasses and minimal tree cover many of which are dead or dying The
aesthetics will actually be improved along Stoughton Avenue when the existing Xcel
Energy East Chaska switching station is removed as part of this project
The new substation facility will be set back from the road and will not be within the
viewshed of residences along Stoughton Avenue as those residences are at a much
lower elevation south of the road The substation equipment area will be enclosed with
a decorative wall on three sides north west and south and a chain link fence on the
east side Additionally the site will be surrounded with 58 trees and shrubs as well as
various small plantings
3 2 5 Human Health and Safety
No threats to public health and safety are anticipated for this project All facilities will be
constructed in accordance with all applicable standards including standards of the
Rural Utilities Service RUS the National Electric Safety Code and other industry
standards Construction personnel will be required to follow Occupational Safety and
Health Administration regulations Other safety measures such as warning signs
fencing and gates will be utilized as needed
Electric and Maqnetic Fields
Questions often arise about electric and magnetic fields EMF which are invisible lines
of force that surround any electrical device The term EMF refers to electric and
magnetic fields that are coupled together such as in high frequency radiating fields For
lower frequencies such as for power lines EMF should be separated into electric fields
and magnetic fields Transmission lines operate at a frequency of 60 hertz cycles per
second which is in the non ionizing portion of the electromagnetic frequency spectrum
Fields are considered ionizing when they cause electrons to eject from their orbits
around a normal atom This will typically occur with frequencies in the range of 1016 to
1022 hertz
Magnetic fields result from the flow of electricity current in the transmission line The
intensity of the magnetic field is related to the current flow through the conductors The
magnetic field associated with the transmission line surrounds the conductor and rapidly
decreases with the distance from the conductor The value of the magnetic field density
is expressed in the unit of gauss or milligauss
3 2
The most recent and exhaustive studies of the health effects from power frequency
fields conclude that the evidence of health risk is weak Some of these studies are
listed below
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 2002 EMF Electric and
Magnetic Fields Associated with the Use of Electric Power National Institutes of
Health
National Research Council 1997 Possible Health Effects of Exposure to
Residential Electric and Magnetic Fields
Minnesota Department of Health 2002 EMF White Paper on Electric and
Magnetic Field EMF Policy and Mitigation Options
Electric and Magnetic Fields EMF Environmental Health in Minnesota
http www health state mn us divs eh radiation emf
For this project the overall EMF impact will not change at the property lines With the
retirement of the Xcel Energy East Chaska Switching Station the overall EMF readings
on the property are anticipated to decrease closer to the road In the area of the new
substation the EMF will increase slightly with new transformer and distribution facilities
3 3 Impacts on Land based Economies
3 3 1 Recreation
The proposed project is not near any recreational areas and will not affect recreational
opportunities
3 3 2 Prime Farmland
The Natural Resources Conservation Service NRCS was contacted regarding soil
resources in the vicinity of the project In a letter dated May 4 2005 the NRCS
indicated that the proposed construction will not affect any prime farmland soils or land
of statewide importance
3 3 3 Transportation
The site will have a paved entrance located in the area of the gravel entrance currently
serving the existing Xcel Energy switching station This entrance will provide access
from Stoughton Avenue an existing city street No offsite roadway improvements will
be needed for equipment delivery The proposed project is approximately six miles
from the nearest airport Flying Cloud Airport The United States Geological Survey
USGS elevation at the project site is 760 feet while the airport elevation is 900 feet or
nearly 140 feet higher The project will therefore not be a hazard to aviation
3 3
3 34 Mining and Forestry
There are no mining or forestry areas in the vicinity of the project
3 3 5 Archaeological and Historic Resources
The Minnesota Historical Society State Historic Preservation Office SHPO was
contacted about the presence of archaeological historical or architectural resources
located on or near the site In a letter dated May 13 2005 SHPO indicated that no
historic properties eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places will be
affected by this project
34 Natural Environment
34 1 Air Quality
Because electric substations and transmission lines do not affect air quality there will
be no long term environmental impacts on the air Temporary air quality impacts would
be expected to occur during the construction phase of the project However adverse
impacts to the surrounding environment will be minimal because of the short and
intermittent nature of the emission and dust producing construction phase
34 2 Water Resources Wetlands Stormwater and Soils
No impacts to water resources are anticipated The substation site does not contain
any existing wetlands or have any impact on groundwater or other surface waters
The US Army Corps of Engineers USACE was contacted regarding this project and in
an e mail response dated August 25 2005 the USACE indicated no permit or other
approvals were required
There are no Minnesota Department of Natural Resources DNR Public Waters in the
vicinity of the project Figure 3 1
The stormwater runoff drainage patterns from the proposed site will mimic the existing
conditions of the land The majority of the site will drain to an infiltration area which will
retain the volume of runoff produced from a 6 rainfall event The site overflows to the
southwest and ultimately to the Minnesota River
The proposed site will require some grading Minimal erosion may occur at the site
during construction but erosion and sediment will be controlled on site with all
3 4
TI
9
11
WI
W
JI
a
0
a
rt
Il
c
0
Figure 3 1 DNR PWI Map
l I
I
35
v
23 w
3 5
appropriate best management practices BMPs in place for the duration of the
construction activity The site meets the design standards of local state and federal
agencies and an NPDES permit application will be submitted to the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency prior to construction initiation
A Phase II Environmental Site Assessment conducted by Braun Intertec reported no
conditions at the site that would require special environmental regulatory actions
34 3 Vegetation and Wildlife Rare and Unique Natural Resources
The DNR and the United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service
USFWS were contacted regarding vegetation and wildlife resources in the vicinity of
the project
In a letter of April 25 2005 the DNR indicated that there are a number of rare species
or natural communities in the general project area However based on the nature and
location of the proposed project it will not affect any known occurrences of rare features
Figure 3 2
The USFWS e mail of April 13 2005 indicated that the bald eagle is documented to
nest in Carver County However given the location not within areas with known
nesting bald eagles and type of activity proposed it is not likely to adversely affect any
federally listed species
Effects on area wildlife will be minimal The substation is designed to deter animal
entry
3 6
Figure 3 2 DNR Sensitive Areas Map
3 7
Figure 3 2 Sensitive Areas
Shakopee 1 24 000 U S G S Quadrangle DNR Code S 15d
Includes portions of Carver Scott and Hennepin Counties
t r fT
C ter of Stn lrw a
Cwrler of SetlMlt P1I
C r 04 snM NwMINu
Center ot 9n1katlt 1 PIa1I ClfrlllliUOlNMS
