Loading...
PC 1997 12 03CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION' REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 3, 1997 Vice Chairman Joyce called the meeting to order at 7;05 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Allyson Brooks, Alison Blackowiak, Kevin Joyce, LuAnn Sidney, and Matt Burton. Ladd Conrad arriving during item 2. MEMBERS ABSENT: Craig Peterson STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Bob Oenerous, Senior Planner; Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer; and Sharmin A1-Jafl] Planner II PUBLIC HEARING: CONCEPTUAL PUD REQUEST FOR AN OFFICE-INDUSTRIAL PROJECT WHICH WOULD PERMIT A CHURCH/INSTITUTIONAL USE ON PROPERTY ZONED A2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATE AND LOCATED SOUTH OF HWY 5 AND NORTH OF COULTER BOULEVARD AT STONE CREEK DRIVE ON 27.3 ACRES, LAND GROUP, INC. AND BLUFF CREEK PARTNERS, BLUFF CREEK CORPORATE CENTER. Public Present: Name Address Liv Homeland Ron Erickson Ken Adolf Jim Sulemd Steve Nomes Randy Koepsell John Amott Dorothy Downing Margaret M. Parsons 8804 Knollwood, Eden Prairie KKG Architects Schoell & Madsen 730 Vogelsberg Trail 1451 Heron Drive 1110 Dove Court 8816 Ridge Ponds Drive 7200 Juniper Road 3732 Hickory, Excelsior Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Joyce: Are there any questions for staff at this time? Bob I have one question and it might be cleared up when the applicant stops up here but I noticed on the original concept that there was a north, excuse me. Yeah. Northeast comer there's an 80 foot setback for the Bluff Creek. Is that going to be, have they changed that or what's the theory behind that? Generous: They haven't changed that yet. They said, in their comments they said they shifted... 20 foot on the other side of the creek. As you can look at our design standards... Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Joyce: So that's what we're sticking to right now is a 100 foot? Okay, that's I guess what I wanted to clear up. So obviously they're going to have, well we'll see what happens, right. Okay. One last, there was one last question. There was a question, there was a letter from the DNR regarding those setbacks and the accuracy of the calculations of the setbacks. Are you pretty finn on the setbacks as far as, I just noted that, where the heck is that letter. It says in addition it's unclear on the site plan where the structure setbacks are being measured from on the creek. The watershed district measures setbacks from the center of the creek and the city shoreline regulations measure from the OHW, which is the top bank of the channel on the creek. I'm just pointing that out. Was there any concern on your part or do you feel comfortable with it? Generous: I think we can.., that up. The center line.., is the easiest to measure. Joyce: That's what I was thinking off yeah. Okay. All right. Is the applicant here and willing to address the Planning Commission please. If you could step forward to the. Ron Erickson was not speaking into a microphone and his comments were not picked up on tape. Ken Adolf: Good evening, I'm Ken Adolfwith Schoell & Madsen. First of all on item 17. At this point drainage calculations have not been done to size the ponds. The intent is to provide much of the storm water storage requirements in the basin on the north side of the church and without having done all of the calculations, we don't know if that's large enough so we had identified secondary area to provide additional storage if necessary. Again those basins would be designed and sized in accordance with the city and watershed district requirements. On item 25, just refers to the public streets. The item talks about a cul-de-sac. With the revised plan here the intent is to go with a thru street connecting to Highway 5 allowing a right-in and right-out access at that point. I think that's the extent of the engineer issues. Ron Erickson made some more comments at this point. Joyce: Well I think we're all just giving everybody a little direction here. We have to give you some and then the City Council and decide if this concepts makes any sense or not so, yeah. Does anybody have any questions for the applicant? Brooks: I don't know if... Ken Adolfi Well at this point no work is proposed below the ordinary high water elevation. Actually the city ordinances prohibit any type of disturbance in the 50 feet setback from the creek so we're not anticipating that there would be. Blackowiak: I had a question. I don't know who to address this to but in the narrative, one of your statements has to do with the creation ofa TIF district. I'd like to hear from you about some of the benefits.., city or why we should consider that. Liv Homeland made a comment that did not get picked up by the microphones. 2 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Sidney: Question for the applicant. What was the motivation for switching to the access to Highway 5 from the original plan? Liv Homeland... Sidney: Okay, and then for the grading, the smaller buildings seem to work, yeah. Liv Homeland... Sidney: I have a few more comments Mr. Chairman. Joyce: Sure. Sidney: Okay. This question for stafl2 I guess I should have asked that on the first part but I'm wondering whether these buildings are actually larger in terms of square footage than what we could have gotten in just a strictly office industrial park. Generous: We calculated what the.., maximum square footage... Aanenson: ...reason that... Sidney: Yes. And remind what is the benefit to the city for the next type of use and. Generous: Well the potential for the use.., transitioning from one use to... more intensive use. Plus there's a... Sidney: And then I'm wondering, you had suggested having a parking lot on both sides of that church and I guess I'm wondering about the views from the Bluff Creek side to the west. Aanenson: That was kind of an issue... On the other hand, we felt that the parking was quite a ways from the church itself and.., so I guess we just asked that they re-examine that... Generous: The other thing is they could segregate their parking. Their day to day parking... office industrial uses.., overlapping parking both ways. On Sundays when church... Sidney: I guess I'd kind of opt for not having parking to the west. Just simply to preserve that view. However, then when I was looking at the proposal that we had in our packet about the parking and the loading docks on the east side, and I was much more concerned about that view. And I'd like to enhance that to, that view from Highway 5 would look great coming east on Highway 5 but I'm afraid that going westbound it would... I like the variety of uses and I guess... concerned about the fact that when I saw the two smaller buildings, now I'm wondering if there's any potential for expansion of these buildings in the future and that might be a concern that the developer would want to look into. And I was thinking on the original plan to have that larger building with the longer side, the loading docks to the south, so the longer side would be along Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Highway 5, you would have the potential for expansion in that case and I guess I would just hope that the developer would think about that so that we can enhance the site for office industrial use in the future. I guess that's what I have for now. Joyce: I have one last question before I open the public hearing. And I don't know Kate or Dave, how are we going to handle this item 17 with the SWMP fees? What? Hempel: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Typically when storm, the comprehensive storm sewer plan is developed, it's the City's intent to regionalize the storm water ponds so we don't have a pond here, a pond here, a pond here. From a maintenance and water quality standpoint it works better to have one regional pond treating all the runofl2 In this case, just looking at the grades real quickly, it looks like they could achieve draining that area with storm sewer, probably into the larger pond or a combination of... I guess based on the narrative from the applicant, I felt maybe that the pond was serving as an amenity as well. If that's the case, we felt the SWMP fees would not be, credits would not be appropriate. Joyce: So this is an item that once we get to the public hearing... Hempel: Again, being a conceptual plan, that pond may relocate somewhere else based on grades. Aanenson: We're willing to look at it... At this point I guess we'd leave it the way it is. Joyce: You'd leave it open ended type of situation? Aanenson: Yeah. And we'd... Joyce: Okay. Well I'll open this up for public hearing. Anybody like to address the Planning Commission on this item, please step forward and give me your name and address. I should have opened that up for a motion shouldn't I have? Aanenson: You don't really have to. Joyce: I don't have to. So I don't have to close it either then? Aanenson: You should close it. You don't have to have a motion. Joyce: Don't have to have a motion? That will save time. Well seeing one, I'm going to close the public hearing and bring it back to the commission. LuAnn we'll start with you. Sidney: I made a lot of my comments already I guess. I guess I don't have any problem with having an institutional use in this PUD. I'm concerned about maximizing the office industrial portion as much as possible, if we can get the square footage up. I have some questions, although I guess I'm thinking that I'm not totally opposed to access on TH 5 but I am thinking I would really like to keep the access off of Coulter as the main entrance rather than off of TH 5 if 4 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 possible, just to alleviate TH 5 and it's traffic problems that it has now. Other than that I think I already made most of my comments. Joyce: Allyson. Brooks: I don't have too many comments... I'm not too worried about the traffic. I don't think a right-in/right-out off of Highway 5 or Coulter Boulevard is going to make a difference with the traffic... It's a done deal. So I really don't have any more comments. Blackowiak: Well I've got a few comments here. In general, I do think that the church could fit in there and provide a nice transition belween the school, the neighborhood and the proposed industrial, office building. However, I feel that the church is too close to Bluff Creek. I talked to Bob today. I asked him to get some more information from Phil regarding the primary and secondary corridors and based on where it was drawn, the primary corridor involves half of the church and I, regardless of whether or not it's been farmed, that has been defined as a primary corridor, then I think.., and we should not be building in the primary corridor. I realize the Bluff Creek overlay has not been officially implemented yet. I know that we're close to having final implementation. However I feel that this would be a wonderful test case. I think we should apply the Bluff Creek standards to this project and not make exceptions in terms of setbacks and location of the primary and where the secondary areas of the creek. In terms of the setbacks, I would like to