1k. Minutes I.,
it
1
d
i1
L
r
I k
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 22, 1994
Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Wing, Councilwoman Dockendorf,
Councilman Mason and Councilman Senn
STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Charles Folch, Scott Harr, Todd Gerhardt, Sharmin Al -Jaff, and Tom
Scott, City Attorney
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Councilman Wing: I have just one item. I think we all got in our packet a letter from Bonestroo talking about
our SWMP program is going to go to a national paper. And having recognized that, I have nothing more to
say. You needn't move it ahead.
Councilman Wing moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the agenda as presented. All
voted in favor and the motion carried.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the
following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:
d. City Code Amendment to the BF, Business Fringe District by Adding Additional Permitted and Conditional
Uses, Final Reading.
e. Approve Agreement with Twin Cities and Western Railroad for the Construction of Pedestrian Trail
Crossings at Market Boulevard and Great Plains Boulevard, Project 92 -3.
f. Resolution #94 -79: Accept Utility Improvements in Stone Creek 4th Addition, Project 94 -2.
g. Resolution #94 -80: Accept Utility Improvements in Church Road 2nd Addition, Project 94 -6.
h. Approve Plans and Specifications for 1994 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Program, Project 94 -9.
i. Resolution #94 -81: Approve Plans and Specifications for County Road 17 (Powers Boulevard) Surcharging,
Carver County Project (City Project No. 93 -29).
k. Approval of Accounts.
1. City Council Minutes dated August 8, 1994
Planning Commission Minutes dated August 3, 1994
Public Safety Commission Minutes dated August 11, 1994
m. Approve 1995 Police Contract.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
1
.1 City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
I VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
LAW ENFORCEMENT COSTS IN CHANHASSEN, SCOTT HARR, PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR
Scott Harr: Thank you. Mr. Mayor and City Council. Mr. Gerhardt. Residents of Chanhassen. Tonight it's
my pleasure formally to present to you the report on police costs in Chanhassen together with an overview of
' public safety service in our town. As I promised in the cover memo tonight, I'm not going to recite the figures
that I set forth in the material that was contained in your packet because I think these figures continue to speak
for themselves. I would however like to take advantage of this opportunity tonight in conjunction with the 1995
' police contract issue on the Consent Agenda, to assure you that the system that we've designed here in
Chanhassen continues to work well. I'd like to begin by introducing members of the Public Safety Commission,
the Carver County Sheriff's Department and our staff that are in attendance for this presentation tonight. From
' the Public Safety Commission, all of whom are residents of Chanhassen, I'd like to introduce Eldon Berkland
who is the Chairman of the Commission at this time. Eldon is also a paramedic with St. Francis. Bill
Bemhjelm, who is also the Police Chief with the City of Edina. Brian Beniek who is also a Plymouth Police
Officer and Captain on our Fire Department here in Chanhassen. Dave Dummer who is the Chief Financial
Officer with Powermation and also recently retired as a Lieutenant Colonel with the Air Force Reserve
specializing in Emergency Management, and Mayor Chmiel who also sits on the Public Safety Commission.
From the Carver County Sheriffs Department I'm pleased to have Sheriff Al Wallin with us. Preparing to run
for his third term as Sheriff. Unopposed for the second time. Operations Captain Ron Holt. Sergeant Larry
Woodsack. Sgt. Woodsack is assigned as the liaison from the Sheriffs Department along with Captain Holt for
Chanhassen. And from our Public Safety staff, Officer Bob Zydowsky and Community Service Officer Sheila
Losby. All of these individuals are here tonight for the formal presentation as a positive show of support to the
system that's been developed here in Chanhassen. They're not here because they want to take issue with
something that Council has acted on. They're not here because there's an issue that people are upset about.
They're here to lend their support to a system that you can be proud to continue to support. There's no question
that I'm asked more frequently than when is Chanhassen going to start it's own police department and the
answer is simple. As long as the system continues as well as it is now, and the price we're able to pay for these
services, we ... commission, the Council... continue taking advantage of this fine set of circumstances. As proof of
' this, I'd offer you this morning's newspaper. The Crime Bill continues to march on, passing the House, in
response to America's staggering fear of crime by consider $30 billion of programs that's designed to, among
other things, put 100,000 more police officers on the streets of America. At a time when many citizens in
America live behind locked doors constantly and are afraid to leave their homes at night, I find it nothing short
' of exhilarating that for the second year in a row I'm proposing to you that we increase our contract police hours
by nothing. And this is particularly unique when you consider that we're operating with a basic number of
police officers that is half of what communities of our size use in the Midwest and a quarter of what the average
number of cities throughout the rest of the country have as numbers of officers working their cities in their
police departments. As much of our country is literally paralyzed with fear of crime related activity, I'd like ,to
bring their attention to the newspaper article that I included in the information on the Consent Agenda for the
' 1995 police costs ... from a strip that listed Chanhassen as one of the safest cities in the suburban Twin Cities in
which to live. The chances of being a victim of a crime are little or less than anywhere else in the Twin Cities
suburban area. I find it exciting as many communities are struggling at their council meetings this week, to deal
with gang related problems. Weapons problems. Drug related crime. Your Public Safety Commission has
' discussed the last 2 months at their meetings making one recommendation for next year. Consider and
developing a crime prevention position to maintain the low crime rate that we have while emphasizing safety
related issues for children and families in this community. Chanhassen really is unique and every department
head could tell you about any programs that they're developing fitting their needs as well. But I find myself
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 '.
frequently concerned with the idea of out of sight, out of mind. I think that's the job of the public safety '
department is to maintain the policies that you set forth. Not to develop policies of our own. Occasionally I'll
bring to you an ordinance amendment to fine tune an amendment that we have in existence. Later tonight we'll
be talking about a minute change to an ordinance to make the system work a little bit better but seldom do I
come before you with additional ordinances. Also there's little controversy relating to public safety these days.
People don't appear in front of you up in arms about safety related issues in the schools, drugs, weapons. The
system works and it works well but I hope you don't think the fact that there aren't issues before you means that '
nothing is happening. A lot is happening. In a way that I think all of us in the community can feel proud and
safe about. I'd like to thank you for the privilege of carrying out the job as Public Safety Director. It was my
pleasure to put together the report. Again, I think the numbers speak for themselves. We have a very unique '
system and I'd like to answer any questions that you have about delivery of these services. I know the Sheriff
or the Chairman of the Public Safety Commission would be happy to address any questions that you have.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Scott. Are there any questions of Scott or the Sheriff or the Commissioners on the ,
Public Safety Commission?
Councilwoman Dockendorf. I have a couple comments.
Mayor Chmiel: Good, I want some comments.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Well, Scott I know you didn't want to recite a lot of numbers but for public ,
consumption I would like to. Just want to point out one of the things I keyed in on your report. Comparing
ourselves to similar cities in the area, particularly Chaska which has roughly the same population.
Approximately 14,000. Their budget is about $853,000.00 whereas our's is $418,000.00 for the past year which,
forgive my math skills, is roughly half, and I think we provide the same service. With the same personnel in
some cases. So that's one number I wanted to point out. And per capita, we are way down the list of all
communities in our area. Shakopee, Prior Lake, Edina, South Lake, Eden Prairie, Chaska, we're rock bottom
and I still think we're providing excellent, excellent services. It's a unique plan that we have. A unique set -up
and it works well.
Mayor Chmiel: I'm glad you brought that up Colleen because if you didn't I was going to. That's always been ,
one of the major concerns I think of Council was to what costs might be incurred and consequently have to pass
them onto the residents within the community by doing what we're doing as efficiently as we are. This is the
only way to go at this particular time. Maybe down the road 20 years or so. Maybe 10. There might be that
need but as it's working right now, it is very efficient. Sheriff, do you have anything to say? Even though
you're not running for election.
Al Wallin: I just want to say that it's really a pleasure. I was sitting here thinking.
Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to come up to the microphone so we can have this recorded.
Al Wallin: I don't want to belabor the point but it's hard for me to imagine 28 years ago when I walked into '
Chanhassen City Hall that I'd be standing in front of here as the Sheriff. That was even as apart time deputy
for the city of Chanhassen. I've seen a lot of growth here and again, this is a community that I actually fostered '
my law enforcement career in and like I said, 28 years ago. And so I'm really happy tonight to stand in front of
you and say that the system that I became part of that long ago is still working as good, and even better
probably than it was then. So I just want to thank you for the cooperation. I want to thank the Public Safety ,
3
'1 City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
and the Commission for all the support they have given us, the Sheriff's Department. It really means a lot,
there's no doubt about that. And I think we are unique. I think a lot of communities could take a lead from
what Chanhassen is doing and the County working cooperatively together so thank you very much.
Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you. Is there any, Richard?
Councilman Wing: Well, whenever.
Councilman Mason: Okay, I'll take my turn. You know one of the reasons I ran for office 4 years ago was
because I thought this city was very proactive and anticipated problems before they arose and took care of
issues, always being ahead of what's going on and Scott and everyone else that's concerned with this, it just
proves it to me and that sounds a little hooky but I'm proud to say that I've been a small part of this and I think
' Public Safety and the Carver County Sheriff's Department and what's going on in Chanhassen is an example for
a whole lot of other people and my hat is off. I'm going to back to work on Thursday, my hat is off to all of
you. Good job.
Councilman Wing: Well I was real interested in this thing because I had a couple questions with the Sheriff and
Scott that I just wanted to follow up on. I think the contract is really even good for the city. Obviously
financially it's been a very efficient way to do this but I think it's also been really for the Sheriff's Department.
' I think it keeps the Sheriffs Department in the forefront of the community. I think it keeps the Sheriff's
Department modern. It keeps them on their toes. They're working with communities. They have to get along
with people. I think everybody gains by this. I think it's going to be a sad day if this city or the County elects
' to break away from that because I think there's more to police service at the County level than just running the
jail or having detectives on the road like's happening in some other counties. Scott I just had a couple of real
quick questions. Years and years ago public safety made a statement that after many years of watching this that
' contract costs would most likely parallel but would never exceed the cost of our own department. Do you think
that statement is still true?
Scott Harr: Right now the way that this city demands public safety services to be rendered, I could not do it for
what the Sheriff's office charges or alone. It is a bargain. I sometimes question how the Sheriffs able to do it
for this figure and again, if some cities look at doing ... base level service. We chose to do it just the opposite.
We buy the least number of hours of policing we need and supplement it with less expensive but equally as
' important community service officers, code enforcement people and no, I don't think that we could do it for less
now and I don't know what the future will bring. I think it depends a lot on this continued administration and
following administration.
Councilman Wing: So if cost is an issue, we continue to be cheaper with the contract. We haven't narrowed
those costs. Our department would still always cost considerably more than what we're doing right now, even in
today. I wanted to just clarify that. We still have this disparity. How many cars do we got on a 24 hour basis?
' Are we running 1? 1 1/2 or 2 right now?
Scott Harr: My goal that Captain Holt and I have decided is that the number that we want on a majority of the
time is 2 cars at any given time and that's only because of the geographic size. If we have a call on the
southern end of town, it would just take time to get up to the northern half and the number of calls require it, an
officers safety. We talk about the crime bill. Well it does affect if they're even ... pushing that. We try to have
2 officers on or Officer Zydowsky or myself are available to supplement that and the Sheriffs office does what
' they can to supplement the time that we're lame just because of scheduling.
n
I
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
Councilman Wing: I brought that up only because I was a little hesitant when we aren't increasing contract
hours this year and with our population, it would seem to dictate two 24 hour cars as a minimum level of service
and we're going to provide that with those contract dollars as you've suggested?
Scott Harr: Yes. They include the support from our non -sworn personnel and Bob and myself and as the city
continues to grow, we'll have to add additional hours. There's no question about that but to be able to do so for
3 years in a row with the same numbers...
Councilman Wing: The crime solve rates in years past were at or better than communities with full time
departments. Do we, with the Sheriff's department, his investigators continue to be at or better than, what's the
word I'm looking for? Solve rates or crime.
Scott Harr: ...statistics across the board, the number of crimes reported and the number of crimes solved. Dealt
with another way, continue to be spectacular. In fact in many areas in Chanhassen rates go down which we
think has to do with more aggressive crime prevention efforts and community interaction efforts in working with
other agencies that provide the enforcement services.
Councilman Wing: I just want to make one comment and treat this as an accolade. This is directed at the
system as much as Scott but I think that back in 1988, well Mike you were here for some of the problems we
had when we first started. The dream was that this contract was very viable and very functional and extremely
cost effective in providing good levels of service. But to really make it fly we had to have visibility. We had to
have local control, which was a real debate for a few years. And we had to maintain good service levels that no
one would question. And the key to that seemed to us to be the position of Public Safety Director as a
coordinator. Not a police chief. We didn't want to get into a police department but as a coordinator that was
willing to work with every agency we had. And Scott I think you are a dream come true. I think that you have
in every way, took every possible resource and combined it into a working atmosphere. There's no back biting.
There's no pettiness. There's no rumors. It's been a very productive couple years and I would congratulate you
and everybody. Al Wallin and his entire department and the Public Safety Commission for what we've got
today. I think you should be proud of it.
Scott Harr: Well I appreciate that. One of the most important things in my report are the individuals listed in
the back ... took great pains to include every single individual. Every fire fighter. Every community service
officer. Every deputy on up to the Sheriff's administration. The commission and to recognize the Council. It is
truly a group effort. Nothing that I have done individually. It's a group effort that's worked well. I think that
some of the philosophies that the Sheriff's Department and I share have really helped. And the issue of local
control, we have it. The Captain, Sergeant and I meet weekly, if not daily. The Sheriff and I meet frequently
throughout the year. I've never had a request turned down. If you want to call it control, we have it. The job
gets done and if we have concerns that we want met like the traffic program, we create that. We don't have to
just buy more and more. We can put money into exactly what we want. Local identity. I guess I'm more
proud to have numerous agencies working together rather than the traditional territorialism that many
departments find themselves arguing about. I have no doubt that the Sheriff would put serving Chanhassen or in
Chanhassen or something like that on the squads but I don't know that that's desirable. People know that's just
providing front line law enforcement, supported by Bob and Sheila and our employees. The system really works
well. And I appreciate the support from the Council and Todd and Don and the Mayor as well.
Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you. Mark, do you have anything.
5
L
7
u
CI
II
u
j City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
' Councilman Senn: No, I think it's pretty much all been said. Thank you Scott. Thank you staff. Thank you
commission members. Thank you Sheriff.
' Mayor Chmiel: Good. Yes.
Al Wallin: Can I say one thing?
' Mayor Chmiel: Certainly.
Al Wallin: One of the most important things that we find in law enforcement is the cooperation of the citizen
and believe me, Chanhassen has really you know been outstanding in that respect and I think we talk about
solving rates, there's no doubt about it that the cooperation between the citizens and the Sheriffs department and
the Public Safety has just been phenomenal. It really has and I think you know, those are the people also sitting
' out there that make those phone calls that alert us to a lot of this. Again, we don't have enough police officers
in the city of Chanhassen, nor does any other city. And without the citizens reporting these crimes, we can't
really be effective and so. I'd rather answer, and I know the officers would, answer 10 calls that don't mean
anything but to leave the one go by that nobody called in and many times we have that. So there is no problem
with people calling in and reporting something suspicious and we certainly appreciate the fact of citizen
involvement. There's no doubt about that. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Eldon, do you have anything to say?
Eldon Berkland: It's been said.
' Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you. Can I have a motion then to accept the Law Enforcement Costs in
Chanhassen by Scott.
' Councilman Mason: So moved.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilman Senn: Second.
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to accept the Law Enforcement Costs in
Chanhassen presented by the Public Safety Director. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER REOUEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF A UTILITY EASEMENT
LOCATED ON LOT 1, BLOCK 1, HIGHLAND PARK, ELINOR KERBER.
' Mayor Chmiel called the public hearing to order.
Charles Folch: This basically we had as a housekeeping item for the property legally described as Lot 1, Block
1, Highland Park. Apparently the property has changed hands recently. A title search has found that the garage
on the property encroaches on a 5 foot wide drainage easement. Staff has reviewed the situation and does not
see that there's a problem with this garage encroaching this easement. And as such we're recommending
6
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
,a
adopting a resolution vacating a portion of the utility easement on Lot 1, Block 1, Highland Park as described in ,
the attachment.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Is there anyone at this time wishing to address this particular issue? As I '
mentioned, this is a public hearing. If you have any concerns, this is the time that you do it. Is there anyone
wishing to address this? Seeing none, can I have a motion to close the public hearing?
Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in '
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Mayor Chmiel: Any questions? '
Councilman Senn: No. Move approval.
Councilman Mason: Second. '
Resolution #94.83: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adopt a resolution vacating '
the underlying utility easement located on Lot 1, Block 1, Highland Park as described in the attached
resolution. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER REQUEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF DRAINAGE AND '
UTILITY EASEMENTS LOCATED ON LOTS 1, 2,3 AND 4, BLOCK 1 AND LOT 1, BLOCK 2, WEST
VILLAGE HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION.
Mayor Chmiel called the public hearing to order. '
Charles Folch: Thank you. Again, another housekeeping item. I'm sure you all remember back when we ,
initiated the project for West 78th Street and the final alignment for the project actually was adjusted and... West
Village Heights 2nd Addition and as such, back in June of '93 the City Council, upon substantial completion of
the projection had vacated the old right -of -way that was dedicated with the plat. Unfortunately the front lot line
easements which are 10 feet wide which are typically dedicated with the property along right -of -way, did not get '
dedicated as a part of the right -of -way. As such, to clear up the matter it would be staff's recommendation to
vacate these existing 10 foot drainage and utility easements as described in Attachment A.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you Charles. Is there anyone at this time wishing to address this issue? I'm '
having troubles with my dentures, and I really don't have them. The question is, if you have any concerns on
this, please step forward. This is a public hearing.
Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Senn seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and '
the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. I would move to move approval however. '
Councilman Mason: Second. '
Resolution #94.84: Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adopt a resolution
vacating the underlying drainage and utility easements on Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2,
7
*, City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
' West Village Heights 2nd Addition and as shown on Exhibit A. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
AWARD OF BIDS: UPPER BLUFF CREEK PHASE IIB TRUNK UTILITIES, PROJECT 91- 1713-2.
' Charles Folch: On Tuesday, August 16th bids were received and opened for the Upper Bluff Creek Phase IIB
Trunk Utility Improvement Project No. 91- 17B -2. A total of 5 bids were received for this project with the low
bid being received from S.M. Hentges & Sons at a total base bid of $371,421.00 with Alternate No. 1 bid price
of $89,448.00. This bid is approximately within 2% of the engineer's estimate. We have checked references on
' S.M. Hentges and Sons and have found them to be favorable. They are also currently working on the
elementary school site contract. Galpin and Highway 5. As indicated, what the Alternate No. 1 entails
providing sanitary sewer and watermain to the school site via Galpin Boulevard. The city was made to do this
given some of the timing delays that are occurring with another trunk utility project which was originally
proposed to provide utilities to the site. So given the time constraints, the commitments that we've made in
cooperation with the school district, we recommend adding this work to the improvement project. So as such it
' would be staff's recommendation to the Council that we contract for the Upper Bluff Creek Phase RB Trunk
Utility Improvement Project be awarded to S.M. Hentges and Sons as a total base bid with Alternate No. 1 of
$460,869.00.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there anyone wishing to address this at this time? Seeing none, I'll bring it back to
Council. Are there any questions of the Council? Can I have a motion?
L
Councilman Mason: So moved. Accept award of bids for Project No. 91 -17B -2 to S.M. Hentges and Sons
with Alternate No. 1.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Second.
Resolution #94.85: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to award the Upper
Bluff Creek Phase IIB Trunk Utility Improvement Project No. 91 -1711-2 with Alternate No. 1 to S.M.
Hentges & Sons at a total bid with Alternate No. 1 of $460,869.00. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously.
AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE TO ADOPT THE DEFINITION OF "BLUFF" TO INCLUDE CITY-
WIDE, FINAL READING.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you. On August 8th we reviewed the first reading of this proposed ordinance and
requested that an article be placed in the Villager for an opportunity for more citizen comment. The article did
appear on August 11th. To date staff has not received questions or input from residents so. You had requested
that it not be put on Consent if there was an opportunity for further discussion so we believe ... and recommend
approval of the second.. as proposed.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Kate. Is there anyone wishing to address this item? I did receive one call on
this.
Councilman Mason: Yeah, I did too.