ua P rw IL t
Major Rod1
oCount VllMrRllltda
cJ Townstlp ltnes RMOldS
sction Ni
o Oudr bOII
0I9 1lI
n 4 h 14
UR N53
IlIJllcl J
lfIfTllQ IfoUS 1HJQIl tAl JIII
ronc at
l l lUut rtO nc
llow t
t
c IU
eoI
MipGR d rI2 1lllr HlUPlant CornmunUeI
orwy
o 0e1l9 1r9 An
ignlkaFtIf1dPI1IIr RIiMot WAtas
3 8
4 0 Regulatory Permits and Approvals Required
Permit requirements or approvals anticipated for this project and the status of each are
shown below in Table 4 1
Table 4 1 Regulatory Permits and Approvals Required
Government Unit Type of Approval Regulated Activity Status
USDA Rural Utilities Environmental Review Construction of 115 kV transmission Environmental
Service RUS line and 115 12 5 kV substation Review for substation
sent to RUS on
9 8 05 approval in
process
US Dept of Interior Threatened and Review of records for federally No federally listed
Fish and Wildlife Endangered Species threatened or endangered species species will be
Service Review that may exist at or near the affected by the
substation site or transmission project e mail dated
facilities 4 13 05
US Dept of the Army Wetland and Review navigable water and the Proposed work does
Corps of Engineers Waterways Review dredging or filling of US waters not require permit or
including wetlands other Corps of
Engineers approval
e mail of 8 25 05
MN Dept of Natural Environmental Review Comprehensive review of substation The project will not
Resources DNR Wetlands Water site impacts affect rare features
Threatened and letter of 4 25 05
Endanqered Species
USDA Natural Environmental Review Prime farmlands and land of The construction will
Resources Soil Resources statewide importance not affect prime
Conservation Service farmlands or land of
statewide importance
letter of 5 4 05
MN Historical Society SHPO Review of Historic preservation No historic properties
State Historic Nationally Registered will be affected by the
Preservation Office Historic Places project letter of
SHPO 5 13 05
City of Chanhassen Conditional Use Construction of new facilities Application in
Perm it process
City of Chaska Driveway Access Application will be
Perm it made once project is
approved
Minnesota Pollution National Pollutant Stormwater Pollution Prevention Application will be
Control Agency Discharge Elimination Plan SWPPP and stormwater made once project is
MPCA System NPDES permit required for disturbance of approved
Perm it one acre or more
4 1
5 0 Potential Future Areawide Infrastructure
The study area described below lies within both the City of Chaska and the City of
Chanhassen As shown in Figure 5 1 Areas 1 and 2 are in Chanhassen and Areas 3
and 4 are in Chaska The proposed substation site lies within the easternmost part of
Area 2 with the proposed access drive through the southwesterly corner of Area 4
Based on both cities Land Use Guide Plans and Zoning Maps the entire area was
analyzed to determine the feasibility of future development in this area and how public
services could be provided to enable future development to take place An analysis of
the traffic impacts and public utilities that would be needed for a feasible future
development scenario using all of the potentially developable land in this area is included
below
5 1 Street Layout and Traffic Analysis
The area is bordered by US Highway 212 on the north and east by Stoughton Avenue
on the south and by Audubon Road on the west A strip of land that is abandoned
railroad right of way bisects the area The Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority
owns the eastern end of this strip of land and it is currently not developed with a trail A
regional recreational trail east of US Highway 212 is constructed and operated by Three
Rivers Park District The Chaska Economic Development Authority and MA Gedney
Company own the balance of the abandoned right of way
Table 5 1 identifies the current zoning classifications and general land use development
assumptions for developing trip generation and general distribution assumptions Figure
5 1 illustrates Areas 1 4 described in the table
5 1
Table 5 1 Development Assumptions
Impervious Surface
Zoning Acres Maximum Estimated Estimated Land Use Type s
Area City Symbol Chanhassen Building Floor Space Sq Ft Per UseDistrictTotalFloorAreaRatioHeightsqft
Chaska
60 Auto Vehicle
Sales
1 Chanhassen Fringe BF 18 3 40 1 story 80 000 40 ColdBusiness
Storage
Warehousinq
Industrial 25 Office
2 Chanhassen Office lOP 23 1 70 2 story 175 000 75 Industrial
Park Warehousing
50 Office
3 Chaska Industrial I 18 2 0 5 2 story 200 000 50 Industrial
Warehousing
7 8 04 NA 0 Cemetery
Medium None proposed
4 Chaska Density R2 to provide accessResidence0504NA0tosubstation
property
In a Planned Industrial Development District there is the opportunity for a maximum floor area ratio of up to 2 0 for a single lot provided
he entire District does not exceed 75 Lot coveraqe bv buildinqs shall be no more than 40 of the lot
Table 5 2 shows 6 754 trips will be generated by the assumed land uses Based on
existing travel patterns it has been assumed that 19 2 of the trips will go to or from
Audubon Road 16 5 to from Engler Boulevard 314 to from the west on Highway 212
29 6 to from the east on Highway 212 and 3 3 to from the west on Stoughton Avenue
Table 5 2 Trip Generation
ITE Trip Generation Estimated Rate Per 1 000 Total TripsAreaFloorSpaceSqFtofFloorCode
sq ft Space Generated
1 841 Auto Vehicle Sales 48 000 33 34 1 601
1 150 Warehouse 32 000 4 96 469
2 710 General Office 43 750 11 01 706
2 130 Industrial Park 131 250 6 96 1 399
3 710 General Office 100 000 11 01 1 335
3 130 Industrial Park 100 000 6 96 1 244
5 2
Based on the 2003 annual average daily traffic ADT volumes and land use assumptions
outlined above traffic volumes were developed for two different internal street layout
alternatives The internal street layout options and corresponding ADT are illustrated in
Figures 5 2 and 5 3
5 3
With either of these street layouts along with the existing road network the additional
traffic demand could be accommodated and it is anticipated that vehicle related air
emissions would remain at acceptable MPCA levels
5 2 Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Service
The majority of the area studied does not currently have utility services nearby The
exception is the Gedney factory in the southwestern most portion of Chanhassen which
has sanitary sewer and water service provided by the City of Chaska
The City of Chanhassen s comprehensive plan indicates that a gravity sewer extending
from a future lift station located between Bluff Creek Drive and Highway 101
approximately 5 500 feet to the northeast would service the sanitary needs of the
Chanhassen portion of the study area This sewer and the extended sewer needed to
serve the remainder of the study area are shown in Figure 5 4 The 59 6 acres of future
office industrial land use not including the cemetery area yield a projected daily peak flow
rate of 125 gallons per minute This indicates that an 8 gravity sanitary line at minimum
grade can adequately service the Chanhassen portion of the study area as well as the
land in Chaska if desired
5 4
Figure 5 4 Study Area Potential Drainage Plan
ENCLER ROAD
I
I I I I
41lfI
01
4
r l
IC i
Sl
STUDY
9OONOAAY
f
F
r
t
ow
WlOiD
OIWN SNrNlr 1lMlI
flMl
SHTNrI COUP PlM
1 r COWO IUH
St 1 lDlIlN alW PAH
MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE
CHANHASSEN SUBSTATION
STUDY AREA POTENTIAL UnUTIES
OECE 8ER 2005 FIGURE NO 5 4IBOLTONMENKINC
Consulting ngln at Su yors
MANKATO r NT uat SlfEY EtE MlUlAR WN
ufo 0t0SIA Md3
H rc t 2P31 1 CO fo lUES 4 2 01 2005 Y56 P
5 5
The Chanhassen portion of the study area is within the Lower Bluff Pressure Zone as
identified in the water distribution figure of the City of Chanhassen s comprehensive plan
This figure shows a future 12 watermain extending west from Bluff Creek Drive which
has been reproduced in Figure 5 4 This main or perhaps a smaller size pipe depending
on the fireflow requirements of the City could be extended further west to serve the