suggest that we include the Bluff Creek overlay district standards in the setbacks when we talk about the minimum building setback and maximum setbacks. I would also like to point out that the Bluff Creek study talked about a 300 foot setback along both sides of the creek and I don't think that this is the time to start compromising. We've spent a lot of time and effort in this Bluff Creek study and to start out with a brand new project and say well, let's forget this 300 foot setback I don't think sends a good message. So I really would hope we could look at that a little bit more intensely because the study recommends this 300 foot setback. I think we should really take that into consideration .... split so I'm not as concerned about that. But I think it's Lot 3 on the southeast comer. I'm rather concerned about the loading docks facing east. It screams post office to me all over again .... residential area directly to the south of... boulevard and worry about noise. We've been through this exercise before.., well aware of the problems that.., of that lot. And finally I especially agree with the.., point number 3 talking about the structures meeting the minimum required setbacks in the report. I think they said that very well. Probably better than I did but we've worked hard on the project. The Bluff Creek plan and I really think that we should.., standards in place for this proposed PUD. And that's it. Joyce: Thank you. My comments are pretty similar to what's already been said. Number one, we're obviously just looking at a concept right here and I like the concept very much. I really do. I think it's great for the mixed use and I think we can work this out. I think it'd be good for that area. As I said before, we're just trying to give direction for when these sites come up in front of us, what we're going to be looking for. And I think that, well the next item after you folks is the Bluff Creek corridor and we've taken that to heart. Alison has mentioned about the 300 foot setback. I can certainly see where she's coming from. But I also feel that you have to have some sort of latitude and ability to develop this parcel of land. And seeing as, I feel that the comments from staff were good that the land really was not, with the agricultural usage before, it's not what Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 we were targeting for preservation as far as the vegetation in the primary areas. But I would strongly enforce 100 foot setback all the way around it, which staff has recommended, so that's certainly important to me and important to the City. The truck bays, as Alison mentioned, I worry about those too. That's something that would definitely, something we'd have to look at once the sites come in front of us. And the shared parking is another issue that I think staff has I'm sure discussed with you. I think they've done a marvelous job at the St. Hauberk's up the street here and I think that we can share, even I saw and was impressed by the progress that's gone on with what you've considered for the site, but I still think there can be more shared parking and less impervious parking lot area. But otherwise I'm in favor of the concept itself and those are my comments. So I guess from here we can make a motion. Brooks: I move the Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve of Concept PUD #97-2 subject to the following conditions. Joyce: We'd have to amend the five that are in there, right? Brooks: Yeah. Let's see. Aanenson: No. Brooks: ... I move the Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve of Concept PUD #97-2 subject to the conditions... Joyce: Do we have a second? Sidney: Second. Joyce: Any discussion? We don't have to amend any of these then? Aanenson: If that's your request, you certainly can do that. What we're saying is that staff} we understand... We agree with number 3. Joyce: Well, like I said. I'm a little shaky on like 17 too so. Aanenson: Right. I think that we'd like the time between now and when it goes to Council to address those and.., more comments.., some concurrence. Joyce: Okay. That's the motion then. No other comments? Brooks moved, Sidney seconded that the Planning Commission reconnnends that the City Council approve Concept PUD #97-2 subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit site coverage and impervious surface calculations for each lot and the overall site. 6 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 2. Staff recommends that the church commit to provide approximately 160 parking stalls for the industrial office users of the properly. 3. Staffrecommends that the amount of parking and impervious surface on Lots 2 and 3 be reduced. Staff believes that a U-shaped building on the northerly portion of the properly would be more appropriate to address pedestrian circulation to the proposed warehouse as well as address the sight lines for the truck loading facility. Staff would recommend that the building orientation be primarily toward Highway 5 and Coulter Boulevard, especially for Lots 1 and 2, rather than the orientation shown on the concept plan. This would require the building on Lot 1 to be reoriented 90 to 180 degrees and the building on Lot 2 to be reoriented 90 degrees. Staff would also suggest that the church investigate a walkout type facility, similar to that used for the St. Hubert Catholic Community in Villages on the Ponds, to help reduce site grading. To improve the layout, staff suggests to design a parking lot on both sides of the building and add sidewalks. Staff strongly recommends all 34 boulevard trees be preserved and guaranteed by the applicant. Where trees need to be removed for entrances, they must be replaced elsewhere along Coulter Boulevard. Protective tree fencing shall be installed around all boulevard trees prior to any grading activity. 6. Additional landscape islands are required in the parking lots; a minimum of one island for each 6,000 square feet of vehicular use area. 7. The loading docks of the southern warehouse building are visible from Coulter Boulevard and require evergreen plantings to screen the area. 8. Visibility of the expansive parking lots from Highway 5 should be limited as much as possible. 9. The applicant shall incorporate increased evergreen plantings and berms to obstruct sight lines into the parking areas. 10. Plantings along Bluff Creek and the proposed storm water pond should be chosen based on wildlife food and/or cover value. Proposed overstory and ornamental trees could be a choice of quaking aspen, amur maple, willows, black cherry, serviceberry, swamp white oak, or aborvitae while proposed shrubs could include highbush cranberry, winterberry, elders, sumac, and red-osier dogwood. City staff shall approve final landscape schedule. 11. In lieu of parkland dedication and public trail development, the city shall collect full park and trail dedication fees for this development. In the event that the applicant deems the dedication of the "creek" outlots into public domain desirable, the Park & Recreation Commission would review this offer. But, again, no park fee credits would be granted. 7 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 12. The applicant is required to plan private internal trail connectors from their site to the surrounding public trail system, thus maximizing their benefit of the recreation system already in place. 13. The applicant shall dedicate a 20 fl. trail easement over the trail segment located in the southeast comer of the site that lays outside the Coulter Boulevard right-of-way. 14. The development shall maintain the natural vegetation and landscape where it still exists, intensify the proposed landscape plan along the creek to improve the buff'er and to keep setbacks from the creek at a minimum of 100 feet with a 50 foot buff'er area. 15. This area has been identified by the Bluff Creek Management Plan, as a candidate for floodplain forest restoration. The applicant shall incorporate some element of forest restoration in the landscape plan along both branches of bluff creek. 16. The developer shall supply the City with a detailed haul route for review and approval by staff for materials imported to or exported from the site. If the material is proposed to be hauled off-site to another location in Chanhassen, that property owner will be required to obtain an earthwork permit from the City. 17. The applicant's engineer should review the possibility of connecting into the City's existing storm sewer in Coulter Boulevard from the southerly drainage pond or combining the pond with the proposed storm water basin north of the church. If the developer desires to construct the southerly pond, the City shall not be responsible for maintenance and the developer shall not receive credit against their SWMP fees. 18. All ponding basin side slopes shall be 4:1 overall or 3:1 with a 10:1 bench at the normal water elevation. 19. The grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall incorporate temporary sediment basins to address site runoff during the grading operations. 20. The storm sewer system shall be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Ponding calculations and drainage maps including pre- and post-development conditions for a 1 O-year and 100-year storm event will also be required by City staff for review and approval prior to final plat consideration. 21. The applicant shall work with MnDOT in coordinating the storm drainage system from Trunk Highway 5 into the proposed stormwater basin north of the church site. The applicant may be entitled to credits against their SWMP fees as a result of pond oversizing and pipe extension. 22. The public street and utility improvements throughout the development will require detailed construction plans and specifications in accordance with the City's latest edition of standard specifications and detail plates. Final construction plans and specifications shall be submitted 8 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 for City Council approval. The private utilities shall also be constructed in accordance with City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. 23. The developer will be required to enter into a PUD Agreement/Development Contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee utility and street construction as well as the final plat conditions of approval. 24. The proposed wet tap on the watermain near the trail in the southeasterly comer of the site shall be relocated to avoid interference with the existing trail. 25. Public streets shall be incorporated to provide access to all three lots. A 60-foot wide right-of- way with a 60-foot radius cul-de-sac shall be incorporated into the site plan. The private street shall be constructed to a 9-ton design. 26. All parking lot drive aisles adjacent to 90 degree parking shall be a minimum of 26-feet wide pursuant to City Code. Drive aisle configurations near the intersection of Lots 1, 2 and 3 lot line shall be reconfigured to minimize drive aisle points onto main street. 