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
Ted Coey: That was me. I'm Ted Coey and I live at 1381 Lake Lucy Road and I just want to bring up the fact
that I feel that this bluff ordinance was originally drafted for the bluffs on the river front. I don't think this
ordinance should be used for the whole city based on the fact that you can have a 10 foot high hill and it's
called a bluff, based on the grade. Not only that, but the major issue to me should be runoff more than the bluff
because the way I read the ordinance, if you have a bluff that's over a 30% grade, you can't build within 30 feet
of the peak of that bluff, well that, on a small plot, that can affect a lot of homesites. And there's no reason on
a, on a cliff type thing you couldn't put a house on the top of that bluff if you take care of the railroad ties or
whatever it needed to control the runoff. I've spoken a couple times with Ladd Conrad who's pretty up on this
and he was the one who voted against it at the Planning Commission and from what I understand, a lot of
research was put into this when they did this. When this ordinance was passed back I don't know how many
years ago. And whoever was on that committee. Were you on that committee Mark? I thought one of the
Council members was on the committee I thought they said. Was it you Mike? And they did not recommend
that they use this for the whole city at that time and they could have obviously done that when they were
looking at this, at the study for this bluff ordinance. So I think we should stand back and look at this and not
just throw this ordinance which was made for the cliffs of the river, on everybody because it will affect a lot of
properties. It will affect mine. And if it adversely affects what you sell it for or how you're going to divide it
up or what you can do with it. I don't really think a 100 foot high cliff is ... 10 or 20 or 30 foot hill. I just hope
you guys look at it before you just go with what staff has said.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Maybe, Kate maybe you can clarify some of the questions that Mr. Coey has.
Kate Aanenson: I think we discussed this at the last time but just to refresh. This goes back to when the bluff
ordinance was adopted. It originally was to go city wide. That was the original discussion. Then there were...
that were concerned about the implication of the city wide and they decided at that time to apply this bluff area
along the river. There was an investigation of where it should be applied and briefly it was determined that
there may be some merit... obviously on Lake Lucy. Mr. Coey is in the process of dividing his property. We
don't believe that there is any, at this time, that would fall into the bluff. He does have significant slopes but we
don't think that they meet this definition. But again, the intent goes back to when we started doing the
Highway 5 corridor study and as you know one of the unique things Chanhassen has is some significant slopes.
And we certainly believe if they fall within that definition that they're worth changing. I mean saving, excuse
me. And not changing and altering topography so we think preserving our natural topography is a significant
value to the city. In addition there is always the opportunity for a variance. As you're coming through
subdivision, if there is a way that we can mitigate that, Mr. Coey's correct. Watershed runoff is one significant
to the impervious surface. The runoff from the roof and that. It affects the shoreland. Gulleying and other
erosion. But it gives us an opportunity to answer... subdivision to apply for a variance and if you can mitigate
those, that would be an option so there is an opportunity to get relief from the ordinance but we certainly believe
that if something has that significant of slope, that we would recommend preserving it.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. And that's something that I think I mentioned Mr. Coey at that time. That probably
what he had concerns about were probably not relating basically back to what this ordinance would be. And as
far as sort of rubber stamping it, I don't think we do that here. At all because we do make sure that there is
enough time to be given to the particular subject and that subject be put into the newspaper making sure that
citizens are well aware of it and it's their opportunity at that time to come in and really address those issues. So
with that I would like if there are any questions in regards to this.
Councilman Mason: That was pretty good. Kate, quick question. What is significant?
0
J
' City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
' Kate Aanenson: 30% rise...
Councilman Mason: In how many?
' Kate Aanenson: 25 feet.
' Councilman Mason: So 30% grade in 25 feet.
Kate Aanenson: Right. But and that's pretty significant.
' Councilman Mason: Yeah, okay.
Kate Aanenson: Mr. Coey does have the slopes. I'm not sure if any of them really meet this definition but
' there is some topography to his property.
Councilman Mason: Okay, thanks.
' Mayor Chmiel: Anyone else? Mark.
Councilman Senn: During fast reading I kind of raised the issue over this and I think the advertisement in the
paper definitely is a step in the right direction but I still feel really uncomfortable with it. If these are minimal
areas and specific areas, I still would really like to see us sit down and define them and notify the people
involved. I mean we did that with wetlands and everything else and it just, I know there's variances and maybe
we've answered Mr. Coey's questions tonight but I'm just real uncomfortable with the fact that we're not
necessarily even going through the motions of really notifying the people that it's going to affect and who's
property going to be involved. I'm still uncomfortable with it.
Ted Coey: Don?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Would you like to come up?
' Ted Coey: It's not a big deal. I just wanted to come up and say, I was only aware of it because I'm going
through the platting process now and it was brought to my attention by one of the guys who was interested that I
could have problems. I'm not looking at this from my perspective but there's a lot of people up here in this
community who would be here tonight speaking if they knew they had this problem. They won't find this out
until they go to plot. Or go to have a developer come in and say ooh, we can't do this because of this and this.
And I'm not, I'm not really against having developments come in ... all the trees down so I'm not in ... leveling
' everything off. I'm just saying that there is some, there could be some type of give and take where if you've
got a 25 foot hill and it's got a 30% grade, that maybe you could put a house on the top if you did it right. And
so that's what bothers me. Once you get these rules in, then you're stuck with that unless you come in for a
'
variance ... but I'm sure there would be a lot more people here had they known that their, like Mark said, their
land is going to be sacrificed they'd be here also.
' Mayor Chmiel: Good, thanks.
Councilman Mason: A couple of quick comments. You know I'm not sure that the city should be in the
business of rooting out every particular case that applies 100% of the time. If staff has to spend a lot of their
10
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
time finding out, well there might be a slope over here. There might be one down there. You know it was
printed in the Villager and yeah, I know that sometimes that's not enough but the city has done something about
it and for every 15 people that the city might find, there's going to be 3 or 4 that we don't and so we're always
going to have that problem. So I share some of Councilman Senn's concern but I think that becomes a pretty
monumental task. I guess my second point is, from what I'm hearing from Kate, even though this ordinance is
passed, if there are legitimate reasons, variances do work and there still are ways of circumventing this in
isolated cases. So while I share that concern, I guess I don't want city staff, well I just think that would be such
a monumental task for every little change we make to notify everyone in the city on a personal basis. I don't
know how we could do that.
Mayor Chmiel: It does become a problem and it does become a chore. Colleen, did you have anything?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: No.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Richard.
Councilman Wing: I worked through the University and I talked to Kate about working through a slope
ordinance which really parallels this in that how can we protect our topography. Well, it's either going to be a
slope ordinance or in this case it's a bluff ordinance. But the decision we're making tonight is a very long term
decision. It's a long term issue but it needs to impact now. So we could notify everybody in the city and
everybody who's impacted could be here but still if we're going to protect our topography and our interesting
terrain as we talk about it, we need to do it now and I don't think that other comments would change or alter the
need to do this so I guess I kind of share Mike's feelings. If we're going to move on this, it's probably
reasonable. I think this is fairly flexible. I'm not sure what the definition of slope is. I wish we knew more
about that a little bit but it's kind of ambiguous thing trying to protect something we've got. I guess it's the
right start. If this isn't real successful then I would like to see an outright slope ordinance that says you can't
cut the hills down and you can't grade this and you can't do that and I think that would be more restrictive than
this so I think as a starting point, this is a good place to be. At least it gives staff some way to review the
projects coming in.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I would entertain a motion for this proposal.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I would move approval of the second reading of the amendment to the City Code
to adopt the definition of bluff to include city wide.
Councilman Wing: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: City Code amendment. Moved and seconded. Any other discussions?
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve final reading of the
amendment to the City Code to adopt the definition of "Bluff" to include city wide. All voted in favor,
except Councilman Senn who abstained, and the motion carried.
Mayor Chmiel: And I think you indicated your concern at the time. Thank you.
CONSIDER REQUEST OF SOUTHWEST METRO TRAIL ASSOCIATION TO UTILIZE
SOUTHWEST REGIONAL LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT ROUTE AS A SNOWMOBILE TRAIL.
11
C�
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
Mayor Chmiel: In lieu of Todd not being here, are you going to do it.
Todd Gerhardt: Included in your packet was a memo from Todd Hoffman that was very detailed in the
' background of staff and the Park Commission's review of this request. And you may also notice that the Park
Commission did not come to a formal recommendation to the City Council. That it was a 3 to 3 vote in
determining if this should be a snowmobile trail or not. With that, at this time I'd like to highlight the proposed
' route and then invite Mr. Leroy Biteler to come up and make a formal presentation to the City Council and then
open it up for public comment. On the overhead you'll notice that the existing route for the snowmobile club
are highlighted with the dark black lines and the proposed routes that the association is asking for are the dark
lines with the black dots. As they fall along alignments for around Lake Riley and then down to the railroad
' bed That route is no longer an option as I am aware of this because Eden Prairie City Council has denied
access through their city. A second alternative to that route would be the route coming down through private
property, down to Pioneer Trail going east across TH 101 to the railroad bed area. This would be highlighted
' with just black dots. There's also a third route which would be vacated and that is highlighted with a black line
with the slashes through them that goes on private property south of Lyman and then down County Road 17 to
Audubon. At this time I would invite Leroy to come up and make his presentation and then again open it up for
' some comments...
Leroy Biteler: Good evening. My name is Leroy Biteler, 910 Penamint Court, Chanhassen and I've also invited
Mike up here to help me a little bit with the presentation. I'll let him introduce himself.
Mike Farkas: My name is Mike Farkas. I live at 7501 Chippewa Trail in Chanhassen. Leroy and I have been
working together on this project and we're going to just try explain a little bit more in detail about it.
' Leroy Biteler: Mike is the expert on the map so when it comes to map questions, I'll definitely be turning
things over to him. Did you receive and have an opportunity to read through the packet that I mailed to each of
' you? Do you have that packet or do you need an additional, that information? I have extras.
Mayor Chmiel: If you have extras, why don't you just pass those out.
' Leroy Biteler: Okay. While he's passing those out I'd just like to tell you how I'm going to present to you
tonight. Basically you know our objective is to be able to get to the southwest or the trail system in Chaska
from Chanhassen via the railroad bed. What I'd like to do is tell you what happened in Chaska with respect to
the railroad bed. What happened in Eden Prairie with respect to the railroad bed and our alternative routes. I'd
like to review the objections from the people that live along this railroad bed and support some of their
objections with ... part of the information that I have collected with respect to sound and some other things. So
' and then at the end I have about a 7 or 8 minute video that videos the railroad bed. I'd like you to look at that
with respect with snowmobiling in mind so you can see from a snowmobilers eyes or ... what it looks like along
the bluff area and how high the bluffs are and where the homeowners live and how close they might be in
relation to the creek. And that would basically be the end of my presentation. Some of the things will be
' repetitive from what's in the letter but I think some of the people that are here need to be aware of some of the
information that I have gathered. Chaska Park and Recreation Board has elected to approve the use of the
railroad bed in Chaska. That will be going to the City Council on an upcoming date. I don't know the time.
' Eden Prairie as of last Monday night had rejected our proposal to use the railroad bed which entails about .5 of a
mile in Eden Prairie for this year. They rejected that basically due to $30,000.00 worth of seed that they will be
putting down and $30,000.00 includes seed and labor that they'll be putting down in the park area out by Lake
Riley. And just with the thought of possibly somebody going across that and trespassing that area, they would
12
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 '.
elect not to do anything this year with snowmobiles down in that general area. They did however say that they
would like to look at this again in '95. They would like to provide an area for the residents of Eden Prairie to
be able to access the trail system. That's what Eden Prairie would like. So with that in mind we hope to attend
their Council meetings coming up sometime in September. The date is unknown. See what we can do at that
point again. So with that happening in Eden Prairie, that gave us the thought that we need to come up with what
we call a dry route. A dry route meaning you can get there whether it's a lake that's frozen or not, meaning
Lake Riley and since we couldn't cross Lake Riley this year because of the Eden Prairie denial, the dry route '
would be the route we would like to use this year and I'd like Mike just to kind of highlight on the map the
route that we are looking to use as the dry route.
Mike Farkas: The dry route, it continues down CR 117, which was our original trail and then it would cross ,
private property here onto Pioneer Trail which will then take us east over to the border of Eden Prairie in
Chanhassen and we will drop down right basically in Chanhassen by a bridge that crosses over the old railroad
bed there. That's the location where we've chosen because everything else in these areas here of Bluff Creek is ,
a little bit more unaccessible by snowmobile as far as the ditches go. And it's our most possible or safest route
as far as giving us the most room in the ditch to get us over to that railroad. We're working with the
landowners at this time to secure the permission to get across their property. We haven't had enough time '
because of we thought that Eden Prairie would let us through across Riley. We had obtained permission to get
on Riley in Chanhassen over some private property but that didn't quite work for this year. Maybe next year.
One other thing I would like to mention. On this map there's a few extra trails that we've given up to secure
our trail in Chaska through to get our railroad bed approved down there. Last year we had lost our whole trail
section here to Victoria which is 82nd Street. We still have our trail to this time onto Minnewashta over to
Victoria so basically what we're looking for is two trails out of town. One to the southern route to get us to the
river bottom, which is a state trail. One is to the west so it can get us out to the west trails and to the north up '
to the Luce Line, which gets us out to Hutchinson, Watertown and those areas. This is, we're just basically
trying to funnel the people out of town and give them a way to access these trails. It's not like we have trails all
over any more. We basically just have two trails left at this time. However, we have one trail now. We're
trying to get two because we had lost that one ... to the State trails in Chaska We gave that trail up to the...
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) '
Leroy Biteler: ...to give them the education so that they can ride snowmobiles. There's a piece in there that
talks about the sound in decibels of snowmobiles. In 1975 snowmobiles were determined that they could not
exceed 78 decibels. What that means so that you have an understanding of sound in decibels a little bit. In this
piece of information they talked about conversation at 3 feet is 70 decibels. They say an automobile at 50 feet
away, stepping on the gas is 84 decibels. A truck at highway speeds is 90 decibels. Inside an airplane is 100
decibels. Now how does that compare with snowmobiles? Snowmobiles were looked at from 1975 to 1989 in '
one area of this report. Snowmobiles traveling between 10 and 20 mph, the decibels ranged from 65 to 73.
Keep in mind, conversation is 70. Snowmobiles between 1975 and 1989 I reiterate were at the top, at full
throttle, 78 decibels. There may be a few that are louder. Some of the older models but basically we're talking
from 75 to 89 and that's probably most of the machines that are out there right now. If you want to back up to ,
1969 for instance, go back to an older model snowmobile. At full throttle the decibel of that machine was 92.
In 1970 they came down to 86. The Shorewood trail which runs from Lake Minnetonka out to Victoria. There
was some sound considerations, problems that were thought to be. The Southwest Trail took it upon themselves ,
to do a very specific test with respect to sound in decibels of snowmobiles. What they did is they took 10
snowmobiles with very strict regulations, I might remind you, and those snowmobiles ranged from a 1972 all the
way to 1986. At 40 mph in 1981, a snowmobile with a 340 motor, average decibel was 74.9. In 1985 decibels
13
1
11
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
were 74. Another a 1984 Phaser, decibels were 75 at 40 mph. A 1980 J, decibels were 76.8 at 40 mph. Let's
look at an older model. 1973 PX440. It was 81. That is an older model. A 1972 Chaparral. Those decibels
was 87 at 40 mph. So you can see, if you look at something from 1980 on up, those decibels range at 40 mph,
from 74 to the low end, to 78.4 at the high end at 40 mph. Those decibels go down a little bit at 30 mph. They
also did a Shorewood, they went out in the street and set up the decibel reading machine. Automobile and truck
traffic in front of the NSP circle parking lot at 50 feet from the road averaged 71A decibels. Traffic noise at the
intersection of County Road 19 and Country Club Road, a half a block north of the Shorewood City offices, 75
decibels. A small chainsaw averaged 83 decibels at 50 feet. The last couple items on decibels. We took the
decibel meter inside a home off of the Shorewood trail. Inside the home there was 65 feet away the trail. The
sound decibels inside the home, the ambient sound within the south ranked from 32 to 58. Snowmobiles went
by that home at 30 mph, the average reading was 50.5 decibels. At 40 mph it was 66.1 decibels. You've got to
keep in mind that the ambient sound was anywhere from 32 to 58 inside the home with no snowmobiles going
by. The loudest it was when the sled went by was 66 decibels. I reiterate, sound of conversation 3 feet away is
somewhere around 70 decibels. I really think the issue of sound is behind us. I think that was in 1970. The
issue of ruining vegetation, should that come up. That was not a big issue that evening but the pressure that a
snowmobile puts on vegetation in relationship to the pressure that a person walking through the snow would put
on vegetation, in terms of pressure, the snowmobile is more gentle on vegetation than a person. In fact, it would
take 10 snowmobiles and their rider piled on top of each other to equal the pressure of one person. Again, that's
from the Minnesota Training Manual. I think the train that used to pass on this railroad bed is probably quite
louder than what we are going to create. Probably a lot more vibrations in the home as the train passes by also.
Another issue was walkers, skiers, hikers. Cross country skiers and snowmobilers don't mix. I can understand
your concern there. I suspect that we will have less traffic on that trail in the winter months than we will during
the summer months, like this past weekend. It was a beautiful weekend to be outside. That trail is 15 feet to 17
feet wide. I believe that is plenty of room for everybody to mix and have a multi purpose trail. The Shorewood
trail is a good example. The Shorewood trail between Shorewood and Victoria, I've passed many people on that
trail that are walkers more so than a cross country skier. They're allowed on that trail The Luce Line trail.
The Luce Line trail goes through Watertown. Starts at Stubbs Bay. Actually you can get all the way out to
Hutchinson on that trail. They are allowed walkers, skiers, bikers, horseback riders, pretty much everything is
allowed on that trail system. There's a trail system down in southeastern Minnesota down by Lanesboro and I
forget the other name of the city. It's down by Lanesboro of which they have an 8 foot wide trail, paved which
allows snowmobiles, cross country skiers, bicyclists and hikers. I'd like to pass a photograph around. That
photograph is from the river trail down by Lanesboro. You'll notice that there are two signs there. One sign
says no motorized vehicles except snowmobilers. On the other side you will see that they have a bicyclist, a
hiker and a cross country skier. These kinds of things do exist in Minnesota. We are not asking for something
out of the ordinary. If I can go back to the Luce Line trail for a moment. We can pass through Watertown.
There's an article here that says, adjacent to the trail, the peak on the Luce Line trail. More and more people
are constructing their $250,000.00 homes creating this section of rural America into one more suburb. My point
here is that the homes along the trail are not losing value because of this trail. They are probably adding some
value. There's some homes that are listed for sale along the Luce Line trail in the Watertown area. They use
the trail as an asset. It says very private beautiful vista of wildlife, wetland on the Luce Line. Wooded acre on
the Luce Line trail. The issue of the trail decreasing your property values, it's more of an asset than it is a
decrease. Another article from a Luce Line trail that goes through Watertown. This happens to be a newsletter
of the Luce Line Trails Association. A well groomed trail designed to handle the travels of all users. Walkers,
joggers, bicyclists, horseback riders and our winter sports. Snowmobiling and cross country skiing in harmony
can be achieved by enthusiasts who are willing to work. Our club has a membership at this time of
approximately 73 family members. We have a roster here which has been included in your packet. These
members work real hard to keep our club and to keep our club active in the community and also our trail system
14
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
tight knit as we possibly can. We encourage people to talk to people if they're doing something wrong on our
trail. We have a list of signatures on a petition. There must be 8 pages. In excess of 100 names. Not all club
members. A lot of them are not club members, that are in approval and would like us to see us have the
opportunity to ride this trail system. Some of these people live along the trail. They may be here this evening.
,
I'll just mention a couple names that I have talked to and that have signed our petition. Nick Evanoff, Keith
Carlson, Sue and Paul Allen, Ed Mueller, Mr. and Mrs. Sabinski, Russ Barto, Ron Mathias. Sorry if I mutilate
your name. Patty and Chris Weber. James Struble. David Metdke. These people live along the area and in the
area of this railroad bed. They are in approval of hoping to get a good access this trail out in their
'
neighborhood. I have a letter here from Brett Davidson, which is a previous land owner of which our trail
crosses 2 years ago. This letter, Mr. Chmiel, I don't believe got to you and the rest of you. If it did, it just
arrived very recently. I'm going to read a little bit of this letter because it is new to everybody on Council.
Brett Davidson. He lives at 7291 Galpin Blvd. I'm writing this letter to address the issue of the new proposed
snowmobile trail location. While I do not know all the particulars concerning this trail and as such cannot
address the specifics, I have had considerable dealings with the Snowmobile Club due to a snowmobile trail
'
being located on my property. I have never owned a snowmobile nor do I enjoy the sport so I believe my
opinion is unbiased. I have lived in Chanhassen for 8 years. For the fast 6 years the snowmobile trail was
located on my property. At first I was reluctant to allow the trail to be on my property but after discussing with
members of the snowmobile club I decided to allow it for a year to see the outcome. I must admit I was quite
'
surprised. The club was very professional and they seriously addressed all issues that were ever brought up. In
addition, it was obvious that they continually worked throughout the year to insure the trail remained in the
proper location and that the signage did not fail into disrepair. It became obvious that the vast majority of
'
snowmobilers was very responsible and could enjoy this sport without serious disruption to the surrounding
homes. That's the letter which you did not receive in the packet. Carver Parks recommends us in their park and
we have been in the Minnewashta Regional Park for some time. They also sent you a letter and
recommendation allowing us to use their trail. Basically supporting our club. The DNR is also supporting this
'
type of trail. The DNR works on these kinds of trails throughout the State of Minnesota. They have also sent
you a letter recommending the use of abandoned railroad grades as an ideal setting for this type of use as it is
already set up to function as a transportation system. In Chanhassen we have 462 registered sleds in the zip
'
code area 55317. Information provided to us by the DNR. We are basically providing a service to all those
people who have registered machines in our community. We provide that service. We do all the work. We
mark the trails. We do the best that we can. We'd like to continue to provide that service. Some of them are
'
members of our club who... Snowmobiling can be an exciting, fun family sport. Our family has snowmobiled
for 17 years. I've snowmobiled since I was my son's age. My children are here this evening, Jeff and Miranda.