remainder of the study area including the Gedney property This scenario would provide
an undesirable dead end in the water system unless the piping was looped back to the
main which may prove too costly to be feasible Another and perhaps more economical
option is for the City of Chanhassen to enter into an agreement with the City of Chaska to
provide water service to the area in question
The portion of the study area within the City of Chaska was considered for water service
during the recent development process of adjacent land to the west That development
Chaska Gateway installed a 12 watermain which would provide adequate flows to the
current study area
5 3 Stormwater Management
The study area is within the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District LMRWD which
requires that runoff discharge rates after development are equal to or less than the
existing flow rates leaving the site The LMRWD does not have its own permitting
process but instead relies on the local governmental units to monitor the development
activity for compliance
It is assumed that the future development of the study area will manage and treat
stormwater runoff through the construction of retention or wet sedimentation basins to the
design standards of the nationwide urban runoff program NURP For the purposes of
this study a regional approach to stormwater management has been assumed That is
an attempt has been made to minimize the amount of ponding through consolidation and
strategic placement of the basins These basins would provide permanent treatment of
the runoff and would be maintained as per the City s comprehensive stormwater
management plan
As shown in Figure 5 5 three potential ponding locations have been identified from the
ten foot contours of the USGS quadrangle maps Pond 1 is proposed to treat runoff from
the western portion of the Chanhassen area prior to discharging to the west Ponds 2 and
3 would discharge to the east after treating water from the eastern Chanhassen property
and Chaska property respectively These basins have been roughly sized for potential
future land uses to provide the NURP recommended dead pool storage volumes as
shown in Table 5 3
5 6
Figure 5 5 Study Area Potential Drainage Plan
ENGLER ROAD
1 1
o
4
I
I
IIlO 0 100
rwl
1CNt lUT
lEIlfljQ
DIWot
RrnNTlON FU1URQ
0Ilx BQXWf nrnooQ
STUDY
BOUNDAAY
BOLTON MENK INC
Conlultlng Engln ra 4 SU Y2
NKAfO FJRMONT WIN su tPY M
lE WN WN lA
MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE
CHANHASSEN SUBSTATION
STUDY AREA POTENTIAl DRAINAGE PLAN
DECEMBER 2005 FIGURE NO 5 5
H U c97 73fJ OO EAO II JjjJS D lOCO ft
5 7
Table 5 3 Potential Pond Characteristics
NURP Pond
Volume1 Surface2
1 0 Area Cac Future eN Cac ft Area Cac
Pond 1 21 9 80 6 1 68 0 37
Pond 2 27 8 734 1 34 0 29
Pond 3 18 2 85 7 1 85 0 39
Assumes 70 max impervious area in Chanhassen cemetery remains
2 Normal Water Level Area
The study area contains approximately 67 9 acres of Hydrologic Soil Group Type A soils
primarily consisting of Hubbard and Alluvial soils These soils are very well drained and
provide for some of the highest infiltration rates in Carver County Because of this it is
recommended that future development planning consider infiltration techniques in addition
to or in lieu of the wet sedimentation basins described above These measures could
include infiltration swales and basins rock trenches as well as vegetated swales and rain
gardens The design of these techniques is dependent upon an in depth site analysis and
would occur as part of a detailed development process The 2 5 acre site being
considered for the MVEC substation will control runoff rates and minimize runoff volume
through the construction of an infiltration basin This basin will infiltrate 15 700 cubic feet
of runoff prior to overflowing to the southwest
All construction activity will utilize the appropriate BMPs to minimize erosion and sediment
transport during construction If more than one acre of land is disturbed a SWPPP will be
developed and the associated NPDES permit obtained
5 8
6 0 Anticipated Staging of Various Developments
MVEC is anticipating the construction of the new Chanhassen Substation along with
GRE s high voltage transmission line tap in time to meet the peak power demand of early
summer 2006 The other possible development scenarios analyzed in Section 5 0 will not
likely occur until well into the future The Business Fringe zoning district designation for
Area 1 is intended to accommodate limited commercial uses temporary in nature without
urban services while maintaining the integrity minimizing impact and protecting the
natural environment Because there is no schedule for providing urban services to this
area from those existing in Chanhassen any potential development would need to provide
their own private on site systems This would likely be cost prohibitive at least into the
foreseeable future Area 2 which includes the existing Gedney factory would be very
expensive to redevelop and this also is not likely in the foreseeable future There may be
a possibility for new development of the northerly 6 2 acres of the separate parcel of
Gedney owned property however the City of Chaska may not have sewer capacity for any
additional development that is not within their city
Area 3 is in the City of Chaska and water service would be available from the Chaska
Gateway development on the north side of US Highway 212 however sewer service
availability is questionable This area could be sewered through the City of Chanhassen
as indicated in Section 5 2 but this would not likely occur for many years If sewer
capacity is available through Chaska s existing system there would be considerable
expense involved with the necessary extension under US Highway 212 and possibly the
need for a lift station Therefore future development of Area 3 does not appear to be a
very near term possibility
Area 4 is an existing cemetery in the City of Chaska except for the small parcel in the
southwest corner that is owned by Xcel Energy No change in use is expected although
access to the proposed substation site would be through the Xcel Energy parcel
Any future development that would occur would involve modification of the ground
topography to accommodate new roads drives buildings utilities and stormwater
management facilities Due to the relatively flat terrain no significant amount of earth
moving is anticipated
6 1
APPENDIX A
LEGAL NOTICES
CORRESPONDENCE
CITY QIo CIIANIIASSEN
CARVER HENNEPIN COUNTIES
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
1 AN1lNG CASE NO 05 30
NffilCE IS IIEREny GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a
public hearing on Tuesday November IS 2005 at 7 00 p rn in the Council Chambers in
Chanhasscn City Hall 7700 Market Blvd The purpose of litis hearing is 10 determine Ihe scope
of an Enlronmmtal AS5elmlent requesl for a Conditional Use Permit with Variunc es and a
Site Plan Re lew application to construct a local electric dlstnhution substation on property
zoned Industrial Office Park located east of the Gedney Pickle plant north of Stoughton A venue
and south of Flying Cloud Drive Applic3ll1 Minnesota Valley Electric
A plan showing the location of Ihe proposal is available for public review at City Hall
during regular business hours All interested perons are invittA1to attend this public hearing and
eltptcss their opinions with respect to Ihis proposal
Shalmccn AI Jill Senior Planner
Email iafr@ci chanhassen mn us
Phone 952 227 1134
Publish in Ihe Chanhassen Villager on November 3 205
rt
L lJ
CRFAT IER
14 ERe Y
11 0 1 l F t 1 I 11 1 r 7C 2 1
September 14 2005 WO 118241
Dr BL rl W Haar
Execu ive Secret3ry
1 1nna50t3 Public Utilities Ccmmission
121 i PI3ce ELlst Suite 350
Sl P3ul r N 55101
SUBJECT Chanhassen Substation and115 kV Transmission Line Project
Delr Dr H3ar
In 3ccord3i1Ce with the Power Plont Siting Act this letter serves 3S the required notice to the
r iinnasota PubLe Utilitios Commission Commission Ihal Minnesota V31ey Electric Cooperative