27. The developer's right for a future right-in/right-out access to Trunk Highway 5 shall be extinguished upon final platting unless the developer negotiates with MnDOT to transfer the right-in/right-out access to the adjacent property to the east. 28. The City's standards for boulevard street lighting shall be incorporated in the public portion of the streets. 29. A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, US West, Cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. 30. Install post indicator valve on fire water service coming into the building. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal or Fire Inspector for exact location. 31. An additional fire hydrant will be required near the church main entrance. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of hydrant. 32. When fire protection including fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during time of construction. Pursuant to Minnesota Uniform Fire Code 1991 Sect. 10-502. 33. "No parking" fire lane signs and yellow curbing shall be provided. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact locations of signage and painted curbing. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy #06-1991. Copy enclosed. 9 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 34. Fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within jurisdiction when any portion of the facility, or any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building, is located more than 150 feet from apparatus access as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exception: When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic sprinkler system the provisions of this section may be modified by the Chief. When access roads cannot be installed due to topography, waterways, non negotiable grades or other similar conditions, the Chief is authorized to require additional fire protection as specified in Section 10.501 (b). Note: As building plans become available we will review the plan to determine if standpipes are required in any portion of the building due to the fact that we cannot achieve 150 foot access of all portions of the building." All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT. Public Present: Name Address Mark Koegler Kurt Papke Skip Cook HKGI, 123 No. 3rd Street, Mpls. 1131 Homestead Lane Eden Prairie Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. Mark Koegler: Thanks Kate. Good evening Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. I'd like to provide a brief summary of the ordinance. The specific items that are within that and then.., obviously answer any questions that you might have. This ordinance is, as Kate indicated, is a follow-up implementation tool, or one of the implementation tools of the Bluff Creek management plan itself. The ordinance will actually amend both the portions of the zoning ordinance and subdivision ordinance and will create what we're calling the Bluff Creek Overlay District. The ordinance as you look through it, first of all begins to define some definitions that currently are not part of city code. Things like clustered development, ecosystem, natural habitat area. The two I want to focus on were a couple of terms that were bantered around in the first discussion item you had this evening. That's primary zone and secondary zone. From the ordinance it states that the primary zone is the buffer zone that directly impacts Bluff Creek and/or it's tributaries. The primary zone which is generally delineated in the Bluff Creek Watershed Management Plan is intended to be preserved as permanent open space. The secondary zone means a buffer zone that contains habitat areas that are valuable to the delicate balance of the Bluff 10 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Creek ecosystem. Secondary zone is generally delineated in the management plan. Is subject to development limitations in order to minimize the impact of new development on the primary zone. Both of those terms, and essentially those definitions as really does much of the body of this ordinance, come from the management plan that preceded it. On the exhibit that's on the table, if you look this darker green color, that comes and meanders, kind of follows the center line.., primary area. More of a grayish tone that you can see that's adjacent to that in the secondary area that's more of a light color.., area within the watershed itself and not designated as either primary or secondary. Primary for example is the center line... Secondary in this... It is delineated, albeit somewhat hard to see on this exhibit but it is clearly delineated as part of the management plan itself. The ordinance, as in typical ordinance fashion, does contain a purpose statement and intent statement. I want to refer to those briefly and I'll stick those on the overhead... The purpose really revolves around a number of premises, virtually all of which again are taken from the management plan itself to protect the Bluff Creek corridor, the wetlands and so forth to encourage development patterns that allows people and nature to mix in the ecosystem that's present along the creek and it's tributaries. To promote innovative development techniques such as cluster development and open space subdivisions. To foster the creation ofa greenway connecting Lake Minnewashta Regional Park and Minnesota River Valley. Encourage cost effective site development and then to implement the policies and recommendations that are found in the plan. And for sake of not having to spit out that long title each time, I'll refer to it as the plan and that's the watershed plan itself. The urban draft also contains.., supported by criteria by which development can be judged. Development within the district should blend into the natural environment while protecting Bluff Creek and sensitive land areas abutting and in the vicinity of the water course and it's tributaries. Criteria that is essentially supportive of that, you would look at developments to determine whether first of all they're consistent with the provisions of the comprehensive plan, and the plan is included within that. Preservation of natural conditions found in the primary zone and to the greatest extent possible preserving resources within the secondary zone. Looking at developments to determine if there's a balance between the arrangement of open space, landscaping, views, some of the other features such as bluff protection and vegetation. Then finally creation of an interconnected open space network. Again this corridor is looked at and very strongly stated in the management plan that it fulfills a variety of functions, both in terms of it's natural habitat for wildlife, but also as a resource that really meanders through this community from north to south providing potentially a trail linkage and educational resource as well within the community at large. So those are some of the kinds of statements that are being looked at as part of the intent behind this ordinance and what the purpose of the ordinance actually is. The ordinance itself, much like the city's Highway 5 ordinance will be an overlay ordinance. It will work with the existing zoning and really fit over the top of that and put on another layer of criteria if you will. More on the nitty gritty basis of how it works. When an applicant comes in with a project, as a part of either a zoning or a subdivision request that will come before you and the City Council, they will be required first of all to reference the City's maps which identify these zones. Those maps, as you talked about in your previous case, potentially can be modified from time to time, either based on staff resources that are available or based on resources that an applicant might bring to bear as part of the application process. What's required essentially is the developer will propose a plan that if you will, will kind of ignore the primary and secondary first, in order to define a threshold of kind of quote, unquote, normal development. Development that would include areas of the primary and secondary but not include those other areas that are 11 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 already not permitted in the plan such as wetlands for example. That would formulate either a base density in residential or a base impervious cover level in a commercial industrial development that then could be clustered on other portions of the site. So the central premise of this ordinance is not to prohibit development but I think was stated earlier, to channel development into areas that are outside of the significant resources that make the Bluff Creek corridor unique as it is. So a quick word there on how it works and it's in that fashion. Boundaries maps then would be maintained by the City. Essentially the maps that have been developed to date and as I indicated, could be modified with more specific resource information and more on site information. I think the appropriate analogy there as you look at the NWI maps on wetlands you get one configuration but when you actually do the field research, typically you'll have a better delineated boundary and that kind of thing could happen here as well. There are portions of the ordinance that deal with impervious cover. It makes reference to the City's Best Management Practices Handbook with regard to some of the erosion control measures and other things that are a part of that. Sight views are referenced in the ordinance. There is an attempt, at least language that seeks to preserve sight views, not only from a site but through a site in some cases, allowing more public access, at least in a visual sense to the Bluff Creek corridor itself. One of the central portions of this ordinance deals with density clustering, and in essence what we're looking at there is will borrow from a current resources.., but typically a subdivision might look like this in a very generic sense.., lots that are larger lots. Simply referring those resources that are either undevelopable or... as wetlands are today. The approach of clustering then becomes one of taking that same number of units, or in essence that same density, and clustering that into what may be smaller lots in this particular example, on an individual.., but preserving a vastly larger amount of open space and in this case Bluff Creek corridor that would be adjacent to it. So that kind of helps I think focus perhaps on the premise behind this ordinance. Again, it's shifting the focus of the development shifting the density if you will from out of the sensitive areas to areas that lie adjacent to them. Other features of the ordinance itself deal with natural habitat preservation. Within the primary zone essentially the ordinance is consistent with the plan recommendations, seeks to preserve that as open space. Entirely 100% open space. Development can occur within the secondary portion and certainly the portions of the site that are not within either of those. There are some structural setbacks that are referenced as part of the ordinance as well. It's consistent with the wetland portion of the city's code and it looks at a 40 foot setback for structure from the edge of the delineated edge of that primary zone. In summary I just want to refer to one more example, ifI may very quickly. We did, as the Planning Commission is aware, periodically