We would like to keep this opportunity as a family sport to be able to do it in Chanhassen as long as possible.
Two weeks ago my daughter asked me, while I was doing all this work on the snowmobile issues. She says,
'
dad. Will I be able to snowmobile when I become of age to ride? Miranda, I hope so. I'm working hard at
trying to keep that opportunity for my kids and there's many other kids out there. We just want to maintain that
same opportunity. We will bring law enforcement out to this trail system. Believe it or not. Maybe you'll see
'
more law enforcement out on this trail system than people along that railroad bed have ever seen. I see Al
Wallin here tonight. I kind of wish he was still here. I was talking with him 2 years ago when we made
arrangements with Carver County to bring their sleds out on our trail system to patrol. Unfortunately at that
'
time we had a couple old Arctic Cats that could barely make it from one end of the trail to the other. As a
matter of fact one of them did fail. Now they have two new machines. We will encourage them to get out
more. The DNR will be out to help us. We will patrol it ourselves the best that we can. As we have in the
past. The last thing I have is I'd just like to reiterate snowmobiling is not a long season. We may feel in
Minnesota we have a snowmobile season that lasts for 6 months because it's cold for half a year. That's not
right. We're lucky if we have snow by Christmas so if we consider that we have December, January, and
15
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
C
0
PI
February as snowmobiling months, that's probably 90 days. Out of those 90 days, and I'm going to be
conservative, let's say we have 60 days that we can ride snowmobiles. Probably about all. If that. My point is
we're asking for a very small percentage of time to use that trail. If there's not snow on that trail, they aren't
going to be using it. It takes snow to make these machines run properly. Otherwise you'll burn up things
underneath the track. So in our area snowmobile times are numbered. Snowmobile days are numbered. So
that's basically what I have to wrap up my presentation from the podium. Other than answering questions and I
truly would like you to see this 7 or 8 minute film with the snowmobiles on their mind as opposed to possibly
some other things when you may have been up and down the trail.
Mike Farkas: I would like to mention one thing before he starts. I don't know if any of the council members
have been on this trail. Have they been down it? Everyone's been down it then? I just hope that we look at
this as looking at these houses, there's maybe 1 or 2 that are fairly close, and they are quite a ways away.
(Leroy Biteler and Mike Farkas showed a videotape of the trail corridor at this point in the meeting.)
Mayor Chmiel: What I'd like to do before we go to questions, is to see if there are some people here who are
either in opposition or for this particular project. I know that many of you may have had discussions at the Park
and Rec Commission and those particular Minutes that we do have in our packets show those concerns. So if
there's something new that you'd like to bring out this evening, I would entertain those positions at this time.
I'd like you to just please state your name and your address and your basic concern. If you could limit it to
roughly about 3 minutes, we'd appreciate it. Is there anyone wishing to address Council at this time? Maybe
you could just sit down and we can get back to you.
Leroy Biteler: I certainly will Mr. Chmiel. We had one other person here. The President of our club who had
just a couple comments. It would be very short. Almost basically what you're asking for now that he'd like to
comment on.
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
Charles Littfm: Mr. Mayor. Council members. My name is Charles Littfm. I am the President of the
Snowmobile Club... particular or continue all this as a club, it helps to have trails to keep the club going. And
therefore I'd like to say that we want to be part of the community and to do that we need to have trails. I guess
basically it gets right down to it. Snowmobilers need trails. We will keep the trail going whether there are trails
or no trails and we will also continue to work with the city on the trails and other activities throughout the year
like Septemberfest and all the other activities that the city has come up with. Thank you for letting me speak.
Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you. Okay, I would entertain anyone who would like to come forward and express
your concerns.
Curt Bardal: My name is Curt Bardal and I live at 10301 Heidi Lane in Chanhassen. My mailing address is
Chaska and Mr. Mayor, Council members, citizens. I'd appreciate a moment. I'd like to first address the
Metro Snowmobile Association. Southwest Metro. I do appreciate your concerns. I am opposed to them. I
appreciate your concerns and I'm sensitive to your issue because you bring maturity, conscientiousness and a
safety factor to the sport that I only wish all participants brought to that sport. I do appreciate your attitudes and
what you bring to it and your conscientiousness. You mentioned a letter from Mr. Webber. He is a neighbor of
mine. He has snowmobiles. He has motorcycles. Rides them through the neighborhood. Maintains the
decibels. Good neighbor. Good person. Quality citizen and he participates in these activities. Also had some
16
n
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 '
area. As a resident in the area, I don't want to exclude people from coming and enjoying the neighborhood. I I
17 1
,
other neighbors. Young fellow, dirt bike. I bet they didn't know what decibels was. Probably couldn't hear.
Enjoyed the area because of the serenity we spoke of earlier... should bring the bike off the top of the hill.
Roaring it down the street. I wish the police enforcement could still be here now because I would like to thank
them. They're always very responsive. However, enforcement is difficult when somebody is shooting off over
'
the hill with loud decibels. And I want to emphasize, I sympathize with you. You run a quality organization.
You obey the laws but when you open a trail like this, you open it also to those who do not necessarily abide by
those laws. You open the trails and there's a need for regulation and enforcement. Enforcement is a difficult
'
thing in this particular area because of the terrain. Where Hesse Farm adjoins the old railroad crossing and the
old railroad trestle, enforcement would be extremely difficult. We have in the past had a sportsmen experience
with hunters in the area. From the railroad trestle and south was an area deemed there could be hunting. From
the railroad track and north was non - hunting because it was residential. On occasion a hunter will cross that
'
railroad track and again I emphasize the vast majority, as in any other activity, the vast majority of hunters are
conscientious and law abiding. Wonderful individuals. Great to have a cup of coffee with and visit. See how
hunting went and any of the individuals who starts wandering up into the residential area. A few of the
'
neighbors have called. The police have responded and appropriately enough state that the police officers refuse
to pursue the hunter in the residential area appropriately because he was dressed in brown. There's a deer hunter
also with a gun. It'd be rather foolish to pursue this person. Now what are his reasons for going into that area,
,
whether it was after a wounded animal. A downed animal somewhere, we do not know. Never did find out
who the individual was. It is not an enforceable situation. This relates to snowmobiles. How do you enforce
when you have someone getting off the trail onto private property? It may not be enforceable. The terrain is
such to pursue this individual, to identify them, to correct the situation is just prohibitive in that area So I have
'
a serious question number one about the regulation and how it can be enforced. I just don't see how our fine
police force could do this. A second issue is a safety issue. The area and the slopes and the bluffs below Hesse
Farm is an area that our children find an adventuresome area Wildlife, trees, places to camp in summer. Places
to slide in the winter. They have on occasion walked along the railroad track since the train has been pulled out.
They enjoy the area but I envision twilight hours, I envision when they're down there in the evening, when
they're ... evening to do some sliding. Walking along the railroad trail and here comes a snowmobiler. And in
bad visibility, we have an accident in an area that is not accessible. So safety is a great concern to me in this
area. And excuse me if I'm being redundant on issues that have already been presented but I'm new to this so
these are my feelings I'm presenting. Thirdly, environmental concern. I'm not sure how many of us are ... found
this out myself. In that particular area below Hesse Farm is one of the last remaining trout streams in this area
,
However minuscule a resource it is, it is a significant natural resource in the fact that at one time there were
several trout streams in the entire metro area I believe the last count there were 7 viable trout streams left. One
of the 7 is Assumption Creek. I would like to invite further information because I recently found this out
'
myself. But if this be true that we have this resource here in Chanhassen, I feel it should be examined. It
should be protected. Something that should be cherished There is some concern for that area now because
development in Chaska that is off the watershed from ... and it has brought some runoff to that stream. But the
stream is mostly spring fed from below Hesse Farm. This environmental factor for me goes back to the hunting
'
issue. If hunting is continued to be allowed below the railroad tracks, the hunter wants to have the animal in the
field is ... by law at this point is allowed to pursue that wildlife, to retrieve it with snowmobiles. This in fact
would leave snowmobile tracks off the snowmobile trail. Once this has been occurred, say in the November deer
season, the tendency would be to follow this trail. If this gets into, and I know there's a lot of if's here. Into the
area of this stream, Assumption Creek, is there environmental concern? Is this a question that has been raised at
all? I don't have answers. At this point myself I only have questions. Also environmental concerns in pursuit
'
of wildlife. I do have concerns with snowmobilers that are as conscientious as the snowmobilers who are here
tonight that will pursue the fox and deer, the occasional coyote and other rabbits and wildlife we have in the
area. As a resident in the area, I don't want to exclude people from coming and enjoying the neighborhood. I I
17 1
' City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
' think for hikers, for bikers, for cross country skiers, that it would be less impact on the animals and wildlife
around. It's a cherished area and I would not presume to be so selfish as to excuse people from viewing the
natural beauty there. And finally I would ask the Council, whatever decision you arrive at, please do not arrive
' at it in haste. Do take a long time to consider this. Is an environmental impact study necessary? I don't know.
But is it a concern because if we decide something in haste, find out years later we lost a valuable resource that
could not be restored, it would be quite regrettable. So finally I'm asking please, please take a long time.
Consider the many, many things that not only I have mentioned but the snowmobile club, there are many issues.
' So again thank you for your time.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you.
' Nancy Mancino: Mayor, Councilmen, Councilwoman. My name is Nancy Mancino, 6620 Galpin Blvd. I do
not live in this area nor am I for or against snowmobiles but I would like to say I live on Galpin Boulevard and
' I think about 3 years ago, or 4 when Jerome Carlson built there and ... property, it was one of the trail systems
that went from Galpin to Highway 41 and they would cut across there. I live just north of that area and we're
probably as the crow flies, about a half mile north. Quarter mile north of there ... that most of the time, I would
say 75% of the time it was just fine having snowmobilers. However, there were many, many occasions at 2:00
' and 3:00 in the morning that we would hear the snowmobilers going through that trail. And there was nothing
you can do. You can't go out and stop them ... by that time they were gone. So what I have, that's very hard,
was the enforcement of the hours and it was again, just to wake us up. Even though you couldn't actually see
' our house ... as I said, we were about...half a mile away so the sound just reverberated all over. So I am...
decibels but I can tell you what it was like in the distance of the, or around the trail. Secondly, I just have a
public safety issue and that is, there is no, as far as I know... training snowmobilers, which I really think is too
bad because one of the things that we find, we have a road that goes into Galpin Blvd. and snowmobilers use the
' west side of Galpin Blvd. to travel. And many times we have come down the end of our driveway and there are
young men, I think they are young men. Teenage...snowmobilers and they just, they don't even look where our
driveway comes into Galpin and there have been a couple times when we almost hit a snowmobiler so I do have
' some concerns if this trail were to traverse a highway and how it was built. I would hope that the State does do
some sort of licensing and training of snowmobilers at an early age. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else?
Joe Kandiko: My name is Joe Kandiko. I live at 10421 Bluff Circle in the City of Chanhassen. A couple
issues brought up by the snowmobilers that I would like to take issue with. The idea of mutual use on the
snowmobile trail of hikers, skiers and snowmobiles I have found not to be true. Walking the trail between
Chaska and Shakopee where it's a maintained trail and many of the trails that are down in the Louisville swamp
area, you hear a snowmobile coming. You're on skis. You have kids with you and you immediately head to the
' side and the snowmobiles are not the ones that give way when they're coming down 25 -30 mph or more. I
don't find it mutually accessible use of trails and I don't think it's in the interest of safety. Many times we,
when hearing that whine, would have to scurry our kids off to the side of the trail for safety sake and I never
saw a snowmobile slow down on an open straight away for a pedestrian. The noise level that was mentioned,
I'm a physician. I know about decibels and he's off by a power of 10. It's 7 decibels at 3 foot conversation
range, not 70. Higher than 115 decibels was the inside the Metrodome at the World Series. 70 is not 2/3 of
what a conversation range is at 3 feet. Comparing things of ambient noise level in a house assumes that
' everybody's up, TV's are going, conversation is going. When you're asleep, any noise is enough to wake you
up and I think that to say that it's 75 or 82 or 72 decibels, if it's quiet at night and you get awaken, that's a
night's sleep lost. And I think this has to be considered that the hours don't stop when you are in bed or your
18
I
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 '
kids are in bed. Many times, and right now that snowmobile is not, that snowmobile trail is supposedly non- '
motorized vehicles. 2:00 or 3:00 a.m. from my house, which is just up the bluff, not being able to be seen on
that video. However, the video is taken right now. You take that video in January and you'll see 20 more '
homes from the distance that he's talking about. So just because he can't see them through fully leafed trees
doesn't mean that there's a lot more accessible trails there. And if he ... night's sleep with the whine of those
engines at 1:00, 2:00, 3:00 in the morning, is not at all pleasant. I would encourage you to think that this is now '
a residential area. Chanhassen cannot go backwards. There are places for these snowmobiles that are on a right
trail and established residential development I think is not considering the day life and night life of the residents
of those places. Policing is indeed impossible. Once those people are on that trail, there's only one way out and
there's only two access points. Bluff Creek Drive and TH 101 and if you can't get on at either of those places, '
you're stuck. And the same things have happened as Bardal referred to with hunters. Once they're in there,
you're not going to find them and that's been a problem with enforcing any of these rules. A snowmobile goes
by, you call 911. They're never going to find them and that's been an issue that we found not only with hunters '
but also certainly with the snowmobilers. So I encourage you to take into consideration the people who border
on these properties. We didn't buy it to live on a snowmobile trail. What he's referring to as far as homes
being enhanced by the Luce Line trail, I'm sure if you said you can listen to snowmobiles at 2:00 and 3:00 in '
the morning if you buy this house, you'd end up with a few less... So I think you have to consider that a lot of
what they say, we're not trying to put snowmobiles out of business but I think there's appropriate trails already
set up for that. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. '
Boyd Peterson: My name is Boyd Peterson, 9860 Pioneer Circle and it's kind of wild to sit here and listen to '
this by the residents of Chanhassen. You've obviously got some people that don't like snowmobiling. They're
trying to cop out some ways to say hey, we don't like them and this and that noise issue. Go away. They're
loud. Everybody forgets about the airplane. I live close to Flying Cloud. They go over all the time. They're '
loud. Can you do anything? No. Riley Lake, same deal. You sit and listen to the motorboats going around
and around and around ... there is all this crazy noise. Okay, everybody's doing their thing. I have no problem
with a trail in front of my house to get to the main Hennepin County corridor. That's a light rail corridor at the
time. That's what it is and we all should be able to use it. Eventually it's going to be a train coming out that
and then nobody's going to use it. There's been an old railroad train going up and down that since 1920. It's in
my Abstract. It says it in there. Railroad trains are ... dirty things. You know what's this environmental impact
stuff when this old greasy train's been going over all them years and there's still trout down there. As far as '
able to get off of that when you're on it with a snowmobile is almost impossible. It's either straight up or
straight down. Or it's got fences. Once you get on at the access point the snowmobile club is asking for, it's a
straight shot to Chaska. So my view is let's keep it in Chanhassen and sure there's bad apples that are going to
ruin every group but you know, do you make the laws for them or for the people that put a lot of work... I've '
heard some people ... watch a good chunk of that property in front that's going to be used for snowmobile trails
and a lot ... if I remember, everybody has a right to that trail. You're always going to have your bad apples here
that ruin it. You're always going to have people that don't like what somebody else does. And we're 1995. '
Snowmobiles are ever quieter today than they were 6 years ago. Thanks.
Resident: Don, can I have a right to rebuttal on the environment? '
Mayor Chmiel: I'd rather not go into that right now. I'd like to get the rest of the people who have some
concerns.
19 1
I
.1
J
n
J
0
k-
n
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
David Gatto: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. My name is David Gatto. I live at 9631 Foxford
Road. I have a question. You indicated that the trail, because you can't use Eden Prairie's is going to come
across Pioneer Trail. Can someone tell me more about that? Where's it going to come from on Pioneer Trail?
Mike Farkas: You know where CR 117 that goes by Lake Susan.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: 17.
Mike Farkas: Or 17, excuse me. Okay, out of Chanhassen there. Okay, that's the original route and then what
we're doing is proposing the trail to go through private property down to Pioneer Trail.
David Gatto: Where is that point on Pioneer Trail?
Mike Farkas: Okay. Approximately I'd say about a half a mile west of Halla Nursery.
David Gatto: Okay. And then continuing.
Mike Farkas: 3/4 of a mile.
David Gatto: Continuing east?
Mike Farkas: It will continue east on the south side, all the way to where the bridge is that goes over the
railroad. The old abandoned railroad and will drop down on the Chanhassen side of the border there and then
we proceed south towards Chaska.
David Gatto: Okay, thank you. I'm actually here for another issue tonight but I'm glad I'm here. Whether
because we've got some comments regarding the Halla issue but as I listen to this, these people want to come
across right in front of my house and I happen to own 400 feet on Pioneer Trail and I must say that I wouldn't
be in favor of this at all. I've had snowmobilers come across on Pioneer Trail there and I'm sure it's not any of
these people because they sound responsible but the problem again is the people that aren't and the problem is
what they'll do is about 2 or 3 years ago I planted several small seedling trees and now they're spruce trees and
they're about this big. And what I think might happen and what I've seen happen is the folks who come across
Pioneer Trail and they see the nice fresh snow down on my property and they run right through the ditch and
they've been on as far as 30 feet inside of my property with their snowmobiles and I'm afraid they're going to
run over the trees and cause other damage and I wouldn't be in favor of that at all. This is the fast time I've
heard about this. I'm extremely surprised. They say that they're working with the homeowners but as a
homeowner and I own 400 foot along Pioneer Trail, I wouldn't be in favor of it at all. Thank you very much.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Anyone else?
David Huffman: Hello. My name is David Huffman. I'm a commissioner on one of the commissions, the Park
and Rec department. 1 was at the meeting last time. I guess I'm the sacrificial lamb this evening. I ask the
Council if you have any questions, I am nervous speaking in front of large groups so forgive my—as we go
through this. We had several different issues that we talked about that evening. They've been covered by a lot
of different people very eloquently. There were two major issues that they were talking to the Council before
and after that were of great concern to us. One was the lack of information given to the homeowner community.
We did not want to see that we were railroading people into a quick and early decision. There seemed to be a
20
u
I-
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1
group of individuals on Heidi Lane who had not been contacted. Inadvertently r adverten o . We did not
Y Y 8
out of our way to exclude anybody. We had a good discussion from a lot of different individuals. The major
concern that did come up was dual use in this trail. It cannot co- exist. I mean that's what we came up with and
that's what we thought about. It was our understanding that Hennepin County at some point along that corridor
was going to have cross country skiing. We talked about that a little bit. You already read the notes or most of
the concerns with the cross country skiing issue and the existence of the snowmobiles caused a great deal of
concern. For myself in particular and some of the other members. We had a 3 -3 vote. The first time allowing
the snowmobiling to continue along that corridor. It was a tie. We had 6 members. It was another, the second
vote was to disallow snowmobiling along there. That was also a 3 -3 tie. We need to know as a commission
and we sent it on, what was going to be the use of that trail and that was our concern. If cross country skiing is '
going to be allowed, it is going to be groomed, there's going to be a problem from our perspective of the dual
use. The other reality is, this is a light corridor system that allows people to get from one spot to another very
quickly. There will be no bonfires. There will be no camping. They move from Point A to Point B. They '
move down into Chaska. Down to the Minnesota Valley State area. They move quickly into an area that allows
snowmobiling because Eden Prairie does not allowing snowmobiling does not mean that this ... body does not
have a few more brains than Eden Prairie. I think this is a very volatile issue on a lot of sides but we sent it up
here. It is our recommendation, after talking to several people on our side on our issue, is that we need some
direction. Some help in terms of the use of the trail. If the trail's going to be cross country oriented, then it's
not going to do us any good to have snowmobiles there. If it's not going to be groomed, taken care of and the
fees collected, the same problem with cross country skiers in terms of use, then from our perspective there's no
problem for using the trail for snowmobiling. Did I get it right or not? Close? Questions, comments, concerns.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess not. Not at this time. You only had 6 commissioners out of.
David Huffman: There were 6 commissioners and we had a 3 to 3 tie both ways.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Anyone else?
Paul Graffunder. My name is Paul Graffunder. I live at 10001 Great Plains Boulevard and this thing is kind of
a bonus issue for me. I'm not here for this either but we happen to have a 55318 zip code where I live and...
My boys and I do snowmobile quite a bit and about all we get to do is go around our house. There's just
nowhere for us to go that I feel it's safe. I would love to have this. We've lived there for quite a while and I
used to hear the train and that was okay. The noise wasn't bad. But we would really love to have this.
Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you. Yes.
(There was a tape change at this point in the meeting.) ,
Willard Halver: ...My house is shown there. I'm 250 feet from the old railroad bed. And I've lived there 37
years and it seems as though my yard, my house is a challenge for target for rock throwing off the railroad bed.