r WEC has elected to seek local approvLlI for the construction of l new 115 kV subs ation in
Ch3nh3ssen rtnnesota
Tha rroposed substatio1 would be locoted within the city limits of Chanhassen in Carver
County r VEC will own the substation and GRE will own the one sp m tap into tt18 substJtion
The new focility will meet the growing e1ectric2 1 demand clOd improve the service cJnd
rclibi ity of electric facilities in the mea A foel sheet thot provides more detl on the project
is enclosed
Gre3t River Energy wholes3le power supplier to MVEC wiil ossist r 1VEC and the City of
Ctl2 nhCJssen with the permitting process MVEC submitted l Conditional Use Permit application
to the City of Chanhssen on September 2 2005 The City of Cl1anhassen has been informed
that thy twve 60 days to refer tho permitting process to tho Comm ssion
Ouestions mgarding this project should hp riircrlr d to Dennis IVolf r 1VEC VP Special Projects
ot 952 492 8260 Sharmccn AI Jaff Senior Pldnncr at the City of Chanhassen at 952 227 1100
or me ot 763 2 1 2367 Thank you for your attention to this mZltter
Sincerely
GREAT RIV
C
Enclosure
CC Gener31 List of Interested Persons wenc1
Denny Wo r MVEC w enel
DeboriJh Pi e DepClrlment of Commerce wlencl
cp 1 IIC s Chl C n Ch3 fl JU u l commltr d
D rcCI Did 763 241 2367 E Jil cpoorkcr grcncrgy com fAX 763 241 6167
Of C f f I I l
T Jl L ELl CIlTti t e
85 7th Place East Suite 500
St Paul Minnesota 55101 2198
651296 4026 FAX 651 297 1959 TTY 651 297 3067
September 20 2005
Craig Poorker
GrClt River Energy
17845 1St Hwy 10 PO Box 800
Elk River MN 55330 0800
Ron Jabs
Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative
125 Minnesota Valley Electric Drive
Jordan MN 55352
Sharrneen AI Jaff Senior Planner
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
Chanhassen MN 55317
RE Chanhasscn Substation and liS kV Transmission line Project
Dear Sirs
This letter confinns that the Public Utilities Commission PUCI has received notification that
Grcat River Energy GRE and Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative MVEC propose to seek
local review to build a new 115 kV Substation and a one span section of 115 kV HVTL tapping
into an existing GRE 115 kV line The project would be constructed in the City ofOlanhasscn
in Carver County
This project falls under the Power Plant Siting Act Minnesota Statutes 116C51 69 and
Minnesota Rules Chapter 4400 which requires a penn it from the PUC for most transmission line
projects over 100 kV However for eligible projects a utility may apply to those local units of
government that have jurisdiction over the route for approval to build the project instead of
applying to the PUC The proposed 115 kV substation and transmission project is eligible for
local review Minnesota Statutes 9 116C 576 and Minnesota Rules 4400 5000 subps 2 C D
GRE and MVEC have indicated that the City ofChanhassen is the only local unit of government
with jurisdiction in permitting the proje t and that a Omditional Use Pennit application wa
submitted to the City on September 2 2005 A local unit of government may relinquish its
jurisdiction by requesting the pue to assume jurisdiction within 60 days of the filing of an
application with the local unit of government Minnesota Rules 4400 5000 subp 4
I On July 1 2005 Minnesota Senate File t368 transferred generation plant siting and lransmissiollline routing
authority from the Minnesota Emironmental Quality Board to the Public Utilities Commission EQB routing and
siting staff was transferred to the Department of Commerce and continue to m31U1gc the application process
Market Assurance 1 800 657 3602
Energy Information 1 800 657 3710
www commerce 5tate mn us
licensing 1 800 657 3978
UnclaImed Property 1 800 925 5668
An Equal OpportunIty Employer
Craig PoorkerlShannecn AI JaffRon Jabs
September 20 2005
Page 2
An environmental assessment must be prepared by the local unit ofgovernment withjurisdiction
over the project acknowledge that the City ofChanhassen is the Responsible Government Unit
for the Chanhassen Substation and 115 kV Transmission line Project
Specific requirements with regard to the environmental review process include providing an
opportunity for the public to participate in the development of the scope oftlle environmental
assessment before it is prepared publishing notice in the EQB Monitor of when the assessment
is available for review and ufthe procedure for commenting on the assessment and withholding
a final decision on the project until at least ten days after the notice appears in the EQll Monitor
The City of Chanhassen also must provide a copy of the environmental assessment to the PUC
when it is completed Minnesota Rules 44005000 subp 5
GRE and MVEC have sent the required notice to those persons on the PUC facilities permitting
general notification list that a permit has been applied for from the local unit of government
Milmesota Rules 4400 5000 subp 3
If there areany other questions please feel free to contact me by phone or email
s
DAVID BIRKHOLZ
Energy Facilities Permitting
Department of Commerce
85 ih Place Ea l Suite 500
Saint Paul MN 55101 2198
P 651296 2878
F 651 297 7891
david birkholz@Statc mn us
APPENDIX B
AGENCY
CORRESPONDENCE
UAitllld Sbtn DlIIparttrWtnt of AJricultu
NRCS
Na t ra Resorces CorsorvaLcn SihS
6120 EuQ Orlrtm Orivo Rm G50
Hro I n Center MN 554 104
70 Cars Phone 7CJ G 241
FAX 763 e 341Xl
1 lltlrtri r CJNm ic Si t 19J1
ro fay 4 2005
Heather Nelson
Heartland Engineering Services
PO Box 330
Rockford rrn 55373
Rc Enironment l Rcview of the proposed Chmh ssen Substation
Minnesota Valley Electric Coopemtivc
Jordan Minnesota
HES Project No 240118
Dear Ml Nelson
This letter is in regards to your request for N ReS to rcview the project referenced above It
is the responsibility oftlle USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service to monitor the effects of
Federal programs or money on thc conversion of fannland to nonagricultural uscs through the
Farmland Protection Policy Act Public Law 97 98 Dec 22 1981 NRCS has completed an
analysis of the ite Enclosed is a mOlp with the soil information The proposed site did nottan
any prime farmland soils or land ofstltewide importimcc that will be lffcctcd by the construction
If the proposed site includeS soil topes other thm PA Sparta A slope or PB Sparta D slope please
contact ouroffice to dctcrmite if Ou need to complete a Fmnland Conversion Impact Rating form
Ifthe NRCS can he of any funher assistance please contact our office at 763 566 2941
Sincerely
dk
Peter Weikle
Ar Resource Soil Scientist
The N tlI191 lurees Call sm rfOoi dtl ktdmhp in pll11r ni ffort to k
e 1lSttn ai1tl uJ irpro l OJr rJtJflll rcrotJrtcS aI crvironrn l1t
An l l On l jty JrCO Icr j Errpl
Carver County
section 34 T 116 N R 23 W
section 3 T 115 N R 23 W
400 0 400 800 Feet
I
Scale 1 7920
a mile
N
Carver County
section 34 T 116 N R 23 W
section 3 T 115 N R 23 W
400
l
o 400 800 Feet
1
Scale 1 4000
N
11
MINESOTA HISTOmCAL or mfY
STATE HISTORiC Pm5ERVATlON OFFICE
May 13 2005
Ms Heather Nelson
Heartland Engireering Services
PO Box 330
Rockford MN 55373
RE Minnesota VaUey Efectric Coopera ve proposed Char hassen Substation
T116 R23 534 Char hns5Cn Twp Carver County
SHPQ Number 2005 1743
Dear Ms Nelson
Thnnk you for the cpportL nity to re ew and comrrcnt on the above project It has been reviEw ed
pursuant to the responsbn ies given the Stn His oric Preservation Officcr by the National Hislcric
Pmcrvalon Act of 1966 nnd the Procedures of tho Advisory Counc1 en H storic PreselVn on
3GCfR6CO
Based on alJa ab e Irlfcm3tlon wo cxmclude that no properties eligible for or listed on tho Na onal
Reg ster of Historic Places are wthin tho prc cct s area of effect
P1CISO contact Dennis Gimmcstad at 651 296 5462 if you have any questions regarding our
review of this project
S ncQfcly
ALU l10jJ iJ
Britta L Dloomberg
Deputy Stale Historic Prescrvl Dn O ficer
3 15lVlIc bnI fsi llml Mir hU Sl l l o ryttp1Il 1 6 2 612
I
Heather Nelson Heartland Engnr
I
I
I