do some kind of spot checks on some of the properties. It's not meant to be a comprehensive look at every property within the corridor but a representative sample to see, and.., for us to assess what problems may occur. An example of that, which is more real.., is the Erhart's property across TH 101 in the area of Bandimere Park. TH 101... would mn right up along this portion of the site. This is the traditional layout which...just quickly concept form so it's not 100% accurate but it's very close in that it preserves the wetlands and it shows right-of-way.., standards. That particular plan.., but it ends up with that density of about 2.04 units per acre.., could be a little bit higher.., do a comparison here. The comparison being if the Bluff Creek ordinance for the size of this property.., shaded area, is off on this side of the site, that is the area.., primary and dashed lines and the secondary the more gray area. You can see the impact. It's a fairly significant portion of this property. What that would mean in one alternative in this particular case would be to still develop this in a single family lot pattern but to do so on smaller lots preserving open space 12 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 both in it's bulk form along the corridor as well as some islands, some little greenways that might be associated with the development itself. Through the provisions of the City's PUD ordinance there would be other development options that would be possible here also. For example townhouses could occupy a portion of this site. Thereby obviously freeing up potentially even more open space or permitting a mix with single family lots that were of a larger size. These particular lots I think average about 11,000 square feet. The previous example I believe the lots averaged, what was it? About 20-21,000 square feet. The density incidentally that is shown here is very much consistent with the tabulation that staff maintains of recent development projects, recent within at least the last 5 years or so. On sites with similar physical characteristics to which you'd find throughout most of the Bluff Creek corridor. Mr. Chairman with that, that's a summary of the ordinance and at least a taste of how it is to be applied. I and staff would certainly respond to questions you might have. Joyce: Any questions for Mark or staff'? Brooks: I had a quick question for Mark. You had talked about strengthening the ordinance so it clarifies the industrial areas. I didn't see that or did we decide not to do that? Mark Koegler: Well we have looked at that and talked about that and I think if that's still a concern of the commission we can certainly look at probably putting a couple of words in here or there. I guess what we looked at more was how the mechanics of it worked and did it still support the industrial properties as well as the residential. I think we're satisfied that it does do that. But if you'd like to earmark perhaps a little more closely, you had the word commercial industrial in there, we certainly can do that. We haven't made that change. Joyce: Where exactly are you looking at that you'd like to? Brooks: Just in general I guess. Joyce: In general. Brooks: ... didn't feel that there was anything specifically for.., it was more geared to residential. Mark Koegler: We actually could begin that, almost even in the intent portion in making it clear.., to really apply to all types of land use as envisioned in the city's future land use plan for this area, including commercial, industrial and residential. Brooks: That would make me a little more comfortable. I do feel that we have some of those types of, those areas and.., within the Bluff Creek area as Alison talked about. Joyce: Where, Mark where, are we at the intent, right at the beginning of the intent section? Mark Koegler: Yes. One potential option would be to add that as part of Section 20-1461 as another intent statement, which would be item f. 13 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Brooks: I'm sorry, what was that Section 20? Mark Koegler: It's on page 4. Starting with line 15. That could become an item fas a part of that section and we could certainly craft verbiage that would reflect the application of the ordinance to all of the land uses envisioned within the corridor. Joyce: All land. Brooks: I don't know how the rest of you feel but it would make a little more... I have thought it out... Joyce: You don't think it's redundant at all do you Mark? Mark Koegler: No, I don't think it's redundant and Kate just pointed out another good idea. That we try to make this at least somewhat graphic in it's orientation and perhaps there's a graphic that we can put in there as well to help relay. Brooks: That would be wonderful... Mark Koegler: Very quickly, very visually that applies to both. Brooks: Yeah, I think that would be a very, very good idea. Mark Koegler: We drafted a section fthere, all land uses envisioned in the corridor including commercial industrial. Kate Aanenson: According to the underlying land... We can just list all the... Brooks: I think we should just specifically say though.., and I think the idea of having a visual graphic geared towards industrial and commercial would be very, very useful. I just don't want any developers coming in... Joyce: No, it's a good suggestion. Thanks. Anybody else? Okay. I guess I'll open this up for a public hearing. If you're interested in speaking on this topic, please step to the podium and state your name and address. Be happy to listen to your comments. Anybody interested in discussing the Bluff Creek overlay district. Thank you. Skip Cook: My name is Skip Cook. I just had a quick question for you. A question on the setback on commercial. Is that going to be broken up from residential? The setback from Bluff Creek... Aanenson: No. It would.., primary zone... Skip Cook: What could you... 14 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Aanenson: Outside the primary zone.., that properly... Skip Cook: So that would have no use? Aanenson: Well that's one that we'd have to look at because. Joyce: Skip has the garden, what properly are you talking about? Aanenson: He has that piece and he has a piece across the street. The garden center has properly outside the primary zone but the hotel is right... Skip Cook: If you went 300 feet back from the properly line, you'd encompass most of it. Aanenson: That one we'd have to look specifically when it comes in because he does have limitations... Skip Cook: Yeah and then you push to the other side and then properly setbacks. Aanenson: ... would probably have to... but it is a lot of record.., but there's not a different, the defining factor is where the primary... Skip Cook: I had another question.., concerning any of mine at this point but the example of the one properly you gave. When you reduced the actual buildable area for those people on that acreage, aren't you actually in essence reducing the value of that properly for those people? The amount of land that they can develop if they plan to put in so many houses, the example was given 11,000 square feet... 20,000 square feet. Aanenson: That's the lot size. Skip Cook: Yeah. But the value of a 20,000 square foot lot is possibly worth more than 11,000 square foot lot or you could put more in on that properly. Joyce: Get two houses in. Skip Cook: Yeah, just curious. I mean you're reducing.., value of the land. Aanenson: But you're also reducing your cost to put in streets... Blackowiak: Kate can I add something? I would hope that there would be a trade off in terms of increased value because of the creek. Skip Cook: I had thought of that too, to a point. Blackowiak: So although you may be reducing a lot size, I would hope. I mean it might not be dollar for dollar but I would hope that there would be some appreciation in value. 15 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Skip Cook: ... take in-between though with the amount of, you know we can have a whole bunch of open space too and. Brooks: I just want to say I agree with Alison on that one... I think that's a lot of the reason people come out to Chanhassen... they're looking for a sort of a rural, country atmosphere and if you keep something like Bluff Creek and cluster your houses to get that open space, it makes the land much more... Joyce: Thank you. Anybody else like to address the Planning Commission on this topic? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing. Are there any comments in regards to the ordinance? Allyson? Brooks: No, just the ones I had about the industrial. Joyce: Okay. Blackowiak: No comments. Sidney: None at this point. Joyce: Great job. Thank you very much Mark for putting this together. You certainly put a lot of effort into it and we've had it a few times in front of us and tweaked it a little bit and I think it could work pretty well. We need to make a motion though correct? Can I get a motion for putting this ordinance. Blackowiak: Well I'll make a motion that the Planning Commission approve the adoption of the, we don't have a number of course. The Bluff Creek ordinance, Draft #4 adding in Section 20- 1461, letter f. Verbiage to the effect of application of the ordinance to all land, etc. Plus some sort of graphic.., industrial sites and that was it. Joyce: Does that work? Aanenson: Yep. Joyce: Okay. Do I have a second? Brooks: Yes. Blackowiak moved, Brooks seconded that the Planning Commission reconunends approval of the Bluff Creek Overlay District ordinance, Draft #4, amending Section 20-1461, adding item (f) to include this ordinance to all land uses, including industrial and conunercial, with accompanying graphics. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Conrad: Chairman, one comment to stafl~ Will this change to the PUD ordinance as a result of this? 16 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Generous: Yes. Conrad: When will that come forward? Generous... CHANHASSEN HISTORICAL DISTRICT-DISCUSSION. Public Present: Name Address Kathy & Jacqueline Schroeder Vemelle Clayton 7720 Frontier Trail Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. Joyce: Looking at the comments made by City Council, is there a little bit of urgency involved in this or do you feel the urgency? I guess the reason I'm asking is that, I feel this is a really important area, obviously and something we really should kind of digest and getting this right now, it might be better for us to think about it. Brooks: I have a lot of comments. Aanenson: The urgency is that, I don't see the urgency. Joyce: I guess I'm asking, can we bring this back at our next Planning Commission? Aanenson: Oh yeah. If you want to spend a month on it, that's fine .... back to the Council what issues you have and what.., working on. Joyce: I'm happy to let anyone make any comments they'd like but I'm just saying that I'm definitely going to suggest, let's bring this back and... Brooks: ... that I think are really. First of all.., and I have real, maybe because I'm in Historic Preservation. I have real difficulties with calling something historical... What we're trying to do here is a nice idea. It's a very good idea, but we're creating what we call in preservation an architectural... Deerfield, Massachusetts. But my concern is that by calling something a historical.., when it isn't, we have historical resources that have, like the brick farmhouses that are historic. That are important. That we're losing. And what you do is give this false impression to the public we're preserving something that's not really there. I mean yes we do have some structures like the Village Hall, old, old Village Hall, but the 1976 church is not historic. I don't want to give the impression to the public that we're preserving things that we're not. The heritage 17 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 of Chanhassen is rural. Not urban. And we need to think about how we're preserving the rural landscape and the rural... That's not included in this. Every subdivision that goes in, we lose a farmstead and we lose another brick house, and those brick houses of Carver County are nationally, not locally, not state, nationally significant structures. And you can see them on down Audubon Road and so I want to make sure that if we do something like the historical district, I'm not comfortable with calling it a historical district. Joyce: Are you comfortable with the district? Brooks: I am comfortable with doing the district. I am comfortable with the concept of making an area walkable. Having design standards. I'm not arguing with that. My discomfort is taking away from the rural heritage of Chanhassen, and like I said before, giving the public the misimpression that we're preserving something that we're not and losing the things we ought to be preserving. Joyce: Plus historic might be just so generic maybe we can figure out something. I'm just thinking heritage district or anything like that. She has, Allyson has a good point. Brooks: If we are going to do, I know there's been a move to start a historical society in Chanhassen or historical commission. If we are going to do some historic preservation, let's really preserve what needs to be preserved and that's the rural heritage .... those brick farmhouses are important, and we can do both. I mean maybe if we're trying to do something like this, we should consider doing urban and rural. But I just don't want to give the impression, I'm saying get rid of the idea. I'm just saying. Aanenson: No. This is what I want to hear. Joyce: Anybody else want to comment quickly or? Conrad: Yeah. I don't think it's appropriate for a park. I guess I'd like staff to tell me why we should put, not tonight but why park and ride would make sense. It seems like it's tokenism. Plus I'd probably have a more philosophic. That is create a downtown. Create a sense of main street which would be buildings and at that intersection, leaving it open doesn't seem right to me. Putting cars there doesn't seem right to me. Putting something that feels like a downtown.., to me. It'd be hard for me to change that opinion ever, regardless of what we talk about. It just, I want a lot of parks. I just don't know that that's where I'd like to embellish the city. You bring up buildings to the street. That makes a real good feeling of the downtown. That's what we should be encouraging in that. I don't know if it's a good commercial though. I know there's a balance to what I'm saying. I know there's some negatives to what I'm saying. Again, just to feed that back to, bounce that off of you. My opinions on that site. I think we do need park and ride facilities. They very definitely have to encourage that. I'm just, as we think about this and as we talk to stafl} I guess I'd like to see what.., recommend besides what they.., make downtown a little bit more friendlier from... I don't have much... I'm not sure if we need a district. I honestly don't know what we need to do. I don't know by putting a district in what it means other than design standards. I know that the old St. Hubert's church will take a lot... That is an icon. That 18 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 is something that I really feel is significant. It's probably the only major landmark that I know of that is real significant to our history and I would hope, I don't know the economics... Blackowiak: Well I just have a couple quick things. My first impression, looking at the map, that I totally understand the area south of West 78th Street. I don't understand why the area north of West 78th Street would be included. I just don't see anything north of West 78th Street that really calls out to me and says you know, save this. We need to preserve it. We need to do something special with it. South, definitely. There's some areas. The old church. The old Village Hall. We really need to take good care of them and whether it be with architectural standards and streetscaping, you know whatever it takes. I think we need to do that but just again my first thought was that north of West 78th Street didn't make a lot of sense to me. I do like the idea of the townhomes that you showed in the packet. I think those are very interesting. But again I guess it's not time to do any rezoning or anything but I just think that they look nice and if that would work on that far eastern properly, I would certainly support looking at a design like that because... Joyce: LuAnn. Sidney: I was listening intently to all the commissioners comments and I agree with many of them. I think my first impression when I looked at this proposed district is, like Allyson, first Allyson's comments. That I was a bit confused that I wasn't quite sure of the historic significance of many of the buildings on the site. I guess what I'm really feeling at this point is that what we're trying to do is, like Ladd said, try to apply design standards to this area to mimic old main streets of you know Minnesota. And if that's the intent, I guess I agree and I like the idea of having buildings close to the street. Drawing people from the neighborhood with pedestrian traffic and gathering places. I do have a problem you know thinking of it in terms of a historical district though. If it's something like a main street development or extension district with design standards, I can see that. I think that would be a great benefit to the downtown. I guess that's it. Joyce: My only comments are, I can certainly see what Allyson is saying about the historical district. I believe though that it should be made into a district. I believe in a district. Now that might be opposed to what other people say but I think it should be considered a special area. I do think that we should consider the boundary possibly, but I think that's not what we're talking about right here. We're just trying to get the issues out. Aanenson: The issues on the boundary, I'd like to hear those comments.., because that specific piece that has the potential to change which kind of afl'ects what's happening down there. That's really what the moratorium issue was about because.., properly and there was some request to rezone that. That's where that came from... Uses on that properly and what, something that did go in there and we had changed the flavor of that. And that also was an opportunity to... pull that building out towards the street.., but those are the comments as far as... helpful for staff to hear. Joyce: I think, and I'm kind of taking up what Nancy said as far as combining the commercial with the residential. I think that would make a wonderful addition to the downtown area. Having residential above the commercial. We're doing that in the Villages on the Pond and I think that 19 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 brings the people, now it makes a downtown a vibrant area. People living there. People commercing there. People walking around there. That kind of stufl~ Brooks: But that's new urbanism. Not... Joyce: No, no, I agree. I agree. Brooks: That's where I just, I want to be real careful with our terms. Joyce: But I also think that we have to have a district and we have to have at least something set out saying we're trying to attempt to do this. Is that correct Kate? Aanenson: Yep. But what I'm hearing historic is not the correct district.., true sense of the word. Brooks: It really shouldn't. I think that we should be looking in Chanhassen at the historical area and our history is, you know Ladd says well we don't really have historical. No, that's not true. Our history is rural. That's where we need to look and that's where we need to...but we do need to, I think the idea of having the district in town is really... Sidney: You were talking about an interpretative center and moving a building there. That's the kind of thing. Brooks: ... we do have farmhouses in Chanhassen. And the other thing that's being promoted around the United States is something called rural landscape. Where communities now are just looking at the landscape itself and the path, as an example of our cultural, trying to preserve that, before it becomes warehouses. Aanenson: That's our Bluff Creek alignment. Brooks: There we go. We have, yeah. Two things going at once. Joyce: Do we have enough here or do you want to see this again or what? Aanenson: Yeah, I'm going to bring it back to you. I've got some good direction and I'm trying to get it so I can, I'll give the feedback to the Council. Sharmin's been working on more specific designs on the site of...talk about park and ride. We'll come back with some more and try to get this thing brainstorming until we understand what we want... Joyce: Okay. I thought it was a good discussion. Sidney: Mr. Chairman? Kate. I was wondering about neighborhood involvement. When does that come into play? Aanenson: I think we'll start doing that now. 20 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Sidney: Yes. I'd really encourage that. Aanenson: We talked to, I've talked to A1 tonight. Klingelhulz. I've talked to Mr. Schlenk. His properly is zone.., density. We know what's happening with the Colonial Square building. The City owns that and we've certainly been in dialogue.., but we need to be working with the adjoining properly owners... Sidney: Yes. Blackowiak: And Kate, what is the status of St. Hubert's right now? I had asked for it today. Aanenson: ... school. That's probably a strong possibility. There was another... Chapel Hill Academy. And there was another strong user looking at it. A mix of senior housing, assisted living and.., and commercial. That was... Joyce: Great. We lease it out right now, right? Aanenson: Yeah. But there's other uses to look at with that and that's I guess what we're saying. I mean... Sharmin had some different ideas. Park and ride.., and that's what we're saying. We've got these there. These uses. What can we do instead of just putting up a few sculptures. Saying what can we do to promote the downtown... Joyce: Maybe when you present it back to us, show us what the City does own in that area. Aanenson: That'd be great. Blackowiak: And also as an addition to that, what do we know? That was one of my questions that I wrote to myself. I mean what's there? What do we know is going to happen. You know like you say, the Medical Arts building is looking to expand. Well that's something we know but it's, you