The 10th of June this year I picked up 47 rocks. I put a call in to Scott Harr. They said Scott Harr was on...
put down the information and said there wan't anyone available here at Chanhassen. Said I'd have to call the
Sheriff's Department. So I called the Sheriff's Department and the Sheriff's Department gave me the
information that they were on an emergency and I'd have to wait a while. Well by that time the individuals that
had been throwing these rocks, I saw him. I know who he is. I know him right today. He was gone. If you
don't catch the man ... half an hour to follow him before I get an officer down there. No. No way. I called
21 1
C
C
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
'
the—call the Sheriff's department. 9 weeks later, last Friday evening. Now this first incident happened on a
Friday afternoon about 1:30 -2:00. Last Friday evening I'm in my double garage working on my lawn tractor and
my wife's in the basement and we hear some strange noises. And here are rocks are coming again. So I put a
call in, my wife put a call in to 911. This was an after 5:30 in the afternoon. It was half an hour. The
individual was gone. Now I got the license number and I'm waiting for the deputy sheriff that finally came
there in 15 or 20 minutes. He took my story for further action. But it seems to be a target. I am definitely,
until we get some enforcement, which I haven't seen in 37 years. We're down in that southeast corner there.
You might as well say we're down in you know what USA. We don't know what law enforcement is down
there. It's that hard to get. And I don't know why. We pay our taxes and everything. So ... until we get
enforcement, I'm not against snowmobiling at all. But when these individuals are under the influence of drugs
' and alcohol and throwing these rocks, I've got a big chip on the siding on this episode that happened this last
Friday night. And Don Fox, the Deputy Sheriff is the one who investigated the case, and this is just starting to
move now. Thank you.
' Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else?
Jim Sulerud: I'm Jim Sulerud at 730 Vogelsburg Trail. I'm here for another issue too, like several of my
' neighbors and I guess several of these are focusing down in that area. Couple of things. One is that when I want
to go canoeing I put my canoe on the car and drive across town or somewhere else to go canoeing. If I want to
go cross country skiing, I put my skis on the car and go somewhere else to cross country ski. I can walk and
jog out my door but I can't even bike out my door. I haven't been able to in the past so I've got to put the
bikes on the car and go somewhere else. There was a horse in that south end of town, you'd have to load up the
horse and go somewhere else in most cases. I'm suggesting that for snowmobilers it's maybe the same thing.
You put your snowmobile on a trailer and go down to the river bottoms or you go out to existing trails. It's not
incumbent upon the city to provide out the door access. Another aspect is that I think maybe my family is the
present user of the trail, even though it's not open right now. We live about a couple hundred yards up the road
and we're on that trail literally daily. Often times twice a day. All I can say is that when I say we, I mean my
' wife jogs. I don't get out there as often as she does but she jogs year round. What we, our kids use it for
biking and running. The primary use we've seen of the trail so far, unopened as it is, is people walking and
there's quite a few. I don't know where they all come from but there's a lot of people who walk on the trail.
The second biggest use, I want to say numbers of people are bikers and then it's joggers and after that it's dirt
bikes and then cars. Some of that has cut down in the last ... I would suggest that it's probably going to continue
to be heaviest used by walkers in the wintertime. Cross country skiing is a slight possibility but I cross country
ski but that area of the track, the railroad bed there is bare most of the winter. The sun hits all that exposed area
and it's bare for most of the time unless it's real heavy snow because it's very exposed to the sun on that south
elevation. So I would say half a mile to a mile is, snowmobilers come through there. I'm surprised that some
do. I'm sure it ruins their equipment but they've come through there in the past. But I would say that it's not
going to be a conflict between cross country skiers and snowmobilers but it will be the walkers and my wife will
continue to jog. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else?
Bill Kullberg: Mr. Mayor, City Council. My name is Bill Kullberg. I am the past President of the State
Snowmobile Association and the current trail administrator for the Southwest Trail Association. But I'm here
' tonight also as a Park Commissioner for the city of Minnetrista and as a helpful hint for you to direct your Park
Commission, we have been involved with trails and trails in our community were nowhere as developed as what
Chanhassen has but we have been working with the trails and waterway unit with the Department of Natural
22
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1
time. I
23 1
'
Resources and I believe the contact person there would be Mr. Dan Cowens. He's .gone to a number of seminars
that address the multiple use concept. The user complex. I sat through the Park Commission meeting here a
number of weeks ago and there was one young lady who was really advocating cross country skiing. But as we
groom these trails in Carver Park, there's even a conflict between the style of cross country skiing. There's in
line skiing and they want little tracks and then there's the scissor type for ski skating type of situation so there's
conflicts there. Developing conflicts between walkers and bikers that I had not heard about until I got involved
with trails. This kind of information I think would be very helpful to your Park and Rec Commission. I cut out
,
a little article just recently that dealt with Carver Park and other, Lake Independence and so forth. They're
having problems with bicycles going off of their trails and they had Rangers out there doing patrol and it's the
mountain bikes that like to get off into the more rugged terrain and I can see where they're going to go down
,
this railway and want to get up and down by the bluffs and so forth so there are environmental issues. It
wouldn't just be snowmobiling that your Park Commission's going to be dealing with. May be well advised to
get this kind of education because you're going to have more conflicts or at least use of this trail but you also
have part of the trails that goes between Shorewood and Victoria with a small section that we have used for a
number of years for snowmobiling. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else?
,
Leroy Biteler: Just a couple of comments on some of the things that were brought up. With respect to ... along
that trail. We can post that trail and put curfews on that trail to whatever we determine is an appropriate curfew
for that area. There are curfews in other areas such as the Shorewood area. I believe it's 10:00 or 11:00 and we
do patrol that area at night with the groomer and with automobile telephones and we do some ticketing with
respect to people that are not meeting the curfew. So if we can help you with the curfew issue. Mr. Kandiko
you mentioned some information with regards to sound decibels. I may be off a little bit but I'm not from 70,
'
which I mentioned conversation is 70 and you mentioned that it should be number 7. I'm very close in my
decibels ratings with respect to conversation. I work with ... wall partitions which deals with sounds transferring
from one side of the partition to the other and they just get some common loudness levels. Just speaking of
'
regular, average street noise is 70 in their case. Conversations at 3 feet away is 60. Just like to correct that. I
may be off a little bit but I'm not off from 70 to single digit 7. I think you indicated people breaking the law.
It is difficult to catch people breaking the law on snowmobiles. That is why we have in the past actually
brought sleds out to the trails with deputies on it so that we can help maintain law and we generally have people
'
from our club assisting these deputies and we have ticketed people. I'd like to see that, those tickets be heavily
enforced and see the dollar volume go up for the people that are breaking the law. David Catcherall, I'm not
sure I pronounced your name but if the trail does go down Pioneer Trail, in fact it will be a marked trail. It will
'
be an enforced trail. We'll be able to take care of the areas such as one of our landowners sent us a letter of
recommendation that he was surprised at how well we were able to maintain... We have an area that there's a
problem, you need to contact us and we need to deal with that problem. There's a variety of ways and I truly
'
believe that we can that some of the people have recommended our services to Council. Which land we crossed
in the past. I think that's basically all I need to address. I think you have enough information from the packet
that I sent you previously.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you.
Leroy Biteler: We would like to see you help us make this decision, pro or con. We've been doing this since
March 22nd which was the last snow season. Coming upon the next one. I can't believe it's taken this long. I
guess that's the way politics works. It's my first experience with this. Thank you very much. Appreciate your
time. I
23 1
u
I I
I �
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess I've heard some of the pros and cons to the issue and there are several things
that I had written down with some of the concerns I had. Number one was curfew. The hours of operation.
What were the city's liabilities, even though the club has an insurance portion on it. But even if they have that,
the city automatically gets brought into any suits that may come up from something as such. Barricades. Some
sharp turns within that particular area and I understand that you're looking at some types of barricades but I'm
not sure what those barricades might be. I wanted more information regarding distances from homes and I
would also like to get the Minutes from the Eden Prairie Park Commission and if and what discussions were
done by the City Council as well. I would like to send this back to the Park and Recreation Commission,
number one and the reason for that is that there were 6 commissioners there. The total commission was not
there. There's 7 members and that one additional member may have tendencies to either break that tie from one
to the other but I would like to get a recommendation back from the commission. And I guess that's where I'm
coming from with this. Richard.
Councilman Wing: I'm in my can't put my thoughts together mode. I want to pass for now.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Well I've got notes all over the place so my thoughts may not be together. A little
bit scattered but they'll be out there. I came in, let me preface it by saying that I don't snowmobile. However I
see, and I don't recall who but someone made the reference to hunting and these are two, what I call, so called
sports. Snowmobiling and hunting which are rapidly disappearing in the metro county area and we see the areas
to hunt diminishing every year and eventually snowmobiling will not be allowed in our community. Just the
population growth won't allow it. However there's along history in our community of allowing both of these
things and as we continue to grow I guess I'm not ready yet to let go of that opportunity for our citizens. I
think if we're going to allow it in the city, and as 1 said, I'm not ready to let it go, I think this is the ideal
location. It keeps them out of the ditches. It provides a safe place. However, as Dave brought up, it's not
compatible with any other use during the winter months and I strongly believe that and I guess I have a question
and since Todd Hoffman isn't here, I'll direct it to you Todd. Who decides what the winter use is? Can we,
can the city decide that no cross country skiing will be allowed there? Or is that up to Hennepin Parks?
Todd Gerhardt: Hennepin Parks has put it back onto the local jurisdictions to determine what the uses will be.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Any use? Okay. And another way to enforce that is with signs in terms of saying
this is a snowmobile trail and any other uses or at your own risk. I guess what I propose to my fellow Council
members is that we do a trial run for the '94 -95 season. I would like to put some restrictions on the time. I
don't see anything later than 10:00 p.m. all week long. Let's see, what else did I write down. I had a question
' as to someone brought up that once you're on the trail it would be hard to get off. I'd like some verification of
that. If this does go back to Park and Rec, I'd like that addressed. I guess that summarizes. And I would also
propose that we have a speed limit and I think what the Association is asking for is 40 and since the decibels do
go up with each increasing mile per hour, I'd like some limitation on that. I don't have a suggested number. I
' also have a question as to what the fine is for after hours use. Can anybody answer that right now? I mean is it
substantial to deter.
Leroy Biteler: We would like to see it be whatever the city makes it.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Do you know what it is currently?
24
r
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1
Leroy Biteler: I don't know myself unless Bill Kullberg knows what you do in Shorewood. I
Bill Kullberg: It'd be a misdemeanor so they have various gradations. Some cities you're allowed to go straight '
home if you live in that city. In the city of Shorewood we have worked currently as they have passed their
ordinance so no matter who you are, if you're on that trail, the rail grade after 11:00 you're going to get a ticket
whether you live next door to the Mayor. So I mean that gave law enforcement more of a tool.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Like that would make a difference.
Mayor Chmiel: We don't do that. Let me just ask Scott. He would have probably a pretty good inkle as to. 0
Scott Harr: Well any violation of city code is a criminal misdemeanor chargeable by citation and formal
complaint with jail time and a substantial fine possible. The snowmobile regulations in conjunction with the '
noise ordinance are so specific that to provide a more specific report I'd have to ask for some additional time,
which I would be happy to do or maybe this is a project that the Park and Rec Commission wants to work on
with the Public Safety Commission as well. But the short answer is any specific violation of the city ordinance
is a criminal misdemeanor. '
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay, thanks. I guess that's my proposal. I'd like to hear what everyone else
thinks but I would say that we give it a trial run for '94 -95. Reduce the hours to 10:00 p.m. all week and reduce '
the speed limit to some reasonable amount.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess maybe I should preface my statement before I get to you Michael. I too am on a '
snowmobile route that goes past our house for the past 18 years and there are sometimes that the 2:00, 3:00 in
the morning does occur. It is rare but it does happen. And as far as encroaching on property. Yeah, I've had
that situation happen as well. Where they have taken out one of my hugo pines. It's something that I guess I
sort of get used to because I've got one of my sons that has a snowmobile as well. So I sort of chalk it up as ,
experience but that 10:00 curfew time is I think something that we should really look at. Let me go to you.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. I have, excuse me, one more item that I just found. I just lost it. '
Councilman Wing: You should have used different color ink.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. I should have used different color ink. Sorry. '
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael.
Councilman Mason: Well, while you're searching for it. Note, we're all jotting notes tonight. East meets west. '
Progress. Should we have snowmobiles or not. I live in Carver Beach, Woodhill Drive. I don't have a '
snowmobile. I don't snowmobile but a lot of people in Carver Beach snowmobile and they come up and down '
Woodhill Drive and no, I don't particularly like it but that's the way it is. You know, my lake place. Well, my
father's lake place. Before there was a grant and aid trail, about a half mile away from the cabin, snowmobilers
went all over the place up there and I didn't like it. With that trail, snowmobilers use that trail a lot and there '
isn't as much traffic elsewhere. That's a plus. I heard residential area. That it's a residential area and my guess
is it will become more of a residential area. Who's held accountable? Who's liable? If there's an accident on
the trail, does the city get sued because a snowmobile hitting a hiker. Cross country skier. Go off the bluff
because it wasn't marked. You know, hopefully we can always compromise on issues. I don't think there's a I
25 1
i
i City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
compromise here. It seems to me we'll either do it or we won't. I think we need some more information before
I make a decision because I have, quite honestly I'm really sitting on the fence right now. I agree with the
people that want a trail to snowmobile. I think there should be one but I also would not like the snowmobile
going down next to my house. I will say right now, we're talking about, you know Colleen you threw out
10:00. Well, I can't cross country ski in Carver Park after sunset. The park's closed at sunset and I've been
chased out of there more than once, much to my consternation. So 10:00, you know my kids go to bed before
' 10:00 so if it comes to that, 10:00's too late for me. But I guess I would like to, Scott said he wanted, needed
some time to look at some issues. I'd like to explore accountability and liability issues before I make my, how I
feel one way or the other. I think, I forget the gentlemen that talked about, the name who said he's got to put
his skis on top of the car and bike on top of the car, his canoe on top of the car. As Chanhassen grows, those
are issues that all of us that like to engage in recreational activities have to face.
' Mayor Chmiel: Thanks, Mark.
Councilman Senn: Boy, this to me kind of seems like government at it's best and I mean that facetiously. You
know it seems to me that the County decided it doesn't want to deal with an issue so it's kind of advocated it to
' the municipalities and you know it really seems to be a little bit silly and somewhat awkward that we're sitting
here trying to decide that fate of one section of trail and just kind of, are we going to ask people to make U
turns and say only this portion of the trail can be used for this. That portion for this, this and this. It seems to
' me that there are some real valid issues here but I think how the trail is used is one which Hennepin County
ought to decide and I think in the process of doing it, they ought to do a lot more studying than we've done and
I think they also ought to ask for our input. But I see our role as more one of input into a whole trail system
than I do deciding the fate of one small section of trail. There's, you know I guess I'd have to say I'm a little
' bit like Michael at this point. I'm really kind of not sure which way I'd actually vote if a vote comes tonight. I
live on a heavily traveled snowmobile area where there are almost continuously 2:00 to 3:00 runs to the fish
houses, etc. And I can say geez, I don't notice the boats much in the summertime but then I've got a lot of
' trees with a lot of foliage on it. But I tell you what, in the wintertime I notice them and they wake me up
constantly. At the same time I like snowmobiles but most of the time I go do my snowmobiling somewhere
else. Of course I have to say that about biking too so. No doubt that really the people before us tonight as far
as the snowmobiling goes, are responsible people and are probably doing a lot to forward the good of the cause
' so to speak but at the same time I've experienced and I know that there's a lot of people that don't look at it as
conscientiously as you do. I have them using my kids skating rink as a jump and I have them using my business
property rather than the ditch and they have ... trees'and other things like that. I think you have a tendency to
pretty much write some of that off because again, no matter what you do ... and I don't think that's only to
snowmobiling. I think it's whatever recreational activity undertaken. So I don't know. Like I said, I'm really
kind of torn both ways on this one but I would really rather see, given the importance of that corridor, the
' importance of that particular trail as part of an overall system, I'd much rather see a comprehensive approach to
that dealing with the entire trail and corridor than the approach which is now being taken.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Richard.
Councilman Wing: I think my favorite time of the year is spring and fall because the boats and the snowmobiles
are gone and very, very frankly the boats are much more irritating and a bigger problem, especially out on
' Minnewashta where all the inboards are. It's just a, and you know when the boats are gone, the snowmobiles
are gone, the traffic noise makes up for it. So I don't know if we're going to win this. On this whole issue I
just want everybody to like me so it seems to be almost hopeless.
26
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1
27 1
Councilman Mason: Good luck.
Councilman Wing: A couple quick comments just going down my notes. Enforcement on these issues are
'
general enforcement issues. We're not out, no one is ever going to target a specific snowmobile or a speck car
or a specific boat so when we have a problem, Scott Harr reacts in a general way. And if we have to send 12
sleds out or line the place with police officers, it gets done. But it's general. It's not specific so if someone has
a specific problem with a specific sled, that's kind of light. That's the same with the car and anything else but
'
we do have the ability to go out and enforce an area if there is a problem that develops and there's no question
about that. Winter use is extremely limited Snowmobiling is extremely limited. There's no snow, there's no
problem. Daytimes aren't an issue. Weekdays really aren't a problem. I live on a trail. It's the weekends that
'
they're busy. They used to be noisy. They used to be a problem. There used to be swarms of them. Now
they're limited in numbers. It's not as popular as it used to be. They're much quieter. Right next to our house
is an access for the neighborhood. What a nightmare that was but it literally doesn't exist anymore so the
'
problem that I once knew, I used to own one and I got so frustrated with them that I sold it so I could gripe.
Because of all the griping I won't ever go back into it so there's a lot of pros and cons here. The cross country
skiers, that's my biggest problem because I'm the little scooter type guy and the skaters come in and min the
trail so come in and groom the trails and the skaters come in and annihilate the cross country trail. They're not
'
compatible. I do find on our trail going through Shorewood, is that if there's no snowmobiles, there's some
cross country skiing, unless it ices up. But if there's snowmobiles, then there's jogging because they pack it
down so I find that for my personal winter use, for jogging, it's convenient for me to have the snowmobiles
'
because they pack it down. I have a running surface to run on. So you know, pros and cons again. I really
agree with Mark. I think first of all I think this should go back to, take our comments and go back to Park and
Rec and hit this head on with the full group and I would like to be there too and address it myself as a
councilmember to help give them some direction. But I think more important, I think Park and Rec ought to
,
take this and give it back to Hennepin County. I think Mark hit it right on the head. Why put it, this little tiny
section with Chanhassen. This little tiny section of Eden Prairie. Make up your mind what you want to do with
that trail. They did it in Shorewood. It's snowmobiles and multiple uses and we live with it and it has not been
'
a problem. There aren't a lot of complaints. There haven't been any accidents. We can go on and on with
these if's but the reality is, that trail has been fairly compatible for everybody. I use it all the time. Take it
back to Hennepin County see what they want to do and tell them to make a decision and decide how they want
,
to use this trail. That will make it easier for us. If they shoot that down, then I think it's back to us to make
the decision. I also want to know from Scott Harr what our present ordinances are. Snowmobiles aren't banned.
I mean they can ride on the streets or they can't. Certain hours they can't. They can ride in the right -of -ways
on the highways so it doesn't matter if you own 400 feet on Pioneer Trail or not, if they stay on the right -of-
'
way, it's got nothing to do with the homeowner as far as his property goes. I guess I note these little fine points
on those issues. Where is the State law and where are our ordinances at? And if that can go to Park and Rec, it
can all be done there. If it does get back dumped on us, we'll make a decision.
,
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is that a motion?
Councilman Wing: I would move to table this and get it back to Park and Rec. Clean it up and then if they
can't make a decision or if there isn't some compromise, I'll be happy to do it.
Councilman Mason: Second.
,
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion?
27 1
1
u
n
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Just that I'd like to see more information. I found my little tidbit on cross country
ski trails in the city.
Councilman Wing: On what?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Cross country ski trails. I mean you can go out and do it wherever but are there
any designated trails. I'd like to know the condition on that as well.
Councilman Senn: Dick, I'm a little confused with the motion. Are you suggesting go back to Park and Rec
and Park and Rec act on it and send it back to us or.
Councilman Wing: Well I'd like Park and Rec to tackle the issues. Number one, I think the first thing ought to
be to send it back to Hennepin County and ask them to make a decision. That's my first direction. Secondly, in
lieu of that not occurring, meet with these groups. Fine tune the ordinances that exist. Get that information to
us and then if they want to come up with a decision with the full group, send it back to us. I think we're going
to have the same problems. It's going to come back with the same issues. The same two sides. We'll simply
have to take a stand on it at that point. I guess I'd be more comfortable doing it at that part. But I agree with
you, Hennepin fast. That's the direction to Park and Rec. Then see if they come up with a compromise here
that might be compatible in terms of hours or whatever. If it gets back to us, it will be another night like
tonight. We'll just simply have to make a decision. Does that clarify it Mark?