Page I of I
From Curtis Cordt Engineer
Sent Thursday AUJust 25 20052 17 PM
To Hcather Nelson Heartland Engnr
Subject FV MVEC Chanhassen SubslJt on ER Approval RtqUest
A CnYp If e iYl
rom Vanta Joseph J MV mli to joseph J yantl mvp02 uSlCearmy miIJntThursdayAl19ust252005209PM
0 Curtis Cordt Engir eer
Subject RE WEe Chantmsen Submltion rn Approval Request
a proposed ChanhLlssen Substation SE 1 4 Sec 34 T 116 N R 23 W Carver County does not rcqu re a permit orol eraJpoasfromheCorpsofEngneers
m Curtis Codt Engineer m3Hto ccorcl@WHEORG
nt Thursday August 25 2005 1 47 PM
I 0 Vanta Joseph J I VP
Ir H athcr Nelson HMrtlarnl fognrrUbjectMVECChantJlSset1SuYitatfon ER Apnuval Request
Joe
im lar to last the last subsa ioo r ucst we are seeking to uild a substation in the Ch1nhassen Arca which is in Carver CcuntyWehavereceivedpost1veresponsesfromalllheotcrgenciescorlaetedclCceplnoresJcnsefromLieCcrpCourdycupleasheckoyertheseITlleriasnndgetbacktousTharks
fUrl
Curtis Cordt P E
iilnager
lartl3nd Engineering Servicos
hone No 763 4773076
Emllfl Addreu ndcstOXFIDENTIALNOTICEThismessage contains information that may be confidential and pri ileged Unless youIrelheaddresseeJOllmaynotlisecopyordisclosetoanyonethemessageorinfonnationcontainedinthismessajcfoureceivedthisrncss1geinerrorpleaseadisethesenderbyreplyemailanddeletethemcsage
I
I
I
I
19 08 2005
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Minncsot
a R i cio rccs
seo Lab Road
Sf raul Ijr re ncl5 155 40ner652967863bx65t296UlllE tl it aJ hofr J@drsLlI eU1 U
April 25 2005
Ms Ile lIhrr Nelson
He mla lll Engineellng Services
10 Box 10
6800 Electric Drive
Rockford Mi 55373
Re Requ 5t for Natural HC ritaeinfen Jtion fer vicinity of proposed Chmhassen Subm tion TI J5KIU3WScction3CanerCounty
lHNRP Contact it ERDIl 20050745
De1r Ms Nel5on
PIC a cnotetlut wc cctcctw b t we beliew to be n error in tlle Township and SCctioninfonnationasitwasdescrihcdintheEnvironmentalReviewreportnccauthelocationdscript on in
the report did not exactly fJlch the pmject a olltEr ell en the map tJ e e c1oscd se ch results are for the
all1 indicated Cl1the map as listed in the subjc clline of this letter If he location description of YOJr
projctarea as Ii led aco c is in error please COfllact me
The fHnnc sota Natufll JIerilagc dat3ba e has ccen rel ieed to deteJmine if my rare pbator
l nimal species or other significilr t nJturU fejtun arc known to ocCllr within an appro dmate on milc
rJdiu Qf the ureOi ir di rcd cn Ihe m p enclosed with your infoIlltllion reqaest na d in thi t vJew there
are 24 known occurrllCCcSof rare pecilsor naUll ll clltmities in Ihe area seardlcd for detai se
encloscd database printout and e Imation of selected ficlds lJOilvcr based he nature Jlld tocationllftheI1rooscetlprnjmIdonothdieiCitwillaffect3nyknonceulTncesoCrrcfeanres
lbe Natural IkritlgC databa c is m1 rtained h the NJturalllCril3gc md f onlame ResCJrChIrogramaunitwithintheUhisiollofrcoloicJlSerceOCpaItJlletltofNauralResourcesItis
wlllinuaJly updated as new infonnation occomt s lvaillhle and is the lllOU complete wurce of dlltl onMinnesotasrareorotlcrwisesijllifiCill1tspedesnatur1ccrnrnunir1esanduthcrnaturalCellurcslis
J11 rpose is to fo lcr better u1def tandjng a lJ prulCction of the e CeJturcs
Becau e ourinformation is net based Oil a comJ1rehlIhem en cry Llerc lIlay be rare or
otheniesignifiean natllml features in the stitc tht are not rcl sented in the database A county by
county sUtyof mrc natural fel tures is now underway and bs been completed for Carv r County Our
information lOOut naltral communities is therefore quite thorough for that conty However occ mse
survey work for rare pl31lard animals is less exhaustive and because tllerthas not been an on site surveyofalllreasofthecountyecnloEicnllysignificantfcauresforwhicbwehavenorecordsmayexistonthe
project area
The enclosed resul of the datJJJ e earch lrc proided in two formals index and full record To
control the release of locational infcm131ion which might result in the dama or destrUction of a rareelementhothprintoutflll1DatsarccopTightcd
The intlcpw ides rare feature lrxations only to the nCJrcst secticm and rIl j be reprintedunalteredinallEllvirotmcntalssemntWorksbeetmunicipalnaturalresorccplJJlorreportcompiledbyyourcompanyfortheprojectlistedabovcIfyowishtoreproducetlcindexforan other
purpose pr asc conlaCt me to request yrittcn permis ion Th full rerord printout Indudes more
defalled loc tionallnfurmation and L for your personal u e only Ifyou ish to reprint he full
D R Infllnonlkn 651 1 6157 I RSS M6 6367 TrY 651 2654M J 800C57 J929
I
I
I
I
I
I
I n J Lt I 1 Or IilIlJII I rnplll CI o niRl J llU f tx cld P f r C I I1IHllc il
Minin ul1I If Inri J llJ H Vl J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
record printouls for any purpose please contact me to request IHillen lermi sion11JankyouforconsultigusonIhismallerandfor01rinterestinpreseringMinnesota s rarenaturalresources
Sincerely
pi Na4
Sardn D Hcffmmn j77 J
EIIIL1ngercd Species Environmental Re icw Coordinator
cnel D tahasc seMeh resulls
Rare Ftl3turoil Dal1base PrilltGIlt s An Explanltillll of Fields
I
I
III
III
I
I
I
I
III
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ci
v
r C
o
u
o
1 u
V
d
ti m
0
P
U
C
t
e
u
ft i
14 I
L
M
lf
0
t
t Etl
uoi
t J
U
n
rP
V D
V
v
r
v
I
Z J
u
i
j
i1ii
J8
tJe
f J
NO
5
2
ftl
tj 5 h
tal Ja tI
Kc r Y
t t fj
ri S
i
g
1
iii
0 11 0Dti
H H
X
fJ
N
W
t
r g a
fo io i Ern i
1t4tlM M
a e f 1 gr
g tl w g llE2NRa
P C8 txMP2w xHagEaqBaag a RlJtjtiiijIfj14UaeUI
rot I boo UI e ec W e I i1 jlOEift
a 38tlt101PI1 saHUHPwofrl1IwCiVILItVu 1EnUsEQugCWgn55hPDYdrlglwg3iBE3HeIlflJf4lJl1IJlunfIwgHBaBggB8BeaR
i
i
t
H
f
B
t E
l
ct 8 B P S
t
1
t
u NN
ouaa OY MMM M MMM
7S 2 22MMMMMMMMM
E
r C r r
Il
R
N
e
11P
O
t1t1e
J
BH
r
I d
Ol t
9
1
J
I 8
J
t lI
0
I
U
t
11l
1 II
t
I
I
g
o
N
n
l
0GIfIJf
t o Oo
II
U
0
0
t
to
n
Meo
t
1
oI
5o
I
1
g1rl
e3
M
111
A
e
u
r
6
r
1
V
l
z
i
I
i
5
i
i
Oll 1BEItrenptl
too i
H S i1 j
O
o
ilptEnfiritLI
ana gtig11i1ti0
3 i1111X jnLIC0
oJ t 11ttiiji1
v x
w j D
r II Il 1 JIu lsloIltIIII
a g Sg
r
u0
r 1It 0C
u 1
I
0
0
i to
2
r
fr
j
I
I
r
n i
t
Cl 0
23
f 1
oJ IJ IItJh
vJ
i
j
E
xfiigG
Q GfUii tHCo
au
ll 5
i g j pR8fg
v n StlP5tjI3h
I Jo
LI gl
q uqi
rittO0rJ11 tRoitlrtIIfIIJtlIr1Io0IIIEaijCotoi11g
a
1
Ib r 4
c i
i
f
2
OJ
u
3
n
fCJ
I
H
c
0
D
n i
1ll
I
i
n I
1 1 C
n ci
12
3
Ji
q
tI
1
Fo j
W
o
l lcl
ti ril88 r88rcfji
t1p r gn
4 cic oti f4n li3c
EI ii jjUtl r
n E N Jl I oSaoWJI
aUIr11 ICo
CoO
fO t
t
0
E
w
2
o
C
C
L
rS
r4
Q
w
l
a
oV lJ
x
J J
H
c
S
E
i
2
L
cl
ii
f
t g
g1
t
i
t
8i
l
It
i
cij
n
a lidjt
U t
ftanJolx
g J
E a fJHJOEUrJBretl8rJ
t tit
2U O
f l1 Bj1
1 i a III MJJT1ur1toe11GIIItC
l I IJ
e lIt aijgfl
i
H
u
rC
ow
H
6 i
I L
i5 C
11
g
i
n
H
0
u
B
l
I8
1
0
N
l
II t
u
r
E Ll
J
r c
U
Ii
Ii2
d
1 0
d i
il il
tJ F
Iltol c
f 4
f
fi
1
U
to t B
tt LJ
U U
t
j 0
OHaottl
t u tJiB
fJ
e
ojij2oC
fj R
HOH
r iB2E a
HJOJ rs
Ii i3ing
c t i5
N t H
t r
o
El t aYIoUuufSB@uS8
u
4
ol O Q
o
CIt I
r I
i
r
s
J
il
1
n
t
f
lJ
t 5
Ei
q
h
d
J
t
3
1
s
j
iJHiSi
31j
o
t
L
H
3
t
i C
i
a
UI
c
v
v
r
e tt
n
r
C
0
x
l rJ3j
1
j
M
lit
n
o
f
L
J
L lf
a
u
n
o
u
b
i
b
s
OJ
Or r
1r
r
C
D
n Il c
f
it
n
J e
O
j
oI
h
J
so
j
1 tL
nUi
g 5 e3
3
E
WZ o
P o
v
a jsSfi00vl
13 s rl
3Oij5sg
E N
G
11 1l2 jEt
3 14 Jj
Eo1 f 11 AClljL
ZK 1 1
tI i JQ@alt
C
V
f t
cZ
1
a
1
E e
0
C il
oP j c q
rl
a I 1 I rIol0fltlt1
J LojQlelC
i3E
I
t X
rJ fjMii
Uy
i
1g
E
1 0 tol
Ua
11 8
r t1
5
E
l g
1 a1W
1r
f
l l 1
ro b
t
i 4 0Hd
ft i b
D l J
tJ
u iiieli
G S gpHet8E
2 Pl f 8 V
C II Cl
Jl utJuSvrJ2lOtn
n f
t 58
I y t
a
cl i1 R eisl15c1
M1
n 2 z3
IJ VIJitItoo1118EarJ1ovMga
c
J
a
b
tIh
r3j
LJ
U f l
fCi
c
1
r
3 E
l
OJ
a
g
U
f1Vl
I J
B
o
c
Q
ro
t
C1 t
u
SU
cL
c
To28
fl tl
c u n i
o l
g t51
8 Uti
t
i3 E
n
n
a a
tl FOCrPiHtsjx
II L t
rMf oo
u
J
aC
rlJ 14 a
i r
n
J
A tlltt
j
0l V u
of
t
t n@g
no
lJJo1I U s
h
tt l
Ioi
i
l lWtgc
u d rif
fl lonloJo
3sfl03li e
rt EgltJiz1t103Lrlil6E
ri rt 1 H
ntttl3iLrJuP8S
lfH t1 g
t fji31l
Ei tJrTAtl1 1at calE3
M
i
u
loI I
0 0
p 1
ff Lo
0
le
i
G3
2
w w
j
Cw l9
V
ii
1
2 Co vcJ
1 tJ
iLl lj
J
JJ
2
It
oW
0 L
1
U