know.., if we can have time lines. If we could have just kind of general information that would help us understand the dynamics of what's going on right now and what's going to be happening in the next couple years. Joyce: Good. Okay. Following our format here. Any old business we need to take of? Discuss? Aanenson: No. This will be your last meeting. Joyce: Our last meeting until next year. Aanenson: Yes. We have, we've already calendared a couple items for the January... APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 21 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Blackowiak moved to note the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated November 19, 1997 as presented. OPEN DISCUSSION: LIBRARY NEEDS-JILL SHIPLEY~ LIBRARY BOARD. Public Present: Name Address Calla Baxter Beth Larson Cindy Schallack Lois Fiskness Steve Cudzinski Jill Shipley Cindy Hart Carman McMan Sue Herby Laurie Gauer Janet Dengel Carla Noran Jackie Schott Sharon Gatto Nancy Parker Rose Novotny Greg Hromatka 2655 Longacres Drive 7590 Canyon Curve 7501 Canyon Curve 8033 Cheyenne Avenue 6890 Utica Lane 261 Eastwood Court 951 Homestead Lane 9391 Foxford Road 8660 Flamingo 3820 Lone Cedar 9351 Foxford Road 6760 Brule Circle 9350 Foxford Road 9631 Foxford Road 540 Pineview Court 560 Pineview Court 7580 Canyon Curve Joyce: Jill Shipley, as you remember, she was at our last meeting when the budget needs were presented to us and Jill would like to talk about the library needs here in Chanhassen so we'll leave it open for you Jill. Jill Shipley: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to introduce Mary Higiss who's the Director of the Carver County Library System and also Kathy Purshman, who is the Head Branch Librarian here at Chanhassen. These are... Gayle Vogel lives in... likes to use the library to pick up audio books... Gayle made the comment to me that she's almost at the point of outgrowing the library.., when her children were preschoolers they used the library. They eventually read all the books.., to another library to find... The same thing happened.., grade school... Now it's happening the fourth time because she's used all... Carol Gray lives over in Stone Creek. Carol has three daughters. She... curiosity and intellectual development in her kids and her love for.., literature. Carol's about to start in a mother daughter book club. She's hoping... Kelly... lives down by Lake Susan Hills. Kelly's the Assistant Director of Nursing at a long term health care facility. She brings her kids to the library every... For Kelly the library is important just as well because she needs reference materials.., at the facility that she works at but she needs more general, broad based.., good ice breakers for group situations. Laurie Gauer... Laurie's an avid library user... that there is in the community. Laurie's a little disappointed in the.., offering her the materials that 22 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 she wants. Laurie would like... Girl Scouts, she would like to be able to bring her Girl Scout troop to the library.., for their badges but there isn't room.., lives north. She is one of the people who live in the Minnetonka School District but has been coming and Kathy always makes such wonderful recommendations.., quality books to read. So Nancy's an avid user. Carla Nolan lives off of TH 101. She's a school teacher in the Minnetonka School system. She thinks that the value of a library is to provide good quality information for students.., projects for their schoolwork. As you can see, a library in this town is more than a collection of books. It's more than.., of information. More than a place to read and think. It's a physical and a social space that enhances people's lives and encourages social interaction. It can be that one central gathering place which can serve all members of the community from age 3 to 93. For 6 days a week, 52 weeks out of the year. It doesn't matter if you're Catholic or Lutheran or if you go to Eckankar. It doesn't matter if you're a member of the Chaska school system. The Minnetonka school system or the Eden Prairie school system. All of these things divide our community. We are united by a strong library. And it's that feeling of connection to the community that builds the loyalty and the spirit that we really want to get in our community. This issue was addressed in the '91 comprehensive plan. The plan read, Chanhassen fails to exhibit a total community identity. So there's a real easy solution to this. The library already exists as our hub, as you can see on the map here. All we need to do is strengthen our library and it is going to strengthen our community. Brooks: Are you interested in expanding the library then or are you interested in a new facility? Jill Shipley: I said, on the history that I sent you that we need a minimum sized facility of at least 50,000 square feet. If you can achieve that by expanding this structure, that's okay. We may have to do... Aanenson: The reason that we're back to this point is, in the capital improvements element, the library wasn't addressed... Joyce: Jill, why don't you make your presentation and then we can make some questions and discuss it, okay? I think we'll do it that way. Jill Shipley: Can you put the graph up there? This graph shows the increase in usage in the library over the years. Compared with the increase in population. It's the orange line here is population. Shows some steady growth.., all aware of. The blue line here shows the increased... library much more rapid growth. This line shows the increase... Now as you can see, you have a much greater rate of increase for a patron going into the library.., population in this city. You as a Planning Commission, Kate and Bob as the planning department and our City Council members are faced with the challenges of this city's growth I'm sure day in and day out. I'm sure it's the ever present factor that affects your planning for sewers, for parks, ballfields, all of it. Well, couple the growth of our city's population with the even greater increase in the use of the library and you can see the need to address the needs of library space for our community. Library systems have guidelines to follow. As far as space needs go, Minnesota guidelines, which are also the same as the national guidelines, recommend 0.7 square feet per capita for library space. This is the amount of space which is deemed to be most effective for a library as far as allowing enough space for the librarians to work. Allowing enough room for quiet reading areas. 23 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Allowing enough study carols. Allowing a large enough reference section. You understand. If we apply that figure to our existing population of 17,000, we should have a library of 11,900 square feet. Today. In 1997. Obviously to plan for the future and anticipated growth in Chanhassen we would need an even larger facility. We currently have 3,250.00 so we are a far cry from that figure. If you look at the growth of the library from 1981, you can see that we've been consistently behind. We're always trying to catch up. We're falling farther and farther behind all the time. So this line represents... It's not that the city has not known of this need. It's addressed in the '91 comprehensive plan. This plan states that the city will work with the County to provide a new library location when space needs exceed availability of room in the City Hall location. It was also addressed in the Vision 2002 plan, which projected a library of 10 to 20,000 square feet. We got really excited in '92 because things started to happen. The City recognized the need for a library. A new library. They started evaluating various sites. We hired a consultant and we thought that things were finally going to happen for the Chanhassen library but unfortunately some financial difficulties befell the city and it just was not to happen. So what's happened since then? That's 5 years ago. Really basically nothing. Other than the additional 250 square feet that we received last year, right about this time when the City Hall did the expansion, there's been no other changes or increase. I ask you, is there any other aspect of our city's development that has remained so much the same since 19817 This community has added new restaurants. Added new retail. All of our churches in the community have expanded or built new facilities. Our park system is undergoing major improvements. We have brand new neighborhoods but we have that same, tiny, little library. If our residents were satisfied with the existing facility I wouldn't be here tonight. We'd just let the status quo continue. Our residents are not satisfied. They're wanting and they're needing more from the library. Exactly one year ago Decision Resources was hired by the Carver County Library Board to conduct a survey for us. This survey was conducted county wide, but there were 107 residents out of Chanhassen who were surveyed so we had the biggest representation on this sample. One of the questions asked residents to rate various service characteristics of the library such as staff availability, size, hours, quantity of materials, and the quality of materials. This graph will show how Chanhassen ranks their library with respect to Chaska and Waconia. Chanhassen is orange. Chaska is the blue and Waconia is... The top part recognizes... Everybody is happy... The middle bar is for the hours that the library is open. Again, we're faring quite well. And the bottom bar, the quality of materials.., not quite as happy.., but it's still... So when you start looking at sizes, quantity.., our residents are crying out for more space.., in that library. If we get more space we can get more residents... I mentioned to you a couple weeks ago when I was here about the demographics of our community and how that is so attuned to a library system. We told you that we are a very affluent community. You all know that. We are a highly educated community. These are the characteristics again of people who use libraries the most. Really value the library. One of the other questions on the Decision Resources survey was designed to identify how people use their libraries. They created a list of all sorts of possible uses, whether it was to... and we asked each person how would you rate these. Very important to you. It's somewhat important. Not too important or just not at all important. This chart shows how Chanhassen ranks the various services but from your perspective as a... important to note how much more Chanhassen... than the other cities and counties .... continuing education was the number one.., for our residents... navigate the non-fiction stacks and fiction stacks but it's those... Chanhassen. So how do we compare with other libraries in the metro area? The Carver County library system is a part of a 24 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 cooperative of library systems known as MELSA. MELSA consists of Hennepin County, Dakota County, Washington County, Scott County, Carver County. Those five county systems as well as the Minneapolis and St. Paul public library systems. Let's look