Mayor Chmiel: There's also another factor by the snowmobile club indicating securement of easements and...
have not gotten those easements, that would be something too that I would strongly look at because that would
just negate any of that trail going if you can't acquire those.
Councilman Wing: It's not this club that's the issue. It's the renegades that are the problem and they're going
to be there regardless.
Mayor Chmiel: No, that's right. Oh no, and I realize that. The club has done excellent. They have gone
through the process of teaching other people how to drive snowmobiles and going through the safety aspects so I
know that the club has done an excellent job from that standpoint. So with that I would.
Councilman Mason: One discussion or question, whatever. With this going back to Park and Rec and if they
were to make the motion that it go back to Hennepin County, I would hope that City Council would endorse that
action and there would be some kind of formal statement.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, because I assume that it has to come back to us basically... doesn't it?
Councilman Mason: Yeah, because I would, yeah. I concur.
Mayor Chmiel: But it falls in their realm of responsibility and that's where it should be done. So with that we
have a motion on the floor to table with the following comments that have been given.
Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to table the request of the Southwest Metro Trail
Association to utilize the Southwest Regional Light Rail Transit route as a snowmobile trail. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously.
28
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 '
INTERIM USE PERMIT TO ALLOW SCR EEN E D OUTDOOR STORAGE IN THE BF, BUSINESS
FRINGE DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 10500 GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD, ADMIRAL WASTE ,
MANAGEMENT.
Sharmin Al -Jaffa This site is located north of Highway 212 and south of the Hennepin County Regional
Railroad Authority trail. Highway 101 and is in ... off of Highway 101. The applicant is requesting an interim '
use permit to store commercial dumpsters on property zoned fringe business. There aren't any structures
proposed on this site with the exception of the fence. The fence is proposed to be 100 feet in length. 6 to 8 feet
in height and would screen the dumpsters from views from the highway. The applicant is also proposing to '
plant 42 spruce trees at a foot and a half in height. The fence is proposed to be of a dog ear treated panel
design. Staff is recommending approval of this application with conditions outlined in the staff report.
However, if you ... some minor corrections. As far as the height of the fence, currently the condition reads,
condition number 1. Reads this fence shall be 8 feet in height. It should read, the fence shall be 6 feet in '
height, not to exceed 8 feet. Another issue that we would just like to bring to your attention. Staff is requesting
that work on Sundays and holidays not be permitted. Now this is not required by ordinance. We put that
condition in there out of consideration to the neighbors in the area. If the City Council wishes to add any '
conditions for this application, we need to find out that there should be a balance between the conditions of
approval and the length of the term that you put on this application. You should allow the applicant to meet
those—of the site. Again, staff is recommending approval of this application with conditions outlined in the staff
report. Thank you. '
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Sharmin. Is the applicant here this evening?
Bill Griffith: W. Mayor, Council members. My name is Bill Griffith, 1500 Norwest Financial Center,
Bloomington representing the applicant. The permit requested is essentially a permit to build a 150 foot fence to
screen existing construction containers on the site. It would seem a simple matter but I do believe that it needs
to be put into context so if you'll indulge me for a few minutes. This will not take as long as the snowmobile
'
discussion. Although I was happy to see that the trail did overlook our site, as it looks at the juncture of
Highway 101 and 212 and as it overlooks the top of the site and down to the bottom, I saw no dumpsters visible
from that location. So the issue is really screening the construction containers from the roadway. And if you
'
drive by the site at this time, you'll notice that there's quite a bit of foliage on the site. It's fairly dense and the
topography lends itself to screening from the north and from the other directions. What we are proposing would
screen the dumpsters more than sufficiently during the winter months when foliage is not as dense. The reason
'
for this application is related to another matter on your agenda this evening, and that is the amendment to the BF
district uses. To add permitted uses and make additional conditional uses. I don't think there is any coincidence
that these matters are on the same agenda. The applicant has very limited uses today. You're probably aware
that there are 4 conditional uses and I think 3 interim uses of the property in the BF district. In 1988 the
,
applicant did have a conditional use permit for a contractors yard and had planned to locate a facility for storing
these types of dumpsters both inside and outside the building and putting... center. They looked at the site and I
think because the recycling was just taking off at that time and as they ... looked at their recycling market, the
'
year lapsed and they came back to the Council for an extension and was denied. So they were not able to go
forward with that contractors use. However, they did have permission from the city to store dumpsters, I think
albeit 6 at the time. They continued to use the property in that manner from that time until this for the last 6 or
so or 7 or so years. And up until last year in December, I think it was late November that Sharmin visited the
site, there were no complaints with regard to this property. Of which we are aware anyway. The point is that
there are very limited uses of this property and for those 6 or 7 years, they've been able to store these containers
without problem. We provided an opinion letter to the City Attorney's office that we believe that what they
29 1
n
J
i City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
' were doing is legal based upon both the conditional use permits and the lack of reasonable use under the zoning
ordinance. The City Attorney did not necessarily agree with us, although I entered into discussion... what we
' didn't want and that... So over the last several months, since probably February we've met with staff on 3 or 4
occasions. Supplied information regarding what we proposed to do, or the applicant proposed to do with the
property in terms of screening the use. In addition we met out on site and I thank the staff for doing that. It
was a very hot and humid day and I, myself was a little late. Caught in traffic and we toured the entire site and
' therefore the balance of the site that would be used for this use. And I think really kind of hammered out an
understanding of what would work and what wouldn't work. Really essential to that understanding is the
concept that the applicant is required to screen the containers and if a container shows or is visible, then it's not
' screened and it cannot be allowed on the property. There was quite a bit of discussion at the Planning
Commission level about this application. In fact there were 3 hearings at which this application was heard and I
think that centered on two things. Mainly the fact that what you see there are hand drawn plans. They are to
scale and they are drawn by the applicant. In Chanhassen you've got a lot of commercial development. You're
used to seeing professional landscape plans. This however is an interim use for dumpsters. Essentially to build
a fence and it was not cost effective for the applicant to hire a lot of consultants. I'm I think the only consultant
on this team. To get this application completed. However she did, both Pat and Nancy provided a lot of
' information and a great amount of detail we believe to the satisfaction of staff. After this long process. So with
that the staff informed us that we met the standards for the city code submission package. However, I think the
Planning Commission was somewhat uncomfortable again with the type of materials, given what they're used to
seeing with all the recent commercial and residential development in town. I think the other thing is the, there
was a request to limit the dumpsters to the 58 on site and we have made a request that the dumpsters be given a
cap of 140. All this 140 would have to be adequately screened so if 58 dumpsters are adequately screened
behind the wall, then that's what will be allowed. If 59 or 60, 61. Whatever is adequately screened should be
the number because that is the objective of the city. Not to arbitrarily pass a number at something less than 140
or 58. So we requested, although at the Planning Commission level we said we could accept 58, that was
essentially because we wanted to move this forward. We would like you to reconsider the staff recommendation
' of 140 as a cap and if 130 fits or 120 fits, that's the number of dumpsters which will be on the site because that
is the limit that is placed on this permit. I think a couple other comments on the staff conditions. The height of
the trees at 1 1/2 feet. The applicant is essentially building a 150 foot wall. Board on board wall to screen the
use. That would be built in what is fairly dense ground cover. In addition, to break up the look of the fence,
they purchased 42 spruce trees at 1 1/2 feet high. They were able to get a good price on these spruce trees but
they are 1 1/2 feet high. They will grow rapidly. They will be 6 feet in a year or two. Or probably a couple
years actually.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Can I get some of those?
' Councilman Mason: Yeah, what kind of...
Bill Griffith: ... they are rapidly growing. It won't be more than a year or two... My point is that they are there
' not to screen the containers. They are there to break up the look of the fence. And I want you to keep that in
mind when you think about that because already this applicant has gone through a very long process to get to
this point and they now have the 42 trees and staff is recommending that they go out and buy some more trees
and at some point this becomes really not very cost effective. Finally, we have asked and we have understood
from the start that, well actually from the point that we were on site we discussed the concept that we did not
want this to be limited to or referenced to the MUSA extension because as you well know, as Council members,
it's anybody's guess when that might occur and if and when the MUSA is extended to cover this property,
' obviously the property will go up in the value and there will be significantly expanded uses of the property. But
' 30
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1
that takes some time and the day from the time that happens to the day the property is ready to marketed and
your zoning ordinances change, it may be several years. So if you tie this to when the MUSA is extended, leave '
a gap because if the permit goes away but we aren't ready, or the city may not be ready to turn the use over to
something new. So we would ask that it be a straight 10 year term. And we talked with City Attorney Elliott
Knetsch and he believes that's reasonable. Now, the condition continues to read with the MUSA extension so
we would ask you to delete that and that was generally our understanding when we met with staff on site. I '
guess those are my comments. Again, I'd like you to please remember the context of this application. I think
this is a solution that your city staff have worked very hard to come to and the applicant has worked hard to
avoid confrontation and to get on with some reasonable use of the property after these several years of being '
fairly restricted. So we would ask you to consider that as you look at this matter. And then we would ask you
to approve it tonight because it has been a long process and we need to get out there and plant trees of 1 1/2 feet
and build a fence and hopefully what you saw on the tape this evening, no dumpsters, hopefully that's what
you'll continue to see on the property here in the winter months. I thank you very much for your time and stand '
for questions.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I just had a quick question as you're looking at 140 dumpsters. How many I
dumpsters do you presently own now?
Nancy Lee: I don't have an exact figure. I believe 140.
Mayor Chmiel: And where do you store those existing dumpsters presently?
Nancy Lee's comments were not picked up by the microphone. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Does Council have any questions in regard to this? Well let me ask, is there anyone wishing to
address this at this time as well? '
Gary Anderson: My name is Gary Anderson. I live at 725 Creekwood in Chanhassen here. I guess I've never
heard about the fact that there'd be a garbage, expanded garbage area in the back of my yard and I was
wondering when this was brought up and how close this is being to passed. I've never heard about it and I '
don't know if all the other neighbors here have heard about it either. I know there have been a few dumpsters in
the area but I don't know.
Mayor Chmiel: Sharmin, would you like to address that?
Sharmin Al -7aff: Sure. We've notified people within 500 feet of the site. Those are empty containers that will '
be stored out there...
Gary Anderson: And how did this, the Park Commission, have they been involved with this? As far as would '
they be involved with this?
Mayor Chmiel: No.
Gary Anderson: Should they be involved with this? ,
Mayor Chmiel: No. I
31
I],
L
0
J
0
1
C
LI
u lll
I
I
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
Gary Anderson: Wouldn't that be considered part of...
Mayor Chmiel: Well basically this goes through the Planning Commission rather than the Park Commission and
it has gone through that particular commission.
Gary Anderson: Okay. How many years has that been?
Mayor Chmiel: How long has this been going?
Councilman Senn: 1986 wasn't it?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah.
Councilman Senn: I thought that's what I read.
Mayor Chmiel: '88.
Councilman Senn: I thought it was in '86 the original approval for them to build a building on the site.
Sharmin Al -Jaffa Correct. However, they let it expire.
Councilman Senn: But I'm just saying, if they would have built their building in '86, this would be a non -issue
and wouldn't even be here, correct?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. It's immaterial. '86. '88. Close. Yes.
Boyd Peterson: Yeah, Boyd Peterson and my question was, did these 140 dumpsters, are they all owned by
Admiral saying Admiral on them or are 30 of them Admirals, 50 of them that. Are we creating a business of
storing them or are they all indeed Admiral dumpsters?
Bill Griffith: To answer a couple questions. First of all I would like to confirm that these containers are
typically used in construction settings. They don't haul garbage or refuse. They haul demolition materials so
they do not create odors and smells and they are empty. Second, to answer the question. All of them belong to
Admiral. These are the dumpsters that would have been stored on site with the contractors yard. These are the
dumpsters that have been stored on site. Since that time they've numbered about 58. And they're all owned by
Admiral. They're not leasing space to other people or businesses. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else? Yes sir.
Verne Severson: Verne Severson at 675,Lakota Lane. We own the property just north of the site and this has
been going on for quite a while and I'm one of those property owners that has been kept informed and I thank
the city for that. And like I say, it's been going on for a few years and we've been struggling over this. I'm a
small businessman and I like to support small business and it does seem like a good use for this piece of
property. But the word dumpster and the word garbage, as a property owner I have a lot of trouble with that
and I think the city should have some concern with that too. This is the south end of Chanhassen. It is part of
the main entrance to the south part of Chanhassen. And some of us in that area feel we've been neglected by
the city. It's often called ugly town and I think that's wrong and we resent some of that. And again back to the
32
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 '
word garbage and you have dumpsters around and it's just ugly. There's no way around it I guess that's my
main concern. Maybe there needs to be a better selling job on this or maybe the city should do a little more '
work because I think, I think like I said, it could be possibly a good use for the property but all the language
we've heard so far and what the lawyer was talking about, he said the dumpsters are empty. The dumpsters are
used for this but I don't hear anything about the future. What's to say that after one year they start storing
dumpsters full of material in there. Or what's to say they don't start cleaning the dumpsters on the property and '
there's toxic waste and it runs into the soil or whatever. I don't see that in the language of the staff report and I
haven't heard anything about that mentioned so I think more emphasize needs to be placed on enforcement and
maybe inspection of the site. And I understand it's a 10 year permit ... and that seems awfully long to me. I '
believe there should be some way we can review that every year. I understand the investment they've put into it
and I want to make sure they get their money back from that. Personally I think a lot of the camouflaging is not
really money well spent on the fence if you think about it. You know the foot and a half trees and the wood '
fence, that's almost ugly by some nature. I guess I'd maybe rather see a smaller time period unless there's a
trade off that we could work something out. I think that's about all of the comments that I have. I would like
to see more emphasize placed on enforcement and the future use of the property and I've been to the Planning
Commission several times. Well, it seems like several times. I've always commented to them how I feel the
south part of Chanhassen is being ignored and like I said to Mr. Mayor and Councilmembers, pay a little more
attention to the southern part of the city. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Verne. Anyone else? '
Jim Sulerud: Jim Sulerud again, 730 Vogelsburg Trail. This is the item that I did come for ... hike and jog and ,
bike along there plus we just live up the road a little bit on TH 101. And I think the trail as you've heard the
snowmobile people talk about, it's a major resource in the community.
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion. The Interim Use Permit for Admiral Waste '
Management was tabled by the City Council.)
PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 46.5 ACRES INTO 36 RURAL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND '
ONE OUTLOT. HALLA'S GREAT PLAINS GOLF ESTATES. LOCATED SOUTH OF PIONEER
TRAIL AND WEST AND EAST OF HIGHWAY 101, DON HALLA. I
(Taping of the meeting began again at this point.)
Mayor Chmiel: Are there any questions? Richard I
Councilman Wing: Did you write all those down? I mean I sort of got lost in the pros and cons and yeahs and
nays. Of their request versus these recommendations. I
Kate Aanenson: Yes. Sharmin and Dave have met with them and were aware of the issues that they had
Councilman Wing: Is there anything to be said? I mean are we going to move ahead and try to put this thing I
together?
Kate Aanenson: The storm water issue obviously... the lot size and we may have to look at that... outside the I
MUSA...
33 1
r
f
r
J
7
L
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
Roger Anderson: That's correct ... to make some adjustment for that but we have to make sure that we have some
mechanism in place that if the property or the entire area was, if it ever becomes in the MUSA in this future
subdivision, that we have some mechanism to recover the additional storm water ... picked up at this time.
Councilman Wing: The Planning Commission picked up on this future road on the southeast corner and looking
at the gradient, it appears to me the road would run into or right along the bluff. How can that road be there
and still be compatible with the bluff ordinance?
Sharmin Al -Jaffa We met with the applicant. We requested that it be realigned.
Councilman Wing: Further west?
Sharmin Al -Jaffa Correct.
Councilman Wing: So this wouldn't be acceptable as it's showing here?
Sharmin Al -Jaffa No.
Councilman Wing: Okay.
Sharmin Al -Jaffa It would move slightly.
Don Halla: Sharmin, you might move it all the way over to the next property to the left. Next one.
Councilman Wing: Now we're surrounding Timberwood with an entire different type of house and lot. An
entire different thinking and our standard subdivision. If we guide this thing to 1 to 2.5, how do we keep it
there? What if the MUSA line shifted tomorrow? If Paul was here, it'd be down to the river already.
Kate Aanenson: Well we have options when we bring that in. We look at the MUSA line expansion, just like
Timberwood and they have to be ... and said this will always remain large lot.
Councilman Wing: Says who? What keeps them, once the MUSA line, why can't they just go and develop this,
break it up immediately?
Kate Aanenson: Well I think as we go through that process and you as a Council have to decide whether or not
what you want to guide it for.
Councilman Wing: At that time.
Kate Aanenson: At that time, right. If you want to exclude them and say they'll be exempt from sewer and
they can make it not just for Timberwood.
Councilman Wing: But if we're going to develop this large lot now, it'd be nice to protect it for the future. I
mean we're approving this based on large lot, large home, or whatever.
34
0
n
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
Kate Aanenson: That is why it's gone through several different, the Halla's have made a good faith effort based
on the fact that we've looked at 15,000 square foot lot and they tried to come forward with a plat clustering that '
and we found out that even on a temporary basis they'd have to provide on -site septic. It just didn't work so
they came back with even trying to do cluster systems. So they have tried to cluster that in case we did bring it
in and said we want this to be small lots. It just didn't seem to work. So we went back to ... go back to larger
lots. That doesn't mean that they still couldn't in the future, if they locate the house in such a way, they could '
come back and ask to be included. You have to work with the homeowners now... subdivide. That's something
you have to look at.
Councilman Wing: Alright. '
Mayor Chmiel: Before we get any more comments from Council, is there anyone wanting to address this
proposal at this time? Go ahead. If you could just, I'd request, because of the time, that the presentation be '
limited to a few minutes.
Paul Graffunder. Well I'll do my best but I'm majorly affected by this development so a few minutes might not
be enough. But maybe it is. That's my parcel of property that Sharmin drawing in. I keep seeing TH 101 go
'
right through my garage. I don't know where that comes from but nobody's asked me about it but it keeps
getting dotted lines through my garage and I'm not sure, something like that. How that's going to affect me in
the future. I'm also concerned that if my road and house appear to have an easement of some sort over that
'
road. Not a total easement for unlimited use but some sort. Are they going to be able to give an easement then
to all those other lots so those people can bring their lumber wagons down that road and park all their wood
piles and whatever they want there? And I also have a problem, I think, with the way the roads are set up. That
'
way, all those 2 1/2 acre mini estates, their back yards become my front yard. Or my front yard becomes their
back yards and everybody knows the dog kennels go back there. The old boats and all that junk, which I have
myself but I store them where nobody can see it. Well, that's going to be in my front door when they put that
in their back yard. Is that a consideration that is given to something like that? I happen to have another
'
question as, I don't think this is platted now and I don't know how this all works but Halla's has kind of hidden
behind the agricultural zoning for decades. They've done things the city hasn't felt were correct and then the
Halla's have said, well we can do that because we're agricultural. The latest thing I can think of is they have a
'
building there that they're using for commercial retail sales that I don't believe they got proper permits for and
they said, well we can build that because we're an agricultural. Is this going to change their agricultural zoning
for every lot on there as soon as this is said and done or are they going to still be able to hide under the
agricultural umbrella and keep dump trucks that haven't moved for a year down along that road. That type of
'
thing. They say they're agricultural trucks and yes, I guess they are but they don't use them. Who can they
give an easement? Did I ask that? Are they going to give those lots an easement? All those people to use my
property. I don't know if they can. In the deed it says that...I'd like some protection against that. At this time
'
there's my home and David Halla's home but Sharmin, maybe you can outline the area where two other homes
were built this summer I believe. Yeah, right down in there. Do you know that? I thought one was in front
and one was behind. I think the way I'm recalling. This easement comes down along this road and comes
'
down in here and one home is to be built in the front and one home in the back.
Sharmin Al -Jaffa Something like that. I
Paul Graffunder. Yes. These two lots here are going to be built. This one here is ... told me that it's
unbuildable. I don't know if it is or not, or how many people can have an easement on that easement. How
many homes can be served. We've had problems there for 15 years. Who's going to plow? Who's going to '
35 1
i
i City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
fl
u
0
L
Put rock in there? Who's going to fill the holes? Who can do what with it? Who can park on it? Who can
drive their snowmobile on there ... or whatever. I'd kind of like the easement to go away. Don Halla, about 5 or
6 years ago, maybe it was in '86, submitted proposals to use that easement for a road plus take 30 feet into my
property ... 60 feet of my front yard. Bring the road within about 30 feet of my door for this development and I
adamantly oppose that plan. He had an agreement that he had with Teich, or his parents ... back in the 60's when
Teich's were separating their property and built my home that said something to the effect where property
needed for road would come from the Teich's side of the fence. And that was fine for Teich's and would have
been fine for me had I wanted to develop but Don Halla wants to develop. I think in the, I don't know of
anywhere else where those lots can be served other than down the easement that we have now. There's just no
possible way to get in on the back side. I don't know if those stub streets are adequate. Those are news to me.
I haven't seen any of that. Those stub streets are not going to solve the problem that the other lot holders today.