nefll
a
111 r
r
v
rJ e
tin
Nr
I
5
J
f u
r J
o
n Ilo to
t uj
t l I
ot
r
1
w
Z
I
roH
n
t
if
0
u t
Dr
1
M
t
t
c
l ij
fZ
1 H
out
l
l Hl
q 0
JI 1
0 0
j t H
ri a 2n
j ctertJ
c i coI J Z H
0 arL itJofJ0 VJ
tl U 1tia11NXQS
4f1 DIllaJILtl1I irfc4t
o u
4tJ Jw oX l
5
c
N1J
III
c
N
Ll H
cG g
rl
W
a a
0o
1
e t i
OJ I I
1J
31
u
u
u
J
56
u
6
u
2
Co
J
3 t
j6
0
r
l o
1
k
a n
t
fl
t
j
g
lG
107
x
g
u t J t
B II
II l
o
i 2
J
0
v rHu
eg
m
J
M
0
u
00
ri
fi
M O
Oa r
B i
a
1
i 3
5
fJ
Ui1
tJrt 3
U J f 1
0
0g g
5
fl
j
u
g
9 1
OJU
c
I
r
li
5
Bv
s
z g l
a g
g
Q o
t n ngtal
fl
fl v
i gjril1ilPHlil21118g
Pi tol II m
r oo
Ho t1a
Jr p g grfirL
oU Lll r4r oU J flJCIlJlUfGjc
X JWL6 l J o
j
t
I
J
foe
K
2
5 n
w t
3
m
H
a
u
3
U
rl Ei N
Z
tI
Q
l a r
1
He s j
eo I to Uetl1
1Il fJ tE E8afjislLic
t 2 r 1rtl1
tj J t
a e ii
el I u r vaQ
o r syWltwcOro
s
2
g
t
r
o
tS
3
t
Co
l
j J
t
t H
II
10
0
n
8
f
I
p
8 1 t
O
m
ii
n
lJ if
3i t
w
101
i
8
OJ
i
i A
VI
it
n
n
u
c1
g
i7 t
f 1 2
E
rl
i 3
i
n
1
3 C1
eii
R
8
eo11
f
DH2
tJ 0 IQt
t
1
o lIJ
0
1r
C1tMu
r f l
u 0
v
u
4hlf
1 Ert
ri
1
o C5no
B
h
0
s
tio
g
n
t
ejt
nUrf
J
I
x 3
6Jt
n
i j
3t
L
o
B
a
B
J
R
0
d
H
lt1U
r t 101
a
0
g g
ti g
ii 3 i9fj
glloPnaliJlii3llU11 Vol
Q wS11r
n n
if di1tl3Cii
J t
oJ 1 C P r
eN1
g I tI
o 3wWVlJJVl6rlOlUl
I
I
t
I
I
I
II
g
l
III
l
D E
co1
4
f1 lot
c
lot
Mt So
I
I
v
0
r
tfi
8
w
p If
R 6
i
Cjl01t11
0
J
UN
D L
a1
to
a
J
Ji
l
a 13
t 7 8EI
00tG
n
l 10
a
0 Ietji1xifHH
J 1 0
r 2 1Io H
lJ
ofi111 ft 1 f
t 8
J olI t r t1
o i 8 ftSpriJlSrnrtilicH11oC
c i lJ Ll
t u CI li U u
3 P o GC5rfl
aWll I e i 7
d
n
n
m
M
U 0
L
I rL
C
fJ
i1
i
o
Z
r
a R
S
i
n
j
tirl
o
3J
i M 3
J1
tllDLo
lIrjv
1 OC
5
x
3 1i
fi
l
11
sr
Oj
J
titlJ
r
t t
g
l
l
i3r
aH
t D
D
sr
j
p ci
B
e I
6
1
J
R
0g
g E
II a 1Ij c
9 a
c
Ifl v J1g6PItbri0n2ntjg14tllsH3
g FIJM
i A
v N t 1
1t1
t OA
r1 H
lol a 1 oJ 2
u Miis a
t J
0 l J
Ui fI IQ UIlVljfzaio 6
l S
r
1
c n
c
rr
Ei
on
H
Co
I
l
g
iat
I1W
0
g
iU ll
tU
I
o t I
io f
l t
0
G
HMO
8M
l
H
u
a
lJ
Po
u U
0
2
Jr
c11
i
nc
tJ
a
S
0
12
lI
I 0
x
Yi rf
B
I
E tll
e
h
o
gou
s
l
er 3
I
J
J
i
f
C
E rotoH
I
g
H 11 n vfjnuctliln
n na
ld a Qi i tligr
12 OC ll Jo H
n t ii
tJ IJ C l
t 30 S Q
w Ll a 2 JIeNUl
l r tit
f El
r
o
f
U
tl
I
C
g
tl
6D
u
n
c f1
n
Q
t
1
f
M C
n
I i
N
r
E
g
1 1
S
uo
8v
i
l
uo
1
j
r
n I I
1
tL
b
aJE
2
D
f
II
e
r
J
J
t
f
83
t Co 1
W E
I f5
PI t 3
Lt on
H
0
B
3 a f1r
r S ta
rtt 6 HjjIll1
L 5 r htctltiVI 3tatc
i io1Qu2I1
u
4 U
r
c
tl C
co
P I
0
IS
a
L
v
3
f
E
r
3
t 0
u
w
too 101
l
MU
3 I b
w 1 1
o
bCll
fl
1l t4
cI
S
C t1
n
I f
w
roJ l
c
gl
j
J 1
u
U 1 1
re
3
I rl
0
gd
M
8
r
93
I
u
Ii
o r
t
i fJ 0
f
5
0
fJ 1V1
g
t
Ht
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I E U
8
n c
t9 roD 2lr
J
1
9
lit
tj tI
Pi hBS
dt
8
1
t
I
og tt
Cl
1
u
o
Cl
u
y
J
z
i
n
N OJ
M
Ll
i
l
Po
P
fl
1
7
M
roO
l
on
w
u
E
c
tir
t
0
t
2fi
n r
u
41Er
5C
M
Q
m
1
ti c
CJ
x
II
R
tiaG
r
Q u n
J
3
l5 U
0
tJ
o
i
il
i
V
sa
J
i
Ll
J
U
8
n
c
i
B
u
w
l ata
u 8liC
vr 5
Y UlI
W Lil
u U
oE
t d a
It
e tr1 I II n 1
ctG l U
g
L P
t
la0 tQ
al r t1
ji c f l f1
1 1
H t
0
g a
fJ I
0
ur
on
i
d
E
Jl
Q
3
N
f
ul
R
E
3
x
a
j
i
5
o
C
TI
a
s
c
8
1 u
Ll
6 1
j
W
l
g
o
a 13
x
1l i400
l
r
5
B
u
JI f lijc
1
J
1
l
f 7
t v
tli
a
001
ro
u
IJ etl
nri
1g
1
1
il
1
o
a
0
f 11 t l
f n
fl c
jJ
H
jl
8
J
u
3
n
IU
f o
cotlE
f
e
w
r
5
I J
x
iIj
c
0
rt n
It
ftj
O
U
1
re
r
1n
g i5
5j
Dt
1
l
j
oj
fr
0
i
g
d
C
Fj g
a
fS 2a
u f1 3 t
t lo 0
I fii I
P h
fJd p O
JU
E 4
41 j r l r 0
rJ e tEtr
JJl J8O f 2
rl
c
p j
O
10 ro
g3 gf
r
jtl
n 1
ms
c
o 5
SO
z
Qp5
1 9tj
oa
p
e
O tt
M l 1
l
gl
tJ
p r i
j 8
II t
v
aj
3 0 1
t
Er lol L t
m
He Ui li
t r
lJ g
500
t 6Xtt
o Ntjl01511
7 S
or I Co n Ii
g j
u
E
g
C
to
PKCs
n
u
IK
1
i
I
g
t g
cilBA
L I
J
rrlpgd
c
g n
coo jn
Q H
I c
I D v
J
2
f g
a l
ao
0
c
t3 u w
g
t 0
Q
U IIii lJ
l 1
l U t ti
u u
U 3 Sto1S6j YItlllwqti
a i t
g EislI
fJ 0
It C N Ie tJ 11 oJ
E
M itil
e
n
v
n
tl
1 lJ
n
n
J 2
oSu
of
o
tI
LB
6
TI
13
I
I
III
I
I
I
I
j
s
gZ
0
v
1M lo
m
Q
n
N
0
r C1
U
u
t
l iX
1f14 Il
3
r
B
o
3
u
i
u
r
t4
cj C
l l
1 I
l s
f mJ
li
f
u
t U
ilflXl
II JIn
3 c
a q fj
aC
Moo C
p
H G
o 1 E93rgIr2
3 e
r i jeUQIrJ Ft
f 3 dSS
a t L 4
St 4 g n
p x
f 1b1a1JIJi41IIJ
ua dl1
E E
J n
Ll 4 I J
j
v
1
3
J
u
k
u
u
iii
1
u
l
x
N
gS
Z
1
jfo
t 11
1 1tic6
t t
LJ tI
J B t
lD
J
ifl
lij
z3n
l1
1
10 1ri
I
I
a
H
ti
8 u
ol tN
a
0
c
0 0iU10
j
c QI
1
n
E
50 IJ
IJ
ii u
lr
of
d
g
0
ro
l
j
i1
c
S NI
e
H
tl8
III
l g
Iq 3
Il W r LV JJ QHJ
v r ili g 1
ijiS
1 cocIJi zj fUIj
o t c rl
M
M
o
u
a
oC
0
I
Q
t
II
n
105
o
r H3
u
Ic
li
rj
at
JtJ
a tol
e
J
3
a
U
k
C
uS1
J 0a3
n
m
l
Hi
l0
o
u
P
1
i
R 3
E
Ed
J fI
t N0n
o W
t
m I z
r 0
I e
S r
at tI 10
UQ
t1 d
5j 1FJtiEn
idfl0
r f11
e I r
f1 4 ll Jt
i t a 3 tt t1Ntflg
PIt
fJ
3i1
r
1at1l
is
1 j
n
c
11
l
e
11ti
ti
tc
11 Ii
10
8
IJ a
5
0
2
u
g 2
fi
v
H
5
k
w
U
r o lf
0
oJI
J
01 J
00
n
J
u
Q
i
5
i
t
r
otJ
s u
g
8 i
o toJ t
c tJ a i to
R
Nh L4
Qu
t
tJI f Ir
f1
f l 1
II 1 c 1 l1fj
oIl
r v WEi
o
1011 0 I xl
R
aQ
M V
tl
1
t
co
c
8
et
i33
v
d E
i
X
8H
2u
U
j
t
1
i fj
S
Q
i
It Heather Nelson Hcartland Engnr
From
Sent
To
Subject
Nick RoSE@fws gov
Wednesday April 13 2005 1 44 PM
Heatf1er Nelson I cartland EngnrERsforVictorilCreditRiverand Chanhassen subslatons
Dear Il ath r
Tidre pcr to three pro al hy lin ta ValleElectrIc Cocp rative to ccr ruet
s st 1lions in Victeria liEProject Nol 730171 in Crodit lUvelEES projec No23008ardillChanhassenHESrojecto24ClHq
o reluc stod Co nts fren h ish and llldl fe ServIce ft b ld cagle HaliatusleUOElJalllShlchiscderilll1hrcdteaedindocmetdtonstinClrverJtonncpinardcottCoultislndtheBigtineyepearlYTlJselLfililiqginihichisfr1eralyendrcrcdisdocumntdinthetIirnsotaRier11PtroPikeIslcIdGvelltJ elecationiltdtypeofctivityreposedwwillconcurwithJctrdetcrninit1onofnotlikytoddcr5elyaffecnydralylistedpciesfnrtheabovitesbecucthesitllronotwithinareaswithInonnetinbl1deqlesortEar1f1qinye
p Jrlic uss ls Thl prEclu k th need fur further ctio en thb project 15 eqt iredndestion1ofthFndageredSFciActof913asaenccdHavrifth
p oject b nodi ieor nc nforrlj ion t ecort n lvailablwhich indcte that list dsrec11smayOcurintheafttcdareascultilticnwiththisatfjceshcul1tl
reini iated
II
I
II
e dpprEciilte It oppcrt I ity to co ent and loc fCrlHrd to workin with ClJ in the
uturf C you have 1llJ tions eq uding our CO 1nt plfa e C11 me nt 12 725 35 Sexter13icr21C
I
Since cly
UicC ow e
Field Blolor l t
Twin Ctics Field orfico
0 5 Fish and 11dlife Service
4 01 Ji ericMl Bmlevard E
Bloc tnglon N 55425 1G6II
I
I
I
I
I
I
w
EXISTING
C U P PLANS FORCOUmUNE
CI1Y uwm
SECTION UNE
PRESElIT RIGHT OF WAY UNE
PROPERlYlOTUNE
PERPETUAL EASDlOO
ZONING SETBACK UNE
ACCESS COIlTROl UNE
RAIlJllW R1CflT OF WAY UN
111I111111 RAllJlOAD
MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE
CHANHASSEN SUBSTATION
SITE GRADING DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL
WAIDl EDGE
WAIDl COOERUNE
HICHWATER UNE
SWAlL CElITERUNE
WIlIANDBOUNDARY
WIlIANDloIARSH
CURB GUTml
CONCRETE EDGE
BnuulNOUS EOCr
GRAVEL EDGE
CHANHASSEN M ESOTA
DECEMBER 2005
J IY upa W
I i I I
i F tf A ill r Hi LIaQj 61
n fI I
1 I J
II
j I I J1 I I L
I uL I i f filrWiI11ID r1IIiliILKllE
1 J 1 Kfllrl I 10 i h111LI4IIflII
v J L Ii lllJIt1lrT11JrI111 P WjI
t l I 1 fllf71ftiIL
r7 J Uc
I IIVoIIY
OJ r v rrII1
1 I SHEET INDEX
o
o
IYtYtY
l X X FENCE
CUlVERT
DECIDUOUS lRfi
CONIFER lREE
HEDGE
TITLE
J
o
II
8 SAN INFl
J 4 FfN INP
15 S1t INP
I 4 WN INP
G
EEl
EU
EO
lB
TV
1W
so
PROPOSED
22tlJO
lRfi UN
TlWFIC SIGN
lIANHOLE
CATCH BASIN
SANITARY SEWER
n SANITARY FORCEIlAlII
STORIl SEWER
I
j7r
ill
1 TITLE SHEET
2 SITE LAYOUT
3 DETAILS
3 LANDSCAPING PLAN
SHEET NO
1lIE UNE
1 WATtRWJN
HYDRANT
VALVE
CURB SlOP
GAS
POWER POLE
UGflT POLE
ELECTRIC lRANSFORWER
UNDERGROUND ELEClIl1C
OVERHEAD ELEC1RIC
ELEl1RIC PEDESTAL
UNDERGROUND TDEPHONE
UNDERGROUND 1V CABLE
BENCHIMRK
SOIL BORING
KAP 01 THE
CITIES OF
CHANHASSEN CHASKA
CARVER COtlNTr KN
CITY OF CHANHASSENRECEIVEDfNOV302005
CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPTI
I
I
M
r JI r1
I
PROJECT LOCATION
AUGNWEllT CENIDlUNE
RIGHT OF WAY UNE
1t
8 SAN
I 6 FUN
@
12 S1N I
4 PERF
o
o
I 6 WIIN
mtPORARY EASEWElIT
CONSTRUCTION UtIITS
CURB GlITTER
BITUWINOUS EDGE
CONCRETE EDGE