at the cities in these areas that have libraries with population is less than 25,000 and see what they have to off'er their communities. There are 38 communities that fit these characteristics. They have libraries and their population is less than 25,000. Ranked by population, Chanhassen is 13th, and this is... If you compare the size of libraries, rank this by size of the library, Chanhassen ranks 27th out of 38. And if we refer to that formula of 0.7... Chanhassen ranks 36th. So it's not a very respectable showing for this highly educated... Personally I find this very disappointing. I'm not trying to sound negative. It's almost embarrassing that we've not as a community made a stronger commitment to life long learning, education. In his travels across America it was Charles Kurault who said you can always tell the quality of a community by it's grocery store and it's library. I don't know what he would say about Chanhassen. Right now the capital improvement plan calls for no action to be taken until the year 2005. And then only $1.5 million is budgeted for that, which includes the City Hall expansion. Now 7 years from now how are we going to rank with these other libraries? How are we going to be serving the needs of our ever growing population and how much is $1.5 million going to buy to fix the City Hall and the library? It scares me to think. I don't think we're planning ahead well enough on this issue. As a community, as a planning department, as a citizen I think we've all been too passive on this issue for way too long. It's time for us to find a genuine effective solution to this problem instead of continuing to band- aid the issue with a 250 square foot addition. This community has been.., upon high standards in so many areas of it's development. Now is the time to apply those high standards to the public library and provide something that's a true reflection of our value, our ideals and our commitment to life long learning and our commitment to community. Before I go on, are there any questions or comments from members that Mary or I could address? Joyce: I'd like to make one comment here before you do go on. Just for the audience to understand that we are appointed by the City Council. We don't set fiscal policy as such. We appreciate all of you coming out here tonight. We appreciate, you're doing a wonderful job Jill and I think this is an important issue but I just want to make it understood that we don't set the policy. It's set at the City Council level. We can certainly, this will go to the City Council as you're presenting it to us and I think the way I'll handle this, we're kind of getting the idea from you okay so if you want to cut it. So what might be best is if we can just kind of wrap it up here. I think what I'll handle is, if anybody has any questions from the Planning Commission, you can certainly ask Jill and then I'll ask the commissioners just for their advice or their thoughts on the process and I think we'll probably leave it at that, okay? But like I said, this will certainly be in the packets for the City Council and you've all signed in and we know you have a lot of support for this issue and I think it's something that you should probably take on and consider with the City Council. Try to make, get a showing in front of them to present your issues, okay? Jill Shipley: May I ask you Kevin to clarify what will go to the City Council? Joyce: Everything you just said is going to the City Council. Jill Shipley: Will there be a recommendation from, as the Planning Commission. 25 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Joyce: If the commissioners would like to recommend this, that it be seen in from of the City Council, I have no problem with that. They're citizens of Chanhassen and if they think that this should be, a recommendation that your presentation be seen by City Council, I don't see any problem with that. Jill Shipley: Actually City Council has seen this. We did the work session with them so they're well aware of the issue. To me, and I'm not sure I understand totally how everything works. I feel like Council needs a recommendation from you that this issue be addressed sooner. Aanenson: I think what she's looking for as far as the capital improvement.., comprehensive plan. Your recommendation... Joyce: I'll leave the commissioners comments to allow it as that and then I would suggest that you follow up with our comments saying that you presented it to the planning council and that you'd like to have their input. That you want their direction as far as what they were going to do with, concerning this issue and the funding that's necessary for it. And I'm going to let the commissioners say what they want to say, okay. Just like a normal planning session, okay. But you can just kind of wrap things up here and we'll. Jill Shipley: That will be fine. I told you what my goal was. We want a new facility by the year 2000. At least 15,000 square feet. We need space for administrative purposes. I'm willing to listen to what. Joyce: I didn't want to cut you short either. I'm just, I just want to make you understand what we're trying to do here. Jill Shipley: Yes, I think it's important to hear what you have to say about this now so I'm going to sit down. Joyce: Are there any questions first for Jill while she's up? Or while she was up. Brooks: Actually I do. Joyce: Allyson has a question for you. Brooks: And I'm sorry, I guess I just didn't get this and that's why I was confused as to where you were going. So I guess this came separate? Jill Shipley: I mailed them. I didn't get them here so. Joyce: Oh, you mailed them? Yeah. Yeah, that's right you did mail them. That's right. Brooks: ... no reason but I guess one thing that popped into my head, and I don't know if you've considered it is. Right now you're associated with the City Hall and I know we're talking about 26 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Chanhassen building that interpretative center. Is it possible to look at combining a new library with a new interpretative center? That might be a nice compatible. Jill Shipley: I know nothing about this center. Can you fill me in a little bit? Brooks: Well I don't know too much about it but I was asking Kate, it seemed like we were planning to pour money into development a Bluff Creek interpretative center. And yet we have what appears to me as a real need with our library. Maybe we should consider pulling the two together because they're both community resources. Aanenson: The interpretative center probably... Brooks: That small? Aanenson: Yeah... The library being.., economies of scale. It was projected to be expanded with the City Hall expansion and the City Council's... There have been discussions... Brooks: 15,000 square feet... Jill Shipley: I think there's a lot of options that need to be considered really in planning for this. Where is the interpretative center? That's going to be out at Bluff Creek or? Aanenson: Across the street. The west side. Brooks: I do agree with you. I think it's pretty amazing that Chanhassen, being the community that it is, has a library this small. Fairly astounding.., resources. Joyce: Any other questions? Conrad: ... and maybe, I don't think we have it. I really need to know.., projected. I don't know what is... use. I saw some, it was hard to read your graphs.., couldn't see anything and that's tough. I wish you would give us some materials that, maybe staff could distribute it... Number two, you really do need to... Aanenson: You're talking about what technological changes? Conrad: Well yeah. What do they need to have, and really are people using libraries more and more? I saw that, I saw some figures that indicated that this was being used here but I don't know how many people were using it. I really have no idea the real use and the future. Libraries in general and then future of Chanhassen library. The way you would project it. We're going to grow to 30,000 people so what's the need to service those 30,000 people so I'd like to get more background, more specifics so I really know what we're talking about here. We don't, as you heard Kevin say, we really don't make the final... Just as a footnote, we never use, I live in north Chanhassen. We never use the.., and so the graphs made a lot of sense. They were really reflective, the parts that I saw but you don't have the same number of materials that we can find 27 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 other places and I think that's a disservice to us. Again, that doesn't mean that I'm saying we should fork billions of dollars into it but it really, you've identified a real problem. So Jill I need more information and I hope staff can give us... in the future as to what they perceive the need to be and then we can merge that into the capital plan. Joyce: Anybody else have a question? Sidney: I guess I, the first thing I wanted to ask was, you know what do you want to be the outcome of this meeting? And I guess I still want to know. Jill Shipley: I would like the outcome of this meeting to be that you would tell me that you are going to send a recommendation, if that is the maximum that you have the power to do. You will send a recommendation to Council that the library be addressed as it's number one priority in capital improvements. Or as a very high priority. And for us that we need to be working with the library and it's needs for a new facility by the year 2000. I requested a task force be appointed in August. Council was reluctant to do this until they had their strategic plan in place and the budgeting process. There's tremendous potential for a library in Chanhassen. I'm not going to go into it now with you Ladd. Not necessarily as just the Carver County regional but maybe as a total regional library. This needs to be, we need to sit down. We need to talk. We need to address this issue and determine what does Chanhassen really want. Does it just want an improved community facility so maybe just do the 15,000 that I'm talking about. Or do we want to have something larger, bigger, better, that serves as a draw into our community just like Target and Byerly's are draws into our community as well. A library does that. A library pulls people in. Ask these people, ask them how many go to Ridgedale or to Southdale for library service. They do. Joyce: I believe it. Jill Shipley: We need to find out what does the City want. Sidney: What I'm struggling with and what Ladd was alluding to, I need more information and I almost felt like I wanted a staff report you know the way this was developing. And somehow I'd like to see a process implemented or a plan for how this might be addressed before it's really brought before. Aanenson... Sidney: Okay. But still there's this matter of convincing City Council and how to do that. Joyce: It's called the squeaky wheel. Jill Shipley: How much interaction is there between Council and the Planning Commission I guess is the question that I have because I feel like I'm getting fairly favorable responses from Council as far as recognizing the need. 28 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Sidney: Are you getting action? Jill Shipley: I'm getting no action yet. Nancy asked me to wait until January when again the strategic plan was done, and the budget process was done. But are you two communicating or working together? Joyce: We think so. Sidney: But I guess I'm just, you need to convince them that there is a need and to have something in, you feel like in a report. Aanenson: I think she's asking you to be an advocate and to move up the prioritization on the capital improvement plan... Sidney: We see the need and. Aanenson: We see the need. We would like you. Sidney: Address this sooner than later, yeah. Aanenson: ... and if you need other documents, as Ladd indicated, and I can facilitate.., but this will come up again in the capital improvement plan.., public hearing.., on the comprehensive plan and ultimately that will be the plan.., and that's what they're doing... Joyce: What's the time line like on that capital, when they approve the capital improvements for? Aanenson: When the entire comprehensive plan is adopted.., late spring, first part of summer. Joyce: There's one time line right there. Aanenson: Right, but she needs. Jill Shipley: We have a sense of urgency on this issue. Joyce: I understand that but I'm just saying that it becomes etched in stone sometime in April or May, okay. So you have some time here and we need to get some information to the City Council. Aanenson: I think the other issue is ... and I'm not sure where that form fits. If that's facilitated here... That's another request that she's making. That's what I said last time... Joyce: Are there any other questions for Jill? Blackowiak: I have a comment. Actually a couple comments. 