The easement isn't a problem but everybody keeps adding one more onto it and sooner or later there's going to
be way more problems than what we've already experienced. So those are all the questions that I really would
like to be answered before anything is...
Councilman Wing: Where does your home sit? On that, would you put that back up.
Paul Graffunder: I own 5 acres here. This is two separate parcels but my house is right about there under my
finger and then I have a rather large garage to the west of that.
Councilman Wing: It looks like your garage is safe.
Councilman Senn: Your house isn't safe then.
Paul Graffunder. What do you mean? For TH 101?
Councilman Senn: Yeah.
Paul Graffunder. Well, they're going to, they go right through my swimming pool. Somewhere in there. We've
got to move when that happens.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Anyone else?
Boyd Peterson: Yeah, I'm Boyd Peterson. I live directly to the east of this property. And going back on the
septic, I think Council and the city generally should hold to that septic system requirement. I personally have
had mine pumped many times and we're having trouble with it and I'm right next door. The 70 boring sites that
were taken in '87 or whatever, are they available to look at? Were they okayed? I mean is there that many in
that area? And the trees, they're kind of down around that southeast zone. There's kind of an issue to protect...
but other than that I mean, it's not a bad project. It's just that my issue is that septic and I think the city should
hold to it. Mound systems are real ugly. I don't know what you can do landscape wise to make a mound
system work, just to get that second system but I would say let's just not let this thing go by with that septic
because it may be a long time before the city. And they're with big houses and everybody's life now days, a lot
of water runs through those septics. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Anyone else?
36
f
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1
David Gatto: Hello again Mayor, Council and staff. Again, my name is David Gatto. I'm here to represent the
37 homeowners of the Lake Riley Woods Homeowners Association. We, for everybody's information, this is
Lake Riley Woods. It's well ... Foxford Road. That cul-de -sac and there's a cul -de -sac here. That's Lake Riley '
Woods. I have a petition from 28 of the people that live there and it says, we respectfully petition that Halla
Nursery should not be allowed to redevelop their property into anything smaller than 2 1/2 acres and that the
minimum square footage requirement of 1,400 square feet be established in order to preserve the value of the
properties surrounding Halla and maintain the aesthetic appearance of the neighborhood at the level adhered to
when our homes were built. So we'll leave that with you Mr. Mayor. We don't oppose the development that
they have but like we signed up there, we really think that the lots ought to be at least 2 112 acres. Some of the
lots on that plat are small and I believe there's a 1.8 acres and that's what troubles us. The City Attorney there,
or at least one of the city attorneys... When I was at the Planning Commission meeting a couple of weeks ago we
were told that this grandfather extension had since expired. Can you answer that for me?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes Tom, go ahead. ,
Tom Scott: Has since expired?
David Gatto: That's what I was told.
Tom Scott: No. That's not my understanding.
David Gatto: It has not expired?
Tom Scott: It has not expired. '
David Gatto: Because in looking at the ordinance as it applies today, there isn't of course any 2 1/2 acre
density. It's all 10 acre density.
Tom Scott: That's correct.
David Gatto: Okay. Well, if I add up the dates that Sharmin just went over, I don't understand how 5 years
from 1987 equals August of 1984.
Kate Aanenson: We can answer that. He had a plat. Came in here and was working on it and it was put before
the Planning Commission or the City Council, we believe we're making a good faith effort to try to provide him
with the requirements and direction he was given by the staff and so we are trying to get this through the
process. Give him an opportunity to go forward. We were giving him the direction to try to give an alterative
so in our opinion he hasn't expired...
David Gatto: Okay. Well that's different than what you told me 2 weeks ago but okay. That's fine. We've got
a couple other things to talk about then. In the staff report they talk about the outlots create a non - conforming
situation. And so I don't understand how they can't allow, especially the one outlot that has the retail
establishment there. How can you calculate that oudot in the entire density of this plat and tell me that it does
indeed meet the overall density of 2.6 acres? I need that question answered and I also would like to see the
mathematical calculations because when I divide 102, if we assume the 102 is right, by 36, Sharmin what was
that number? You've got a calculator there.
37
i
{I
i�
n
n
C
l i
u
ri
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
Sharmin Al -Jaffa 2.8 units.
David Gatto: That's 2.8 acres. Does that include that Outlot D which we established at the Planning
Commission?
Sharmin Al -Jaffa Right.
David Gatto: Okay. So you established at the Planning Commission that he doesn't even own Outlot D so can
we take that away?
Sharmin Al -Jaffa Correct. So it was 92.
David Gatto: Is that what it is? I don't know.
Sharmin Al -Jaffa Correct. That would be, if you divide it by 36 units that would be 2.5.
David Gatto: 2.5...? Okay. And that's assuming that you allow the retail establishment outlot to be calculated.
Audience: That's what they're saying.
David Gatto: Well yeah. You know I don't understand that so I hope that Council takes that into account
here ... as I carry on my discussion. I'm trying to finish. This trunk sewer is extremely troublesome to us. In
our development. We heard some encouraging words a minute ago that you might grant this plat a sewer
exemption. We only hope if something like that is possible, that we could be granted the same thing across the
street. We all have septic systems. We all have wells. You have to have a water treatment system on the wells
but I know that all the neighbors say it works very well, Mine works very well. My mound is so efficient I
have to water the top of it every couple days or the grass dies. It's, as I'm saying, so efficient that everything
drains down. Not only through the mound but into the earth it's built on that was supposedly not able to bear
the burden of the effluent but 1 have to water it every couple days. So it works fine. I paid $10,000.00 for my
mound and my well and I know everybody else in our development did. I know everybody else in this new
development is going to and are we—and I can assure you, if that you people let that happen here in Chanhassen
I'll be right here at your desk again. I'll bring all 37 of my neighbors with me and I'm sure that people from
Deerbrook will come along with us. That's the development that's directly to the east of this and I think some
of these other folks have septics too so take care of us. I'm not going to take any more time. I know it's
getting late and I think that was really our concern. ...development but we're going to be watching very
carefully what you allow and what you don't allow and what you calculate for acreage is in there. Thank you
very much.
Mayor Chmiel: Anyone else? If not, Richard do you have any other questions?
Councilman Wing: No. Just when, however this comes back, when you clean it up, 2.5. I mean when you
push your calculator it ought to say 2.5 and I think we should stick with that.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Well I always struggle with preliminary plats. I try to keep in mind preliminary
means preliminary so I get too caught up in the detail. But overall I do have some problems, even with the
38
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1
preliminary concept and that is I'm so lost in the mass at this point so let me just tell you what I would like and '
you can tell me if it exists. I'm not really keyed on this overall density. I want to see 2.5 lots.
Kate Aanenson: Minimum lot size? ,
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes. I don't want averages. I want to see 2.5 lots. I realize that there's a lot of '
unfortunate history with this platting and the city needs to be held responsible for past actions but I'm frankly
disappointed that it can't be 10 acre lots. So I guess I don't have any, if we get to that point, the 2.5 minimum
acres, I don't have a lot of problems. I mean everything else needs to be resolved and that has been discussed. I
would like Scott, I'm glad you're still here. In reading through all the Minutes and notes, there is a problem that '
may fall under noise ordinance in terms of these facility. The speaker system, the peacocks. That's a
completely separate issue but I wanted to bring it up because it does seem to be a problem.
Scott Harr: We do have complaints on it.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: And what can we do? ,
Scott Harr: We issue permits for the loud speakers. For the PA system and what not ... housing in the area is
taken into consideration.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. So it is something that we have looked into?
Scott Harr: And that we do control.
Mayor Chmiel: Anything more?
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Well, see I'm not so certain that we can give even preliminary. There seem to be
too many changes necessary so I guess I'm finished.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael. 1
Councilman Mason: I'm okay with averaging. As long as it does in fact come out to 2.5 when everything is
said and done here. You and I, I mean we'll have, we'll continue to have discussions, maybe even arguments
over that.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Maybe even fist to cuff.
Councilman Mason: Oh, I don't think that will happen. I don't think that will happen. But I guess my view of
this is that, if it averages out to 2 1/2, I think the intent of the ordinance is still there. You know 10 acres or not
I think is, for me at any rate is kind of water over the dam and I only half jokingly wrote down the times they '
are a changing but you know, what are you going to do. I'm concerned about the easement issue. That sounds
like a real valid point to me. I see that as this, what's going to happen with those homes? What is going to
happen with that road? And the go carts and that whole issue has got to get cleared up somehow and I'm not
quite sure how to clear that up. But, and I know.
Kate Aanenson: ...that is not part of this plat. We don't intend to do anything nor with this plat do anything
with it. We wouldn't allow access onto it as part of this plat. The intention was, there's 4 existing lots or 5 that
39 1
F,
7
C
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
have access onto that. It's a private drive. It will continue to act as a private drive for those homes and this plat
will have access off of a public street which is required by ordinance.
Councilman Senn: Which 4 or 5 because he'd have to have a variance.
Councilman Mason: But that's, I'm sorry. But that doesn't have, what you're telling me is that that doesn't
have anything to do with this plat.
Kate Aanenson: No. He's asking a legitimate question. He wants to make sure that those people don't have
access off of that as a part of the plat.
Councilman Mason: Right.
Kate Aanenson: And we'll make sure that doesn't happen. They want access off of a public street, which is an
ordinance requirement. Those who live along that will continue to use it as their private drive and maintain it
however they're doing.
Councilman Mason: Okay, okay. And how about that issue of, and I know we've talked about this before and
it is getting late and I quite honestly don't remember what. What does happen when all of a sudden somebody's
back yard is all of a sudden now facing somebody's front yard?
Councilman Wing: Ask Colleen.
Councilman Mason: I mean that's, yeah. I'd be concerned about that.
Councilman Senn: I have 4 back yards along my front yard.
Councilman Mason: Well, is all that stuff stored back in there?
Councilman Senn: Yeah and it's a pain in the butt. There's sheds. There's garbage piles and everything, yeah.
And the ordinances don't prohibit any of it.
Councilman Mason: So when final plat comes up or whatever, can something be put in there about landscaping?
Screening. I mean I hate to use the word screening with the past discussion that got tabled but I mean we've
done that before with what, landscaping.
Kate Aanenson: We do that all the time with different subdivisions ... lots which are less desirable and maybe
there's a way to do the landscaping...
Roger Anderson: Can I interject here?
Mayor Chmiel: Time's getting late. We're just trying to keep going here.
Councilman Mason: You know I don't know how all the neighbors feel about it but if I can see something
about landscaping so the sight lines are protected because that is an issue but yet I don't think we can deny
people to develop just because of that but how can we reach some sort of compromise. I don't have any trouble
with going ahead with preliminary plat but I will go on record as saying there's a whole lot of stuff that has to
40
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
be taken care of before I would give final plat approval. I mean we've got to, I think maybe it is time to get
this off of square one but I share a whole lot of the concerns that have been mentioned.
Resident: Future Councils are going to have problems with that street if you don't take care of it today.
Councilman Mason: But, you know you're right but I think that's a separate issue. I mean that's not connected
with this plat. I mean you're right. You're right.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark go ahead.
Resident: But you've got the opportunity now. You're not going to have the opportunity years from now.
Mayor Chmiel: I could rule you out of order because this is a discussion up here at Council. Thank you.
Councilman Senn: Right now what that easement serves nothing in the Halla development, correct?
Kate Aanenson: No. They're using it right now their...
Councilman Senn: I'm not saying using it. I'm just saying that that easement specifically.
Kate Aanenson: When this is developed?
Councilman Senn: Yes.
Kate Aanenson: No, it will not...
Councilman Senn: Okay, so that easement will, there's nothing to the north?
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Councilman Senn: Okay. So that easement will only serve the properties then to the south of it?
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Councilman Senn: Which are the current properties that have an easement over it. They'd be land locked
otherwise, correct?
Kate Aanenson: That's correct.
Councilman Senn: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: To provide access to the ... property. That's, we were talking about moving that road.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, I understand but besides from that, the land locked properties that are in there to the
west ... need that easement to get in and out.
41
u
F 1
F
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
Kate Aanenson: They have that easement and they will continue to have that easement. They're using it as a
private drive, correct.
Councilman Senn: Okay. And none of that is in the ownership of the Halla's or under ... right now?
Kate Aanenson: It's my understanding they have an easement.
Councilman Senn: They have an easement but they don't, I mean an easement is very different. Okay. So
even if Halla got rid of that easement, all those other people would still maintain that easement and we have
absolutely nothing to do for it? Okay. Alright. The other thing I'll just ask you real quick. On the road over
here, the future road you're talking about.
Kate Aanenson: The realignment of TH 101.
Councilman Senn: No, not TH 101 but this future road.
Kate Aanenson: Oh, yes. If the nursery property was ever to be platted, we would block that, instead of having
direct access onto TH 101...
Councilman Senn: So they put the public systems in.
Kate Aanenson: They would just throw a stub street...
Councilman Senn: Okay. And then I saw the comment in here or I saw the Outlot A shall have no additional
access granted to TH 101. That's more or less additional over what's there now.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Councilman Senn: Alright. Last question. Item 35 really confuses me and I think you're missing the point.
What are we trying to do? Covenants be provided for the new property owners informing the days and hours of
the retail commercial site and if changes are made to those hours and days, the property owners be informed of
such change. You lose me there. I mean if we're informing them all we're going to do is start the fight, we
haven't provided an mechanism for the ability to fight. It seems like a bottomless pit where we're going
nowhere and why is it even in there.
Sharmin Al -Jaffa It was ... by the Planning Commission to let new homeowners that will be buying into the
subdivision know that there is a nursery...
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Kate Aanenson: We'll use the 2.5...
Councilman Mason: Well so that's the issue right?
Councilman Senn: And you said 2.5 minimum. You said 2.5 minimum and Richard, did you say 2.5 minimum?
I thought so. Well there, I guess it means we deny.
42
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1
Mayor Chmiel: That's what we're looking at. Okay, do we need a motion to do that? Or should we give it
Y gr
back to staff and let staff see if they can work with them.
Tom Scott: You can just continue it and I mean you've expressed your sentiments to staff, if staff's comfortable '
with that.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Does everybody understand? It's back in staff's lap to continue to work. ,
Don Halls: We're back to the conceptual drawing basically. That's what you're back to is the 1987.
Mayor Chmiel: If it takes longer and another Council comes in, they might make another change. '
Kate Aanenson: I guess the other issue too is we've kind of passed that time frame and we'd like to get, keep it '
moving so that either a plat goes forward or it dies. You know we keep extending this, extending this so if you
want to give him the 2.5, I'd recommend you make that in a motion and have them come back within such a
time period because otherwise we're back in the same window. Was there a time frame for them to come back? '
Mayor Chmiel: But with all the uncertainties that are there yet, things that are still not answered, I think if staff
works back with that, knowing that the maximum is 2.5. Or I should say minimum is 2.5, I think you can work
that out to come back and bring it back again to Council for the final. Or for the preliminary portion of this. ,
Don Halla: Can you put those side by side?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I can't see a thing on this. '
Councilman Mason: Well. '
Sharmin Al -Jaffa How about if you compare the easterly side or the westerly side.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. I think the point is moot because the 2.5 doesn't necessarily mean it has to be that '
configuration.
Kate Aanenson: Right, it could be something totally different. I
Tom Scott: I believe what Kate is saying is that Council set some deadline as to when this plat would come
back so we don't put ourselves in a limbo type situation. Potentially it could be another year or two years ,
before the plat actually comes back in a reconfigured form. Maybe we could get some input from the applicant
as to timing on presenting everything in the plat. That might be helpful here.
Roger Anderson: The timing for a reconfigured plat may be secondary. I feel that through the process here Don '
has rights, if I understand the rules correctly, to develop that piece into 37 lots. And making allowance I believe
that he has to meet the 2 1/2 acre minimum, which was in effect back at that time and that's what has driven
this thing forward is the number of lots actually. Not the 2 1/2 acre requirement. The 2 1/2 acres is to obtain a
certain neighborhood characteristic I believe and to meet the individual soil treatment site provisions, which we
fully intend to meet. But this doesn't fall under the current ordinances, the way we understand it and admittedly
it's a complicated situation but if there is a requirement now that each of these lots be 2 1/2 acres, I think that
throws a whole different skew on it. It's not just a reconfiguration issue that our engineer can do. It's the legal ,
43 1
i
i City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
' and the planning question I think that's going to take more '
g q g g than that. I don't see it as dust a black and white
situation.
' Kate Aanenson: How about if we table this for the next City Council meeting and we get a legal opinion and
resolve that issue and then also maybe come back with a time frame where we can resolve another plat...
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I don't see that as a problem. Can I have a motion to table?
' Councilman Mason: So moved. I'll move to table.
Councilman Wing: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, moved and seconded.
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Wing seconded to table action on the preliminary plat for Halla's
' Great Plains Golf Estates until the next City Council meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
Councilman Mason: I guess if I could just add. I think we also need to continue this discussion about why
every lot should be, what the rationale is and what the rationale isn't for averaging so it comes out to 2 1/2 acres
or maintaining every lot. I mean we average PUD's. We average a lot of things and I'm, I don't personally
don't think tonight's the night to have that discussion but.
Mayor Chmiel: And I think we can continue that probably at the next meeting.
' Councilman Mason: Okay.
Councilman Senn: Since we're bringing it back, I think it becomes an interesting question because it's one we
have to keep asking ourselves all the time and I think the neighbors should ask themselves the question. What's
' more important to you. The configuration, design layout or this absolute number and that's something that we
have to deal with constantly up here. And just to say magically 2.5 can give you a nice, wonderful square lot
boxed neighborhood subdivision that in our eyes sometimes we've looked at and kind of gone yukk. Okay.
1 And so we try not to just simply etch in those numbers and say that's it. We look more at overall design
configuration and say, well if you give a little bit there, you get to something that looks nicer. So all it is is a
question and something to look at.
' Councilman Wing: And don't forget the TH 101 issues of grading and sight line and what the responsibilities
are. ,
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I'm going to suggest that we do 10 and 11 and cut it off after that.
Councilman Mason: No argument there.
' Mayor Chmiel: And I'd like to get the approval of 1(b) and 10) with a quick explanation as to whatever it
might be.
Councilman Senn: The thing on 1.
1 44
t
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1
Mayor Chmiel: Well no, we'll just come back to that but I'm just putting it in the proper sequence. ,
Councilman Mason: Do we need to make a motion to amend the agenda now or do we wait?
Councilman Senn: Well and that's what I was going to ask. I thought some of these people were kind of
sticking around here for 1(b). '
Mayor Chmiel: Is there somebody sticking around here for 1(b)?
Councilman Senn: There were people that were here on the business fringe. Item l(b). ,
Mayor Chmiel: City Code amendment to BF district. Additional permitted and conditional use final reading.
We went through the process of this with the fast and now this is the final. With the recommendations as to
what.
Councilman Senn: I'm just asking, should we move that up to take care of them?
Mayor Chmiel: Well, I think what we'll do is just continue with what we have. We'll go to item 10. That item
10 I don't think is much of a problem.
ANNEXATION /DEANNEXATION REQUEST, CITY OF CHASKA.
Councilman Senn: I move approval. '
Councilman Wing: Second.
Resolution #94 -86: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the
annexation/deannexation request for the southwest corner of West 82nd Street and Highway 41 between
Chaska and Chanhassen. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
DISCUSS CONCEPT OF ENTERTAINMENT COMPLEX. REDEVELOPMENT OF THE
CHANHASSEN BOWL FACILITY, LOTUS REALTY.
Councilman Senn: The one I feel bad about is I'd love to spend some time on this and we aren't going to have '
it tonight for number 11. So I'd really, if we're going to push something off, and I know that's not fair because
they've been sitting around all night.
Mayor Chmiel: They've been here so let's bring in number 11. Brad Johnson, you're on deck. '
Councilman Senn: Let's come up with a time we can get together and do this. I mean right now to rush I
through this.
Mayor Chmiel: You've only sat here half the night and waited. '
Councilman Senn: Do you want to stay for a few more hours and go through it?
Mayor Chmiel: How long of a presentation will this take? ,
45 1
i
i City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
t Brad Johnson: We can do it in 15 minutes. It's just a preliminary, there's no decisions.
' Councilman Wing: I'm willing to sit through it if we can get rid of 1(b) and let those people go home.
Councilman Senn: Yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Let's do, let's go back and revise. Go back to the 1(b).
CITY CODE AMENDMENT TO THE BF, BUSINESS FRINGE DISTRICT BY ADDING ADDITIONAL
' PERMITTED_ AND CONDITIONAL USES, FINAL READING.
Councilman Senn: So do we have to move to amend the agenda?
' Mayor Chmiel: I think we can try to get around without any problem.
Councilman Senn: Okay. I had asked 1(b) to be pulled for I guess the same specific reason I brought up at the
' first reading. I go down under the permitted uses and I don't find a great deal of difficulty with permitted uses
but I get down under the conditional uses and continue to see cold storage and warehousing, which is a pure
industrial use, just thrown into this BF District and it doesn't really make sense with what else is being proposed
' for use in that district. And having gone through I guess the earlier discussion tonight on this BF district, I'm
just really uncomfortable making this kind of change in the ordinance right now without taking a little closer
look at what we're just going to throw into the BF because once we do this, and it happens, we can't change it.