GRAVEL EDGE
SIlT FENCE PREASSaIIllEO
SilT rENCE HEAVY DlJIY
EROSION PROTECT1OH AT INLET
HOlE
CATCH BASIN
SANITARY SEWER
1 SANITARY FORCDIAJN
SANITARY UFT STATION
STORIl SEWER
PERFORAlrD PIPE DRAN
CULVERT W APRON
HYDRANT
3000 0 3000
r I
SCAlE FEET NOTE EXISTING UTlUIY INFORI4ATION SHOWN ON THIS PLAN HAS
BEEN PROVIDED BY THE UTlUIY OWNER THE CONTRACTOR SHALL
FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCING
CONSTRUCTION REQUIRED BY STATE lAW NOTIFY GOPHER
STATE ONE CALL 1 800 25 1166 OR 612 454 0002
THE SUBSURFACE UTlUIY INFORI4ATION IN THIS PLAN IS UTILITY
QUAUIY LEVEL D THIS UTILITY QUAUIY LEVEL W DETERMINED
ACCORDING TO THE GUIDEUNES OF CIASCE 36 02 ENTITLED
STANDARD GUIDEUNES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF
EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA
I HERDlY CERllFY HAT lHIS PlAN SPEClFlCAl1ON OR REPORT WAS PREPARED
BY liE OR UNDER IIY DIRECT SUPER1SION AND HAT I JA A OUL Y UCENSEO
P ONAL ENGINEER UNDER lIlE LAWS OF lHE STAlE OF IIINNESOTJklJmNO24307DAlE112905
KREG J 1110
t BOLTON MENK INC
Consulting Engineers ar Surveyors
IIANIATO IIN fAlRlolONr IotN SlEPYEYE IotN W1lU1AR IotN
BURNSVILlE IotN CHASKA ItN JAES IA SHEET
VALVE
CURBSTOP
1 WAlDlwJN
MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE
CHANHASSEN SUBSTATION
TITLE SHEET
OF
10 25 om 4
f
I
i
I f
r
1
r
r1
1
I
LEGEND
i
I
i
BITUMINOUS DRIVE
j
30 0 30
SCALE FEET
Emmll
GRAVEL PAD WASHED RIVER ROCK
AESTHETIC WALL
PROPOSED FENCE
PROPOSED POWER LINES
SILT FENCE
PROPOSED PERPETUAL EASEMENT
GRADING LIMITS
r
I
1
1
I
Ifr2L
I x
I I0
J
J
i
I
I
400
FEET
SITE AREA 2 87 AC
NEW BITUMINOUS 0 17 AC
NEW GRAVEL AREA 0 73 AC
TOTAL NEW IMPERVIOUS AREA 0 90 AC
EXISTING GEDNEY PROPERlY AREA 2647 AC
APPROX TOTAL HARD SURFACE AREA 11 14 AC 42 1
MVEC GEDNEY AREA 2 35 AC
FUTURE GEDNEY PROPERlY AREA 24 12 AC
FUTURE GEDNEY HARD SURFACE AREA 11 14 AC 46 2
MVEC XCEL AREA 0 52 AC
TOTAL MVEC AREA 2 87 AC
MVEC HARD SURFACE AREA 0 90 AC 31 5
f
400 0
ro
SCALE
EARTHWORK SUMMARY
RAW CUT 4141 CY RAW FILL 4647CY
SECTION CUT 1673 CY SHRINK 25 1162 CY
TOTAL CUT 5814 CY TOTAL FILL 5809 CY
BALANCE 05 CY EXCESS
12m FUTURE REFERS 10 AFTER lIIEC PURCHASE ANO DOES NOT
CONS1OER NOIliER ALTERAllON 10 1HE GEDNEY PROPERlY
I HERElJt comFY 1KQ THIS PlAN TlON OR REPORT WAS PREPAAEDl
KREG OT
ue NO 24307 DAtt 1 29 05
DWP
DWI
E30L TON MENK INC
Consulting EngIneers a Surveyors
UANKATO UN fAlRlotONT lotN SILEPYEYE lotN W1LUtAR lotN
BURNSVILlE lotN ctWKA UN AMES
n MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE
CHANHASSEN SUBSTATION 2005
SITE LAYOUT
SHEET
CKDCED
IJS
2
OF
4
2 lYPE 41 wtAR COURSE 2331
BITUMINOUS TACK COAT 2357
3 lYPE 31 BASE cOURSE 2331
10 AGGREGtTE BASE PlACED CL 5 100 CRUSHED 2211
SUllGRADE PREPARATION 2112
BITUMINOUS DRIVE
NOT TO SCAlE
SECTION B B
A
L
I
8 0 75 ctEAR WASHED RJVER ROCK
8 1 5 CLrAR WASHED RJVER ROCK
SUBGRADE PREPARATION 2112 INCIDENTAL
GRAVEL PAD
NOT TO SCAlE
RlPRAP
ClASS ClASS ClASS Ii
II 12
1M
Of
ROUND
PIPE
No
12 8
15 8
18 10
21 10
24 12
I 12
30 14
38 11
42 11
48 20
GEOTEXTIlEFABRIC PER SPEC 3601
TIlE FABRIC SHOULD COVER THE AREA
OF THE RIPRAP AND EXTEND UNDER
THE CULVERT APRON THREE FEET
SECTION A A
RCP CULVERT END RIPRAP
NOT TO SCAlE
liQlIDETAILS ARE NOT TO SCALE
10 47 am
Ii
Ii
Z
i
o
I
PUBUC ROAD
RADIUS AS
REQUIRED
6 MINIMUM DEPTH
OF I TO 2
CRUSHED ROCK
I ENTRANCE WIDTH IASREQUIRED
llQIE
ROCKS AT ENTRANCE CLEAN WORKSITE MUD
OFF OF TRUCK TIRES BEFORE DRMNG
ONTO MAIN ROAD
ROCK ENTRANCE CONSTRUCTION
NOT TO SCALE
PLASTIC ZIP TIES
50 TENSILE
lOCATED IN Top 8
t5
i3
STED S1lJODED T POST
5ft MINIMUM LENGTH POSIS
AT 6ft lIAXlMUlI sPACING
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC 36 WIDTH
DIRECTION OF
RUNOFF FLOW
lIACHINE SUCE
8 12 DEPTH
PWS 6 FlAP
SILT FENCE MACHINE SLICED
NOT TO SCAlE
I HEREBl CERTIfY lHAT tHIS SPECIFlCATlON DR REPORT WAS PREPAREDBYWEORlJNDRWYDIRECTSUPEJMSIONIfTINoIADlIYlICENSEDDQfiR
t jr Tt Of ESOTk
KREG 11r
24307 DAlE 11 29 05
OMP BOL TON MENK INC
ConsultIng EngIneers Ie Surveyors
IoWIKATO MN FA RIAONT IAN SlEEPl EYE IAN WlLlWRMN
BURNSVILlE MN CHSKA MN AMES It
OMP
CHECICDl
IJS
7l5
1ItY Of
A A
i
I
I
7D
I
J
Ii
1
I
i Af
I
I
J
AES HETlC
WAlL
SECTION VIEW A A
s
1t
SECTION VIEW B B
MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE SHEET
CHANHASSEN SUBSTATION 2005 3
OF
DETAILS 4
1
1
I
I
1
i
I
1
I
I
4
r
c
I
J
J
P9
r
J
C I
I
l
6
y
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
r
I
I
I
I
II
i I
II
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
h
I
I
I
1
r
ISl
I
30 0
SCALE
I HEREBl CEJmFY lH4T THtS PLAN SPECFlCAl1ON OR REPORT WAS PREPARED7orfER17jit
KREG Itr
uc NO 24307 DAlt 11 29 05
ClCKI
KJS
D P30
I
FEET
D P
11 28 2005 4 35 m
I
j tII1 II
l 2 1
I
I
r i rr
i r
lI
I
I
lliITES
1 EXISTING TREES ON SITE 90 SYBERIAN ELM OF
VARYING CONDITION
REQUIRED BUFFERYARD PLANTING TOTALS
OVERSTORY REPLACED W UNDER DUE TO POWER LINES
UNDERSTORY 25
SHRUBS 32
PLANTING SIZE
SPRUCE 6 8 TALL
MAPLE 15 2 5 TRUNK DIAMETER
CRAB 1 5 2 5 TRUNK DIAMETER
PROTECT EXISTING TREES TO EXTENT POSSIBLE
SEED ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITH Mn DOT MIX 250
EXCEPT AS NOTED ABOVE
CONTRACTOR TO MINIMIZE SITE DISTURBANCE AND
PROTECT EXISTING TREES TO EXTENT POSSIBLE
2
3
4
5
x
o
o
o
6
0000
I
BOL TON MENK INC
ConsultIng EngIneers 4 Surveyors
loIANKATO tlN FAlRtlONT tlN SlEEP EYE tlN W11L1lAR tlN
BlJRNSVILLE tlN CHASKA tlN AtIES IA
LEGEND
BITUMINOUS DRIVE
GRAVEL PAD WASHED RIVER ROCK
I
INFILTRATION BASIN SEED MnDOT MIX 310I
AESTHETIC WALL
PROPOSED FENCE
EXISTING TREE CONIFER
EXISTING TREE 6 DIA
EXISTING TREE 6 10 DIA
SPRUCE 7
AMUR MAPLE 7
RED TWIG DOGWOOD 32
RED SPLENDOR CRAB 11
SMALL PLANTINGS 12
If
J
1
I
If
I
I
I
MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE
CHANHASSEN SUBSTATION 2005
LANDSCAPING PLAN
IIV SHEET
4
OF
4
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES MINNESOTA
DATE Januarv 23 2006 RESOLUTION NO 2006
MOTION BY SECONDED BY
A RESOLUTION DECLARING NO NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STATEMENT FOR MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC SUBSTATION
WHEREAS an Environmental Assessment EA was prepared for the Minnesota Valley
Electric according to the Environmental Quality Board EQB regulations and
WHEREAS notice of the EA was published in the EQB Monitor on January 2 2006 and
WHEREAS copies of the EA were mailed to all of the agencies and organizations on the
EQB official EA distribution list and
WHEREAS the ten day comment period for the Electric Substation EA ended on
January 12 2006 and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen
Minnesota that findings in the document titled Findings of Fact Regarding a Need for
Environmental Impact Statement Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative be incorporated
herein by reference
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a determination is herby made that the preparation of
an Environmental Impact Statement EIS for the project which is the subject of the EA is not
needed by on application of the following criteria to the factual information contained in the
EAW
1 Type extent and reversibility of environmental effects
2 Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects
3 The extent to which environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public
regulatory authority and
4 The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a
result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the proposer
or an EIS previously prepared on similar projects
Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 23rd day of January 2006
ATTEST
YES NO ABSENT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
DATE: January 17, 2006
SUBJ: Bonnie Labatt’s Donation to the Fire Relief Fund
Bonnie Labatt has asked to be on Visitor Presentations so that she may publicly
thank the Chanhassen Fire Department for the excellent service they provided to
her family over the years. Mrs. Labatt is also going to make a donation to the
Fire Relief Fund. Fire Chief Gregg Geske will be in attendance to accept the
donation on behalf of the Fire Relief members.