29 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Joyce: I was going to come back and just do it like we do the Planning Commission so it's in the nice form that they can read it and, and since you have the comments, you go first. Blackowiak: Oh good. Well I just wanted to respond to Allyson's idea of putting an interpretative center. Definitely piggy backing the library with that facility would be good but I would certainly hope the library could retain what I consider to be the downtown Chanhassen area because not only do we get a lot of people that don't necessarily drive to a library. I think we have a lot of people that can't drive to a library. They like the ability to be able to walk downtown and go to a library. If we had it too far removed from downtown we might have better parking. There might be some advantages to that but I think we'd lose a lot of the core people who couldn't walk or bike to the library. I'd like to have it downtown. Often I'll go to the bank, to the post office.., a full loop and I do everything and it's nice to have it here and I think it's.., future that we keep it in downtown Chanhassen if at all possible. Joyce: Do you want to make a recommendation to the Council that they put this as a priority as far as? Blackowiak: I would certainly hope that they could look at it. I know I've heard the history a little bit. I realize that.., until January. I think that we should definitely, I would like to look at it again. I think Ladd has asked for information and we need a little more information. I would like to see that information, Kate together with the strategic plan. Let's look at the whole thing again. I need to kind of get all together in front of me so I can figure out if this gets moved up, what affect does it have on other.., of the plan. That's kind of what I need to see and I'd like to see it all laid out in front of me. Joyce: So you want to it come back to the Planning Commission? Aanenson: You will see this again anyway. You will see it again. Blackowiak: We'll have to. Conrad: It's got to come back. Blackowiak: Yeah, it really does. If we're to make a recommendation. I would not feel comfortable just saying something tonight without having more facts. I would like to have it in front of me so I can take a look at it and make an educated recommendation. Something I feel comfortable with. Something I'd be able to back up ifa Council member asked me why we decided to, why are you saying this. I can say okay, if you look at this and I feel comfortable saying, backing this out a couple years. This up a couple years and have some rationale to my recommendation. Joyce: Allyson. Brooks: It seems that when it comes to spending $4 million on trails, we're quick to do that but when it comes to building a library to expand our minds, we have to think about it and put it ofl~ 30 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 (applause from audience) What I was going to say is that, you know when I look at my kids, it's important for them to ride their bikes on trails but it's important for them to expand their minds too and in fact in a sense, I'd like to see them ride their little bikes down the trails to the library. I don't think that this should be as difficult of an issue as it is. A library. Andrew Camiege built libraries all over the nation because he understood the importance of a library. And it's kind of amazing to me that we're spending, we question something that should be so fundamental to our community. That we have to look at it over and over. Go look at it. That's not a library. I lived in a town of 9,000 people in Vermillion, South Dakota and our library was bigger. Way bigger than that. I think that we should make a recommendation to the City Council to, if they don't prioritize the library, to at least they should be putting together a task force to look into it. Chanhassen is a growing community. As Jill said, it's an educated community. I think if we had a good library, we would use it. If we sit around long enough Barnes and Noble will show up anyway eventually but I mean it's just a fundamental foundation to any community anywhere. And I feel pretty strongly about it. Joyce: Obviously. Ladd you're next. Conrad: Nothing more. Joyce: Okay. Conrad: But just that, we have the control as the comprehensive plan that Kate presented to us. We prioritize. It can be changed but we do this so. We've done it before. What we don't like, so it's up to us to identify whether there are higher priorities. So it's not like we're just going to send a recommendation up to them to say take a look at it. We have a responsibility to understand more about this and if we don't, do get a task force. Recommend that to the City Council so again I think.., everybody's understanding the process here. We can change things. I have nothing to add. Joyce: So, let me ask you a question real quickly. So what you're saying is that get more information. Clean this up a little bit so that we can make a formal presentation, a formal recommendation to City Council. Conrad: ... more information about the library needs. If we see that there's a need, then we'll compare that to the plan that the planning staff gave us where they laid out the capital improvements for the next 20 years. Then we'll make a decision, or we'll try to understand where this priority should be. So it's not an independent item. We're slotting it someplace into the overall budget. Joyce: I understand that. Conrad: Okay. Joyce: Matt. 31 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Burton: Oh I'm a new resident of Chanhassen and also I'm a new member of this Planning Commission. In fact this is my first meeting and this is the first time I've even spoken as a member of the commission. But I'm a parent of two little girls and I was shocked at the small size of the Chanhassen library. It wasn't something I checked out before I moved here. I do think that waiting until 2005 is a very long time to wait on an issue like this. I'm not real comfortable with the Planning Commission's role in the process because I'm just learning it myself but I do think that this issue should be given a very high priority. Another idea that I was intrigued by was perhaps keeping the library downtown I think would be important, but also perhaps separating it from the City Hall and that's also an issue I don't know much about and Kate talked about the concerns there but we talked earlier tonight about the, what was referred to as a possible historical district. That seems to me might be like a good place for a library down the road. Where there's a lot of pedestrian traffic and you can get a lot of use. I guess that's all my comments. I look forward to looking at this issue when it comes to the comprehensive plan. Joyce: Great. Thanks. Sidney: A lot of good comments. I think I might just add to Ladd's comments a little bit. When you think of planning commissioners, you think of comprehensive plan and land use and I think what I'm kind of itching to do is you know find out what the ideas would be for a site or how could the library be expanded on this location. What are their options? What could be done and that might make things a little bit more concrete in talking about what would be needed for a budget in the future. Maybe I'm jumping the gun a bit but I still, you know the first thing I thought of was, like what Matt was saying. The proposed historical, somewhat historical district down the road here where you could have the library on the first floor and then have another use on a second floor or something like that. But that's where my mind was going. I wanted to look at land use and those issue being a planning commissioner. That's all I have. Joyce: My comments are quite similar to the other commissioners. I think we should look at a library. I think we should look at open air theaters. Conrad: You've got my vote on that. Blackowiak: Woke him right up. Joyce: I'm serious though. I mean do we need another hockey rink? Some people like hockey rinks but I think libraries are very important. I think it's something, it's an issue I appreciate you bring it up Jill and everyone that's attended. Is there any mechanism Kate where they'll definitely know when this comes. It's in the paper and everything. When the comprehensive plan. Aanenson: We'll be putting it no the home page. Joyce: Okay, so that's a must that you're aware of when we visit this as a Planning Commission would be the next time really is with approving the comprehensive plan budget, which we say is sometime in the spring. 32 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 1997 Jill Shipley asked a question from the audience that was not picked up by the microphone. Aanenson: Back through me. Jill Shipley... Aanenson: We'll getitback. Iftheyneed additional information... Joyce: All right. You're on the docket. We'll make a recommendation. I think from the comments that were made, people want more information. They feel uncomfortable making a complete recommendation to the City Council as far as this. Go ahead Jill. Jill Shipley... Joyce: One thing about the City of Chanhassen, they're pretty good about communications. They really are and they'll try. They're not going to you know slide anything by you or anything. We're very open here and try to keep you posted as best as we can, okay. So thank you all for coming. Appreciate the discussion. It was very interesting. Chairman Joyce adjourned the meeting at 9:25 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 33