I mean even if we change the ordinance a few months from now. Something comes in the meantime, we're
stuck with it. And maybe we need to look at what we want that area to be and I think most of these things that
are here kind of maybe teeter on that. Now all of a sudden we've got this industrial use thrown in there that
continues to bother me.
' Mayor Chmiel: All we could do with that is completely eliminate it.
' Councilman Senn: Well that's kind of what I asked in the first reading but.
Mayor Chmiel: Well in the fast reading you're not done with it until you get your final reading right now.
' Cold storage and warehousing I agree, is an industrial kind of use and that's where it really should fit in.
Councilman Wing: Why was it put in?
' Mayor Chmiel: It's within our ordinance and.
Councilman Wing: Oh excuse me, these aren't additions? Okay.
' Councilwoman Dockendorf. I guess, if I may. As I said earlier in the evening, this is an area of town that I
think warrants additional study and we can always expand the use if and when we so choose so I don't have any
problem eliminating that understanding the current business there can continue to use.
' Kate Aanenson: It's currently listed as cold storage and warehouse as a conditional use. That wouldn't be a
change.
46
I I
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 11
Councilman Wing: But if I have a problem with a change, it's trunk/trailer /auto /sporting goods/boat sales/rental.
,
That means we could have used car lots down there.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
'
Councilman Senn: Yes, that's what it means.
Councilman Wing: Well I don't Iike that at all.
'
Councilman Senn: Well we raised that last time Dick and. ,
Councilman Wing: Did you bring that one up?
Councilman Senn: Yes. I brought up all of these. I didn't like really a lot of any of them. '
Mayor Chmiel: Actually there's never been a successful auto portion down there. It's all been closed so there
aren't any there now. ,
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'd more to table item 1(b) because I don't have a brain right now.
Councilman Wing: And I agree. I think we want to think this out starting now. '
Mayor Chmiel: Let's bring it back to Council. A motion to table.
Councilman Senn: So moved.
Councilman Wing: Second. And not on the Consent Agenda. We want to. '
Councilman Senn: It was on the consent agenda.
Councilman Wing: We want it moved off the consent agenda, right? ,
Councilman Senn: I already moved it off. Now we're just tabling it.
Kate Aanenson: Next time you want it off.
Councilman Senn: Oh, next time off. Yeah, and I'd really be interested in hearing the neighbors comments on ,
the subject.
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Wing seconded to table action on the City Code
Amendment to the BF, Business Fringe District by Adding Additional Permitted and Conditional Uses,
Final Reading. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Mayor Chmiel: We'll have it back on the agenda but as you can see, you've got the consensus of where we're '
coming from with it. Brad, you're on.
CONTINUATION OF ENTERTAINMENT COMPLEX CONCEPT REVIEW.
47
n
L
',1
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
Brad Johnson: ...back in 1984. The first time around was one of the first Council meeting I ever went to here.
I sat here and wondered what was going on.
Councilman Mason: And you still do, right?
Brad Johnson: Yeah. This evening we'll go through this fairly quickly. Back in, basically we have a proposal
that we presented to the HRA which was the proper place to see what their interest was in completing the
redevelopment of the downtown area. We have assembled the various owners which down there is basically a
fellow by the name of Bloomberg that owns part of it. The city is involved indirectly with some parking lots
and stuff down there. And a fellow by the name of Dan Dahlin owns the bowling alley. He didn't want to own
the bowling alley but he currently owns the bowling alley. We've tried 3 or 4 different times to accomplish
something down there. Primarily on the public side. We had one referendum. A couple runs at referendums
you know trying to figure out what we could do down in that area. And so where we are at the present time is
we think that we have some private uses that might make the thing work. We'll probably need some assistance
by recreating a new district down there that does qualify as a redevelopment district, which means you can redo
the district. It's a real redevelopment under the classical type of thing under the HRA regulations. So this
evening Truman Howell, who's n architect working with us is back with us currently. Vernelle Clayton is
working on the project and also Russ Pauly is here. It gives us an opportunity to relocate Pauly's and actually
create a whole new restaurant type and maybe, I don't think Russ you've talked too much at these meetings so
you can kind of explain what he's trying to accomplish. We're just trying to set the stage. We understand the
process of the HRA is sort of run it up the flagpole in an informal discussion and ... planning point of view. We
do have some needs. The building will be changed here in the near future. We have a movie theater that would
like to move into the community but has other places to go. Those type of things so the urgency would be, we'd
like to accomplish all of this by next fall. But I don't know if we can accomplish it that fast but we'd like to try
to do that. So and that's why we're, Truman do you want to come up here. We've just got a little slide show
that we put together. I don't know if all of you can see it. Maybe they'll see it on the video. As long as I have
been here, many people have been talking about downtown Chanhassen and how they would like to see the
community look like Excelsior. I think what people are looking for ... and a lot of times that has come up and I
guess what we tried to show you is some of downtown. People talk about downtown. People talk about being
pedestrian friendly and that type of thing so these are ... St. James Hotel in Red Wing for example. One of the
things you should be aware of is that a lot of downtowns can end up looking like this. In other words, the
businesses move out of the downtowns and we're using—but that's what happens if you don't keep your
downtown sort of viable and it's happening a little bit in Excelsior currently. The other thing people should
realize that the backs of these beautiful buildings in the front, when you double those, look like this. Is not
downtown Excelsior but it could just as well be, right. Most of your old downtown parking has ended up in the
back of the buildings so this is what you see. Now we could say well we can fix that all up but obviously
Hopkins and no town has really figured out how to do it. Even places like, this happens to be Winnoa. And
this is the front of those buildings. But you can see the people have tried to maintain some architecture.
Reflected this as a town. We're going to go real quick through these slides. These are just images that we're
trying to show you. Most of these would be the river town type of look... architecture is 1850 -1860.
Truman Howell: The late 1800's.
Brad Johnson: And you can see, I think if you looked at Northfield or any of those towns like that, this is an
old. That looks kind of new doesn't it ... And see a lot of these buildings are empty. The second floors are
deserted but they still look kind of nice ... But that would be what is a downtown and I think we all, many of us
from a small town, we say we're kind of comfortable with that. Truman has gone through and picked up some
48
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1
architectural types that we'd like to just show you that represent some of this period Where is this do you ,
think?
Truman Howell: I don't know what the exact location is but there's some elements in here of balconies, '
awnings on the side of the building with arches. There's some architectural elements that we find ... in some of
the older towns and the buildings that may come up. ...with different kinds of buildings. For example... They
cast a certain kind of image that is sort of a stable feeling compared to some of the things that seem more '
contemporary. Here's another one with the large trees. This is a more contemporary rendition of an older
building. Here they've put some pediments over the windows. Here they're using awnings. Again, the building
looks, it looks like a stable piece of architecture. Then the more classical ones. Obviously this says bank '
immediately or courthouse. Various detail which develop these kinds of feelings. Again, pediments over the
windows. Cornices. Awnings on the corner. Those kinds of elements are throughout the older buildings that
you find turn of the century... Here you're getting into some things that are a little more exotic and the
traditions... '
Brad Johnson: This is some of the architecture that we've classically been using in downtown Chanhassen. A
lot of gables ... and this of course is Chanhassen. ...sort of the area of the downtown that we're trying to focus
on. We're trying to remind you what it looks like. We haven't quite figured out the architecture. It's kind of
,
interesting. In all these 20 years, this is why things do change. We say we're going to set this in concrete
forever. But 30 years ago this was the premiere building in downtown Chanhassen with a brand new lumber
yard had just opened up and so you know, things go change. Just 10 years ago this was remodeled. I think it's
'
been..., what you do think Todd, a million bucks. Million and a half. These are some of the architecture
elements that you probably recognize in the downtown. Areas that probably are friendly and many of us
recognize them in the community. Where people have actually gone in and remodeled places. This is down...
Buildings that have been redone. A lot of these were done by themselves. This is down along ... A lot of areas
around Riverside. Anybody have any questions? I guess we threw this in because it's kind of an outdoor dining
kind of thing and it's got the awnings and it's raised and probably has a good look. This has been very
successful. That's ... old buildings. Looks nice...Street look. You know this is what the whole street ends up
'
looking with trees on it. One of the areas that we probably, there's two areas that we kind of focused on. One
we didn't take a lot of slides like this and that was Canal Park up in Duluth that probably has led to a little bit
of our thought because that's an entertainment district and we have about I would guess 58,000 square feet of
bulk space we have to figure out what to do with and what they've done up in Canal Park is they've been able
to figure out what to do with it. I don't know, has anybody been down on Main Street at St. Anthony this
summer? That's become a fairly popular place, forgetting the rest of the whole area but that's kind of what, a
lot of the architecture, does that look familiar? And these are buildings that have been redone and areas that are
actually working. Movie theater. Different types of things that people have done to create traffic and if you go
down there ... so this is what we have. And what we'd like and that is the idea that we try to create something
new out of that back area. Into something more like that and so Truman has come up with some ideas. All the
'
sort of investment in this so far has been made by the property owners. No city money has gone into the ,
concept and as I said, Truman can probably go through what we're trying to think. There's a lot of things we
have to think out in addition to what we had thought about. For example, a lot of parking lot over there. Not
,
enough trees. We have ... and so you have to do something just long term to make it actually work. But that I
think...
Truman Howell: Part of the attraction of the downtown area is, what you've seen on the slides, has to do with
'
some variety. Some, not everything is the same. Not all the buildings are alike. There's uniqueness to them
and that was part of what we were trying to accommodate. The location that we're talking about, and you're all
49
1
I
[I
u
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
familiar with it. This is 78th Street here. The hotel. The proposed restaurant. Frontier building and Dinner
Theatre here. We're talking about the back side where the bowling alley presently exists and what's called I
guess the city building. The elevation of the floor of this building in relation to the present parking area back
here is approximately 4 feet above the grade. So we've chosen to elevate a streetscape along the exterior of that
building as a beginning place. There would be a pedestrian, attractive and friendly area for people to go to.
Access not only from the back but also through the separation between the restaurant and the Frontier building.
In large scale, that's what you see here. We've included the undulating walls with vegetation with trees and
plants and all kinds of streetscape materials including railings, light fixtures, ramps for the handicap accessibility.
Over here we have a game table area where people can sit and play cards, checkers, what have you. Over here
near the restaurant is an outdoor seating area for meals. In this area we developed a theater which actually takes
up this portion over here would be a 6 theater complex with some small retail spaces here and the back of this
building, the back of the Frontier building actually also retail space. On this end where Filly's is presently
located, the restaurant concept and then some retail space ... theater with the restaurant and behind the bowling
area here. What we've done then in concept is to take a look at how we could, using the existing buildings as
they are presently, we've refaced them with a variety of building faces and types of various images and ... that
would give some life and interest to that facade. These are concepts. They are not each one of these particular
designs exactly down to the nth degree but what we're trying to do is give you a feel for what could be an
attraction to the area to bring people to it. Our interest is to use real materials and—painted facades and this
kind of thing. We would like to use real brick. We want to use real wood and we want to use materials that are
compatible. We would obviously then structurally mount these to the existing panels. We would have a
structural engineer involved to make sure we weren't causing any problems with having too high of buildings
that would not be properly reinforced, etc. We've taken off a lot of the trees that you see here in an effort to
show you better what the facade could be. Basically that's what we're planning to do. What would occur in
relating the plans to the elevations. The restaurant would take up pretty much this area in here. The access to
the bowling alley would be here. The restaurant here in the corner. These actual four buildings here would
form the facades for the retail area. Moving on down, this new building here is actually an exist out of the
theater area. This building here behind it is actually one of the theaters. Then the theater complex itself...front.
And the drawing that you have on that mailer that was sent to you is what the theater would look like based on,
you're looking at a 45 degree angle. So that's basically what we're proposing and would like to get your
comments and input and feelings about it.
Brad Johnson: ...say too is that we do have to attend to the bowling alley obviously. We've got .... for the
movie theater with good credit. Each of these have good credit and then Russ, you maybe can comment on your
interest in moving over there.
Russ Pauly: Well the operation that we're looking into that facility is about a 9,000 square foot. It would be a
more Champs style. Sports bar and restaurant with more emphasize on food than what we currently have.
Brad Johnson: I guess that's where we are. We think we've got the tenant space that we need. We've got 2 or
3 retail people that we have to have. One of the questions we have finally worked out is that we did include in
that facade goes around and then the Frontier building is ultimately included in that facade and this can be
broken down into retail. We have some parking, we have enough adequate parking the way we're set up. If
you remember Fred Hoisington saying maybe you have too much parking in a lot of areas so we have to make
some studies because there may be enough green in the parking lot to accomplish all that and then there was
some interest in encouraging, you see what happens in these double ... backs of the buildings towards the railroad
tracks but there may be some way again of figuring out how we can get some building or some structure down
50
t
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
near the railroad. It's just that will take a lot of effort from the planning department and figure out how we can
accomplish all of that.
Truman Howell: Basically the parking which you see on this drawing does not have, except for on the ends any
of the green space and I realize that you ... an ordinance at this point that would require to be considerably more
green space in that parking area. However at this point, based on this drawing, there is adequate parking for all
of these facilities that we're talking about.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Does that include the use that Southwest Metro currently has?
Truman Howell: Yes.
Brad Johnson: Yeah, if you go there now there's nobody parked there.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. So hours of operation.
Brad Johnson: Yeah. What they're trying to do is, we would have..Yriday night but right now that whole area
does not have a lot of.-there's a lot of empty parking spots. The other area is we do have more expansion space
of the hotel over here. We're going to sooner or later... That adds 38 rooms, right Vernelle?
Truman Howell: 36.
Brad Johnson: 36. You add another 20 or 30 and change the facade of the bowling alley, some day but that'd
be the next phase of the hotel. The hotel has been very successful. This we feel.
Truman Howell: It maintains the pedestrian access from the back with planned walkways coming to the back
and then around the area.
Brad Johnson: This I think the 2000, Vernelle went to all the 2002 meetings. Most of the people tell her this
should be an entertainment area. As I said short of tearing everything down and starting over, which is difficult
to do, this probably would work and we're trying to work within the building types that we currently have.
There's always been an interest in the movie theater down here. As I said, we've got a business in town that's
doing about, oh maybe a million and a half, two million dollars worth of business a year. It's kind of crazy to
Eck them out of town and that's kind of what would happen on October 1st of next year. So you've got a
viable tenant that's already been in business here for how many years.
Russ Pauly: 60.
Brad Johnson: 60. Part of the reason is that Market Square has been successful is that we moved MGM in over
there successfully with you guys help. We moved Chan Lawn and Sports over there with your help. And we
moved Merlin in and that's made that a very stable type of shopping center. We didn't relocate or kick anybody
out of town. And everybody else had a chance to so that's kind of the grand plan. Our process would be to go
back to the HRA with your input and the planning input and start the process over. There we are Mr. Mayor. A
couple of you have seen this before so.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. So there will be two of us who won't have to comment. Richard.
51
1
I
1
I
n
L
I
r
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
Councilman Wing: One of my big concerns when I see you walk in Brad is I constantly here from you market
driven and what the market will bear. I think this is a big deal. This is a big event for our city. This is my
number one priority when I got elected for this whole mess down there so I'm real excited and if you can put
this together, I think we've got to do whatever we can to get this thing moving and do it right. But the point
being, I want to start at the HRA. Get their support and funding so that you have the ability to put it together
and to do it right. But part of that means that we hire once and for all, without any question, an architectural
professional architect to represent the city that attends every HRA meeting. Every Planning Commission
meeting and every Council meeting to ask the questions and help set the pace. And this is a team effort and
we're working together. It's not them against whoever. But I don't feel that anybody on the HRA is a designer
and I don't think they know what questions to ask and I don't think we do a good job at it so I want someone,
whether it's Jeff Farmakes or a professional architect, helping us get this thing done right and making sure it's
done right so that if you say well we think, he can say here's what's best 20 years down the road or help us set
this up. At any rate, let's get HRA to get on board. It has my full support. Let's get ourselves an advisor so
that we're well informed and then move full steam ahead. The only other quick comment with whatever bar, I
don't want to hear the word bar. Whatever restaurant goes in is a restaurant with a liquor license. If it's a
Champs, it's food fast and liquor second. I don't want to put in another bar in there. I want a restaurant with
liquor. A winning combination but I think that as we've looked at giving liquor licenses, they're for restaurants.
Not for bars. We're no longer giving permits to bars so I just want to differentiate the wording so we're
providing liquor license to a restaurant, not a bar.
Mayor Chmiel: Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Well I certainly like this a lot better than a community center. A lot better. I
whole heartedly concur with Richard however about getting a designer to counteract. Not counteract but to
balance your proposals because I'm not a professional. This could either look absolutely wonderful. It could
look terribly garish and I want to make sure it's done right. It's a huge, it's what people will identify
Chanhassen.
Truman Howell: Would anyone have any problem with us working together?
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Absolutely not.
Councilman Wing: That's the point.
Truman Howell: What I've been hearing is sort of an adversarial thing that they're here at the meetings so they
can defend and I think it would be a lot easier if that person and I were to work together on the concept.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Absolutely.
Mayor Chmiel: Don't see any problem.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. And will you be providing the mountains in the background shown there.
Truman Howell: Oh, those are ... clouds.
Councilman Mason: I thought, boy you know, if you could pull off mountains in the background.
52
t
City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
Councilman Wing: Forget the mountains. If they could just pull this off at all.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: Conceptually it looks great. Architecturally it looks like you're heading in a good direction.
I guess when it comes right down to it, I'll be more interested in just seeing what assistance level is required and
that sort of thing. There's a lot of issues with that property too in terms of back taxes of the bowling alley and
all that stuff but...
Brad Johnson: I think the good news here is Mr. Dahlin who owns it can see his way through this project.
He's... cooperating. So we'd like to go back to the HRA. We'll probably try to get there about in September
and have some type of financial proposal on paper. And then work our way back upstream...
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Item 10). I want to touch that one real quick.
RECEIVE ASSESSMENT ROLLS, SET ASSESSMENT HEARING DATE FOR SEPTEMBER 12, 1994.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. I'd move approval. I didn't see the stuff that we had on the desk when I pulled it.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright.
Councilman Wing: What just happened?
Councilman Senn: And we're not approving anything. We're really just accepting it.
Mayor Chmiel: That's right. Is there a second?
Councilman Wing: Second.
Resolution #94 -82: Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Wing seconded to receive the
assessment rolls and set the assessment hearing date of September 12, 1994 for the West 78th Street and
Downtown Public Improvement Project 92 -3 and the Johnson/Dolejsi Utilities Improvement Project 92 -5.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, CITY CODE SECTION 20- 1181(B)(4) REGARDING
INTERIOR LANDSCAPING FOR VEHICLE USE AREAS, FIRST READING.
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, item number 12, when we approved this I said I didn't think anybody knew
what they were approving and what was missing, which Byerly's picked up on, was that this was, that it
addressed interior, some interior landscaping. All they did was add, take the existing ordinance and add this..
and I would move approval of item 12 and clear this off the agenda.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah and that basically is really what it comes down to.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. I'll second it.
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded.
53
r�
0
7
r
I i
II City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994
' Councilman Wing moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the fast reading of an
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, City Code Section 20- 1181(b)(4) regarding interior landscaping for
' vehicle use areas. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 1:00 a.m.
Submitted by Don Ashworth, City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim
n
L
IL
7
7
i Ik
i
F1,
11
C
F
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 17, 1994
Chairman Scott called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ladd Conrad, Matt Ledvina, Joe Scott, Nancy Mancino, Ron
Nutting, and Diane Harberts
MEMBERS ABSENT: Jeff Farmakes
STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner II; Bob
Generous, Planner II; and Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer
PUBLIC HEARING:
CARVER COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS FOR A PROPOSED PROJECT FOR THE
RECONSTRUCTION OF COUNTY ROAD 17 FROM THE EXISTING FOUR LANES
SOUTH OF LYMAN BOULEVARD (SECTIONS 14 AND 23, T 116N. 4 23W).
UPGRADING OF TWO LANES TO FOUR LANES WITHIN THE EXISTING RIGHT -
OF -WAY WILL IMPACT 1.55 ACRES OF WETLAND. APPROXIMATELY 3.1
ACRES OF REPLACEMENT WETLAND WILL BE CREATED AS MITIGATION.
Public Present:
Name Address
Jon Horn
Beth Kunhel
Brent Miller
BRW
BRW
1200 Lyman Blvd.
Kate Aanenson introduced Beth Kunhel with BRW to present the staff presentation on this
item since Diane Desotelle could not be present at the meeting.
Mancino: How long does it take once you mitigate and create a new wetland there. How
long does it take until it becomes a natural?
Beth Kunhel: Actually the area that we're looking at right now for wetland mitigation, a
couple years ago a beaver had moved in and dammed up a portion of that drainage ditch and
the city just removed that beaver dam and in the last year or so the cattails sprung up so
within a year. Or less than a year you can have the wetland vegetation there.
Mancino: It starts. And what we're mitigating right now or filling right now is all ag
wetland? Are we getting into any natural or pristine wetlands that we're filling?