No City Council action is required on this item.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Paul Oehme, City Engineer/Dir. of Public Works
FROM: Alyson Fauske, Assistant City Engineer
DATE: January 23, 2006
SUBJ: Public Hearing for 2006 Street Improvement Project No. 06-01
BACKGROUND
On September 26, 2005, Council authorized the preparation of the 2006 Street
Improvement Feasibility Report.
On December 8, 2005, staff held an open house meeting with residents in the
Koehnen neighborhood to discuss the proposed street and utility reconstruction
project.
On December 15, 2005, staff held an open house meeting with residents in the
Chanhassen Hills neighborhood to discuss the proposed street rehabilitation
project.
On January 9, 2006 Council accepted the feasibility report and called for the
public hearing for the project.
DISCUSSION
The street improvements proposed for 2006 were identified using the City’s
Pavement Management Program and because of the utility problems in these
areas. The City’s consultant for the project will be at the meeting to present
information to City Council and to answer questions.
Koehnen Area
Streets are recommended for reconstruction in the Koehnen area. These streets
are 35 years old and are in need of replacement and do not have concrete curb and
gutter. The reconstruction area includes approximately 1.05 miles of street,
including West 63rd Street, Koehnen Circle East, Koehnen Circle West, Cardinal
Avenue, Blue Jay Circle, Audubon Circle and Yosemite Avenue (from 6440
Yosemite Avenue to the City limits). Concrete curb and gutter will be included in
the street design. Also, the street improvement project will include replacement
of all watermain, replacement of some sanitary sewer, installation of storm sewer
and construction of storm water treatment ponds.
The watermain in this area is cast iron which has resulted in 23 documented
watermain breaks. It is recommended to replace the watermain in this area along
with the water services in the right-of-way.
Paul Oehme
January 23, 2006
Page 2
Televising of the sanitary sewer indicates that portions of this utility are “egged”,
sagging and/or cracked. Bolton & Menk, the consultant engineer the City has
contracted for this project, recommends that portions of the sanitary sewer
exhibiting “extreme” sagging or segments that are cracked be replaced.
Storm sewer will be installed and will outlet to one of three ponds that will be
constructed in conjunction with the project. The ponds will treat the runoff before
discharging to other water bodies.
Forty percent (40%) of the street rehabilitation costs are proposed to be assessed
to the benefiting property owners within the project area. The preliminary
assessment amount for the Koehnen area is $7,100/lot and is proposed to be
assessed over a 10-year period at 6% interest.
Approximately 25 residents attended the Koehnen area open house on
December 8, 2005. The following generalizes the questions and comments
received at the open house:
· Why are the anticipated assessment costs so high?
· Who decided that these roads need to be reconstructed?
· Why is the City’s standard cul-de-sac 90 feet in diameter? It seems large.
· Upgrading Yosemite will increase the traffic volume on the road.
· Will trees be removed?
· What is the proposed timeline for this project?
All property owners’ questions were answered at the meeting or with a follow-up
letter or phone call.
Chanhassen Hills
The project also includes resurfacing or rehabilitation of the streets in the
Chanhassen Hills neighborhood. These streets are 15 years old and are
recommended for milling and overlaying. Improvement consists of milling the
pavement and paving a minimum of 2” bituminous. Damaged “alligatored”
pavement areas will be removed and repaved prior to the overlay. Severely
damaged curb will be replaced. Some draintile will be included in the project.
Forty percent (40%) of the street rehabilitation costs are proposed to be assessed
to the benefiting property owners within the project area. The preliminary
assessment amount for the Chanhassen Hills area is $1,698.15/lot and is proposed
to be assessed over an 8-year period at 6% interest.
Four residents attended the Chanhassen Hills area open house on December 15,
2005. The following generalizes the questions and comments received at the
open house:
Paul Oehme
January 23, 2006
Page 3
· Why doesn’t the City pay for the entire project cost?
· Who decided these streets need to be worked on?
· What is the project schedule?
· Will Draintile be included in the project?
All property owners’ questions were answered at the meeting or with a follow-up
letter or phone call.
Final assessment amounts will be based on the consultation report the
Engineering Department is working on with the City Attorney. This report is
expected to be completed by the end of January, 2006.
Lake Ann Park
Also included in this year’s street project are proposed improvements to the
parking lots at Lake Ann Park. Most of the drives and parking areas are in very
poor condition and are in need of reconstruction. The improvements include
reconstruction of the roadways, realignment of roadways, reconstruction of
parking areas and overlay of parking areas. Also included will be placement of
concrete curb and gutter in parking areas.
These components of the project and the feasibility report will be presented to
City Council at the next meeting prior to the public hearing. Copies of the
feasibility report are available in the Engineering Department.
Funding for this project is proposed as follows:
ITEM ESTIMATED
COST
2006 CIP
Budget
Amount
2006 CIP
Project Number
$ 500,000.00 ST-012 (MSA) Street Reconstruction $ 1,561,073.00 1,600,000.00 ST-012
Rehabilitation Area
(Chanhassen Hills) 661,300.00 125,000.00 ST-018 (Pvmt. Mgmt.)
Subtotal, Streets $ 2,222,373.00 $ 2,225,000.00
Lake Ann Park $ 321,235.00 $ 350,000.00 PK&T-051
Storm Sewer 586,011.00 400,000.00 SWMP-019
Sanitary Sewer
Reconstruction
185,679.00
310,000.00 SS-014
Watermain
Reconstruction
544,585.00
440,000.00 W-024
TOTAL $ 3,859,883.00 $ 3,725,000.00
Paul Oehme
January 23, 2006
Page 4
The estimated costs for storm sewer improvements are higher than the budgeted
amount since the detailed storm sewer design was not complete when the budget
amount was determined.
The estimated watermain costs are high due to the unforeseen increase in the cost
of watermain pipe.
The tentative schedule for this project is as follows:
Public Hearing (Koehnen Area) and Order Plans and
Specifications January 23, 2005
Continuation of Public Hearing (Chanhassen Hills Area) February 13, 2005
Approve Plans and Specifications and Order Ad for Bid April 10, 2006
Bid Opening May 2, 2006
Accept Bids/Order Assessment Hearing May 8, 2006
Neighborhood Meeting (Koehnen area) May 17, 2006
Neighborhood Meeting (Chanhassen Hills area) May 24, 2006
Assessment Hearing/Adopt Assessment Roll/Award
Contract June 12, 2006
Start Construction June, 2006
Construction Complete October, 2006
The project start and completion dates are later than originally anticipated due to
changes in MNDOT’s State Aid review process, which is required since Staff is
seeking to add Yosemite Avenue to the City’s State Aid roadway system. The
City’s consultant is prioritizing the preparation of Yosemite Avenue plans in
attempt to get the project back to the original anticipated schedule.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council order the preparation of plans and
specifications for City Project 06-01 and continue the public hearing at the
February 13, 2006 meeting to discuss the proposed improvements within the
Chanhassen Hills neighborhood.
c: Marcus Thomas, Bolton & Menk
Attachments
G:\ENG\PUBLIC\06-01 2006 Street Improvements\01-23-06 continuation of public hearing.doc