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
Beth Kunhel: No, I believe they were all ag urban, except for the one that was created and
that was utilized.
Conrad: So the functions of the wetland that we're filling, what were the functions of those
wetlands?
Beth Kunhel: Basically storm water and some ... larger wetland area to the south which kept
some wildlife habitat...
' Scott: Any other comments? So you have any other comments for us? This is a P ublic
hearing. May I ask, are there any people who would like to speak on this particular issue?
Could I have a motion to open the public hearing please?
Mancino moved, Ledvina seconded to open the public hearing. All voted in favor and
' the motion carried. The public hearing was opened.
Scott: Would anyone like to speak? Let the record show that no one wishes to speak at this
' public hearing. May I have a motion to close the public hearing?
' Ledvina moved, Mancino seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and
the motion carried. The public bearing was closed.
Scott: Ladd.
Conrad: Nothing.
Scott: Matt.
Ledvina: I had a question for staff in terms of the wetland bank. What do we have in our
bank and do we use this just around the city as we fill wetlands for road improvement
projects? How does that work?
Hempel: I can answer that. The required, as part of the wetland loss that right now are in
mitigation, when you fill an acre of wetland, you have to replace it with 2 acres. So
' essentially we're filling 1.55 acres and we're mitigating 3.1 essentially is a wash there...
Beth Kunhel: The restoration area that we're looking at restoring the existing wetland and
creating additional wetland adjacent to it, there's a good possibility there would be more
wetland created than the 3.1 acres. So that could be enrolled into a wetland banking program.
2
F
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 �r
Nutting: I don't have any additional comments.
Scott: Okay. Can I have a motion please?
3
C '
,
Ledvina: Okay. What's the balance on our account right now?
Y g
Hempel: Zero.
Ledvina: Zero, okay. So this would be our first wetland banking type of situation? Okay.
And again, this could be used for other projects.
,
Scott: Other city projects or is it specifically for the use of other city projects or let's say
another developer, we can apply that?
,
Hempel: We're leaning that way. We're trying to establish a banking program whereby we
can actually sell some mitigation areas to the developer down the line here. We can give
,
them a total package on where and how to do that...
Mancino: I have a question about that in principle. If we are going in to certain areas and
'
we're filling in wetlands and asking for mitigation 2 to 1 in that same area? A lot of times
it's because there's been habitat and wildlife in that area. Don't we want to keep the area
where we're filling and putting in the 2 to 1 mitigation kind of in the same way? And even
,
add more to the site specific areas versus making it.
Hempel: That's a good approach there to replace... mitigation laws go 2 to 1 so if we're
,
filling an acre of habitat, we'd be replacing it with 2 acres. We're essentially going do we
need to replace 1 acre of habitat for the wildlife and so forth ... an extra acre of land...
Mancino: And that was the intent of the 2 to 1 mitigation?
Aanenson: ...ag urban wetland—that we can pick an area such as Bluff Creek where we want
to and we all concur that that maybe that would be an area that we want to do and put it in
...
an area where we want to enhance it as an improvements. So those are what we're trying to
'
get some makings on ... the implementation portion that Diane is working on, where the
appropriate locations would be.
'
Mancino: That's wonderful.
Scott: Okay, Ron.
,
Nutting: I don't have any additional comments.
Scott: Okay. Can I have a motion please?
3
C '
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
Ledvina: I would move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Wetland
Alteration Permit #92 -5 subject to the staff, the conditions identified in the staff report.
' Scott: Is there a second?
' Mancino: I second.
Scott: It's been moved and seconded that we follow the staff's recommendation. Is there
' any discussion?
Ledvina moved, Mancino seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval
' of Wetland Alteration Permit #92 -5 subject to the following conditions:
1. The replacement plan includes restoration to the existing Wetland A.
2. The design and construction specifications must be approved by the City before the
project commences.
3. A wetland bank be established for the City and the County if the wetland restoration
creates more than the required mitigation.
4. According to the WCA, the project cannot comment until 30 days after the City's decision
' has been distributed to the parties notified of the application.
5. The County will monitor the replacement and restoration for a period of five years as
' required by the WCA. Monitoring forms will be completed and submitted to the City at
the end of each growing season with descriptions of the site vegetation, wetland types,
and ground photos.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Scott: City Council, excuse me Kate. This goes to the City Council on the 12th? Okay,
good. Thank you very much.
P
ii
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
�I
PUBLIC HEARING:
REZONING OF 25.85 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL ,
TO RSF, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY AND PRELIMINARY PLAT TO
SUBDIVIDE 25.85 ACRES INTO 21 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND 3 OUTLOTS
LOCATED IN THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 3, T 116, R 23, NORTH OF HIGHWAY 5 '
AND EAST OF HIGHWAY 41, BRENDEN POND, GESTACH AND PAULSON
CONSTRUCTION.
Public Present: '
Name Address 1
Dan Herbst
7640 Crimson Bay
'
David Gestach
8001 Acorn Lane
Lee Paulson
St. Bonifacius, MN
Charles Stinson
Deephaven
'
Sam & Nancy Mancino
6620 Galpin Lake Road
Peter Davis
6640 Galpin Lake Road
6651 Galpin Blvd.
'
Steve Buresh
Mancino: Planning Commissioners, I'd like to ask your approval, well just let you know that
I'm going to step down from the Planning Commission at this point for the next two ,
subdivisions that are coming in front of us, which is the Gestach- Paulson and the Ryan
subdivisions because my land abuts their land. I have no financial interest in it but I do care
about what happens so I'm going to remove myself, if that is fine with you. I talked to the ,
City Attorney and kind of gone over this with him and will take my place as a private citizen
and speak from that point of view. '
Scott: Good, thank you. In view of similar things on other parts of city government, that is
definitely appreciated but does not surprise me. Thank you very much.
Sharmin AI -Jaff presented the staff report on this item.
Harberts: What's the, excuse me. What's the comment by public safety on this issue. I'm '
trying to determine traffic flow and then stacking up here. Has staff looked at that?
Hempel: One of the issues that's been brought up in the subdivision before us this evening '
that is being addressed, that the intersection spacing was.
J Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
I Harberts: Pretty tight.
Hempel: On their submittal, yes. We did point that out. It would be sufficient, we would
revise the drawings and get additional space.
Aanenson: I'd like to make a couple of comments as far as the options. What happened with
this is we had the Gestach- Paulson parry who wanted to go forward with the plat ...Lake Lucy
extension. Having done that, the Ryans put themselves in a position where they want to
' make sure the road that they're designing so they were ready to develop. Well that left us
with the concern, is well now Mancino's is the last big missing link here and—we needed to
make sure that access is provided for all properties. If the Mancino's to come in first we
would say okay, you need to now provide access to Gestach- Paulson property and to the
Ryan's property so all three parties have been very cooperative and we've spent a lot of time.
It's been very difficult. We've kind of wrapped each ... issue here as far as on this subdivision
' but they're all inter related. So we tried to make sure that each subdivision provides access
to the adjoining property. It is a complex issue and we're not sure that we've got all the
answers but we've tried to give some options that we think may work. There's some steep
' slopes on this property. Significant grade changes. Some natural features. Wetlands.
Heavily wooded areas that we had to preserve. So it is complex but on this, the Gestach-
Paulson property, we feel that however we get access to the Mancino's, there is one outlot
that was platted on the Shivley addition. We're not sure but ... would be to the north into the
Mancino's so we're saying somewhere, either through the Ryan's subdivision or through the
Gestach- Paulson subdivision, access needs to be given to the Mancino property. And that's
why Commissioner Mancino removed herself from this because we're insisting that, whether
they develop or if they would sell at some time in the future, somebody may want a public
' street through there. It may not be them but somehow we need to insure that there's access
to that property and we're not land locking them so that's why this issues is before you with
this subdivision.
Scott: Just a question. Dave, with the alignment that we see here having access to the
Mancino property from it looks like between Lots 20 and 21. Is that slope going to be, is it
' going to be, is it going to be about a 10% grade street or 15% or something like that?
Hempel: Yeah. We looked at the topographic maps and it was extremely steep and then I
I believe the Mancino's had hired an engineer's office to do that as well. The grades were
pretty significant for this swath. The street would be 100 feet or so in that area. We felt
that that was not a feasible route for a city street to go.
Scott: How do Y ou feel about that?
6
I
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 ''
Hempel: I would concur with that. I believe there are better alternatives to serve the
Mancino parcel than bisecting it in that specific location.
Scott: Would you, I mean just from looking at the maps that we are provided, does it appear,
at least if we're looking at access from a westerly or southwesterly portion, would you agree '
that a connection between Lots 15 and 16 would topographically would yield both the access
with a minimum amount of disturbance. I mean we don't, obviously we're trying to allow
three different land owners to develop responsibly here but just dealing with the access from '
the westerly side, does it appear that going between Lots 15 and 16 is one of the better
alternatives?
Hempel: It is a better alternative than the southerly one, definitely. There are a couple '
drawbacks with that one as well. It would be a single loaded street. The school property is
directly to the north. If the Mancino's develop, they may not even elect to use that option. '
They may loop the street back internally but at least we're providing an access with the
utilities for future extension if so desired.
Scott: Is there enough distance inbetween, now we need a quarter of a mile inbetween access '
to county road? What is the distance requirement?
Hempel: In this subdivision here we're looking at 300 foot intersection spacing. The quarter
mile refers to arterials like Trunk Highway 41.
Scott: Okay. So there wouldn't be really anything that would preclude an access point to the '
Mancino property off of CR 117 that was somewhere in the middle of their, I know there's
an existing driveway or something like that. '
Aanenson: And that would be one access: They would have direct access out onto Galpin.
What we're saying is, if that was their only access point, let's say. '
Scott: Well yeah, you need. '
Aanenson: You would have a long dead end cul -de -sac and that's our ... there needs to be
another access point into the Ryan's piece which can...or up through the extension of the cul-
de -sac from the Gestach- Paulson property.
Scott: Okay, thank you. I
Al -Jaff: We are recommending approval of this subdivision with conditions outlined in the
staff report. I have some minor changes to some. One ... where the applicant needs to shift
ii,
a
n
0
n
L
I
1
U
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
some property lines to give some—adequate frontage. We also apologize for not forwarding
the grading plans to you. If there are any questions regarding the grading, it's fairly simple
and if there are any questions regarding the grading, we will answer them. With that we are
recommending approval of the plan with conditions outlined in the staff report.
Scott: Good, thank you. Any comments from commissioners? Hearing none, would the
applicant or their representative wish to speak at this time? Yes sir, please state your name
and your address please.
David Gestach: David Gestach ... we've been working with staff and the adjoining neighbors
and like they say, it's been a long process. The first plat was submitted back in '85. That
was in 2 1/2 acre lots and then ... so it's been a long process so we're appreciate your
approving the plan. It's basically the same layout as far as...but I guess that's all I have to
say.
Scott: Good. Any questions for the applicant? Good, thank you very much.
David Gestach: And the other thing is, we are willing to provide a public street to the
adjoining property owners.
Scott: Okay. Good, thank you. This is a public hearing. May I have a motion to open the
public hearing?
Conrad moved, Nutting seconded to open the public hearing. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The public hearing was opened.
Scott: If anyone would wish to speak, please step forward. Give us your name and your
address and tell us what's on your mind.
Steve Buresh: My name is Steve Buresh. I'm more directly interested in the next item but
this one does impact me somewhat since I do live on Galpin Blvd. I do have a few concerns
with having lived in this area since 1987 in the Lake Lucy Highlands area. And in that the
concerns are with the extension and then with the two additions that are planning to go in
there. Currently we already, as someone who tried to get onto Highway 5 every morning, we
currently have some extreme traffic problems out there in that area and I think that the
Planning Commission should definitely take a look at the approvals of additions out there
with the current status of Highway 5 and the fact that it's only 2 lane out there. And then
also what, basically what impact this, all these homes going into this area are going to have.
Scott: So you're concerned about your access from CR 117?
8
1
I
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 11
Steve B h: Well with the continuation of Lake Luc Road there. I'm just about 4 houses '
ores y �
down from the intersection of Lake Lucy, the current Lake Lucy Road and Galpin Blvd.
The traffic that's going to end up being dumped onto Highway 5 to the south there and then '
also currently with the traffic that's going through that area right now in the rush hour period.
So I just want to voice that we should take into consideration the current roads out in that
area before we start expanding that at too large a rate. ,
Scott: Okay. Dave, do you want to talk about the signalization project this fall? '
Hempel: Certainly Mr. Chairman. The projection with the new elementary or middle school
being constructed at the southeast corner of Trunk Highway 5 and Galpin Blvd, there will be
construction and installation of a signalized intersection there to assist traffic in crossing '
Highway 5. This project and Lake Lucy Road extension will actually probably assist in some
of the traffic. Right now you only have one access and that's going south with the extension '
of Lake Lucy Road through and provide a parallel street system to Highway 5, approximately
a 1 1/2 mile north of Highway 5 to give another option to access TH 5 as well. But we are
well aware of the traffic concerns at the intersection of Galpin and Trunk Highway 5. We're
working on resolving that.
Scott: Okay, so that signal will be installed yet this fall? I
Hempel: Early 1995.
Scott: Okay, good. Does that answer your question? '
Steve Buresh: Yeah. That concludes my concerns. '
Scott: Good, thank you sir. Would anybody else like to speak at the public hearing?
Sam Mancino: Hi I'm Sam Mancino, 6620 Galpin Blvd...
Nancy Mancino: Mr. Chair, Nancy Mancino, 6620 Galpin Blvd. I
Sam Mancino: First off we'd like to make it clear that we at this time have no intentions to
develop. We are merely trying to do some long range planning. As the development around
us sets in, it becomes clear that we have to apply certain prudent.-how we deal with this
property and allow for future contingencies. But at this time we don't have any definite plans '
but we have done some drawings and some planning to—decision. In the process we've
talked to a lot of experts and engineers as well as staff... sketched this and we want to kind of
walk through some of the issues as we see them. As it regards, the first part of this area, the '
9 '
F - 1
d
r
ii
n
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
Gestach- Paulson property to the west of us. Both this and as well the Ryan property but
basically in terms of the topography for the last many years, working farms has been mostly
clearing trees. The rolling topography remains but most of the trees have been cleared.
During that same period of time in the 40's and 50's, our's was the old Slogan Tree Farm
and planted a lot of specimen trees. The perimeter is pretty much lined by trees and within
the site itself there are a lot of very mature trees. The western half is almost completely
woods with a ravine system that runs through it. It makes future development of it possible
but as we say somewhat problematic. We have to deal with and sensitive to it. Our house is
located at about the gift point east and west, very close to the southern property line.
Scott: If you could angle that. Could you angle that straight at us so the camera can pick it
up from behind. There are cameras everywhere so be careful.
Sam Mancino: By the way, this is Charles Stinson who is an architect who will be helping
with the presentation and planning. There's a perimeter tree line that runs the entire east/west
portion of the southern property line. Many of you who drive Galpin Boulevard probably are
familiar with the large stand of arborvitae trees that line the western side of Galpin Road.
There's a companion set of arborvitae through here. This entire section is woods and will
be ... through here, that will meander back into here. The terrain rises somewhat sharply here
to a high point. The section near our house is probably at 1,050 -1,060 feet and this property
falls off down into the 960's I believe or 980's. It's about an 8 foot drop there so just to
give you an overall sense of the terrain. Through here there are a lot of stands of Ponderosa
pines... As a consequence, most of the people who have advised us about looking at our
future development potential, both developers, architects, and engineers, have really come
pretty much to the same conclusion which is whatever is happening here, we should probably
consider that whatever development we do in our property will be somewhat different than
the surrounding developments. Both in terms of the lot sizes, which following the landforms
and the natural trees and vegetation—force themselves into a larger lot configuration than we
see being platted around us. And so our long range thinking is that we will probably tend to
develop that as an eye per se. More self contained and for that purpose we probably don't
want to go through... adjoining properties. We've looked at a number of road options. We've
been in some discussions with the Gestach- Paulson and Lee and have at one time looked at a
variation that staff had talked about us with which had us accessing a road system through
here, or a road system through here to serve this property. And perhaps Charles, maybe you
can talk to us about some of the things that's happened as a result of that road system
Charles Stinson: Okay. My name is Charles Stinson. I'm an architect and I live at 4733
Eastwood Road in Minnetonka. I was approached by Nancy and Sam about taking a look at
that property from an architectural standpoint, from a land planning standpoint and with the
understanding that none of us wanted to do a maximum density residential area and we
10
I
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
wanted to keep and save the integrity of the area. I mean it's, with all the development going
everywhere and with trees coming down and topography being ripped apart, we wanted to
save one of the last stands of just specimen trees. I mean there's huge ponderosa pine.
,
Across this area, I mean they're just gigantic. There's a big ravine and again there's 80 feet
of drop going from here to down in this area. A lot of, there's pathways. Just a tremendous
amount of trees that were planted 40 -50 years ago and they go all the way across the
'
property. This is totally dense. Kind of an unmolested nature in this area and they actually
extend across the property line. So as we looked at it, the first thing we wanted to think
'
about is, as we get back to the road, was just the idea of what can we do to preserve the
integrity of this whole area without destroying it. And with the buffers we're thinking, at the
beginning point is, creating a conservation zone that would occur on both our property and
'
the properties abutting that would be desirable for everybody. You know perhaps 30 feet on
each side or something but it would be far enough away that it wouldn't destroy the root
system and that's one of the problems of so many of our developments is we go in and we
'
say well, we're going to miss that tree with the road but by the time we do the grading, it
gets wider than we think and dirt is you know knocking the oxygen out of the roots or the
earth below the tree and we lose not only where we've just placed the trees but we've
'
damaged everything around it that we'll lose it within a couple years. So trying to preserve
their root system for everything around, for everybody in the neighborhood. So the idea, and
in looking at this and the other, we can look at a concept here of the road but to give you a
'
feeling of how they live there ... have lived here for the last 10 or 12 years, is there's a private
drive that comes in here. Drive through past the existing houses and reaches their house. In
going in there, so you're just cutting right through the trees. It's just beautiful and very
,
private. And when you arrive at the house, there's a giant meadow that's just going all the
way across here that just goes on forever. There's also a large meadow behind their house
and wildflower garden and then again the path system going through here is just, you really
'
should take a look at the property. So in looking at it, I can address this road alternative but
this is an example of what can happen I think just about anywhere where a large street comes
through the site. But an engineer took a look at this and showed us the topography so I've
'
just identified the area of the trees that certainly would be lost. And to see that, I mean it's a
major displacement of that forest. And even if a natural road came in the top, it would do
top did all the that seem to be
,
pretty much to the top what the same at the and ponderosas
here and here would be gone. And it's right next to the school field and it's exposed to the
fence and all that. So it didn't seem like a real good alternative. So what we looked at.
Sam Mancino: One other point. In addition to just knocking out the trees, because of the
grades. We'd have to probably be either outside...10% grade in some cases which would
,
require, I think that requires cutting down of 10, 12, 14 feet. Being able to fill with 16 feet
up in places and being able to ... across the whole ravine system so it seemed a bit of a
violation to the topography. I
11 1
u
L
I
u
n
J
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
Charles Stinson: So in a very cartoon form, this is what we were thinking of We were
thinking if it had to, and we were trying to come up with stages that would happen so the
Mancino's could live in their house with the same integrity that they do now and the site. So
we thought if there are several components here but the ravine is so big and this is so dense
and the topography is dropping down so much this way and that way, that the service is
dipping down here. The best way to service this side, instead of bringing a road all the way
through, would be having a two private drives off the west side of the property. One coming
up here and would service this lot and this lot with each of them are good sized lots. I'm not
sure of the exact acreage they would be.
Sam Mancino: Probably 3/4 of an acre.
Charles Stinson: Yeah. And another one coming up at the top. So it would just be a private
drive and utilities so anything brought up would actually stop at the conservation line instead
of wrecking the trees with these. If it doesn't happen and then at some point we would bring
them in. And then the other access point would be in kind of a phase one but would be just
coming off this existing road up here. That neighborhood and coming out with one cul -de-
sac that would service here, here and here with a private drive going to that lot so we could
work the homes built in a real ... solution into the existing topography. And then leaving this
all the same as it exists in the middle and just bringing in a short road and a cul -de -sac here.
Just servicing these lots and keeping and using this, what would be the future road, as a
private drive going to these lots temporarily and that would leave this whole meadow area as
kind of a neutral open zone and that way we'd be leaving all the trees here, all the trees here.
As much of this as we possibly can all in this except for where the road can come in.
Mancino's would continue to use their existing private drive coming in and enjoy this area.
At some point they retire and move out to the country or something, they could put this road
all the way through. Connect the two of them and divide this up into lots and they would
have a thru street here and a short cul -de -sac at this point. But from the lower portion, just
bringing up utilities because the topography is ... bring the utilities in here. Instead of having a
thru road going through here, just have the utilities again stop at the bottom of the
conservation line and I'm getting ahead of myself on this next site but it's all so integrated
that it's doing the same thing here. That way we could bring it up. There is a short open
space just by the arborvitaes here. Just on the back side of it that there isn't anything. So we
could bring it right across there and if we need to go across, we could just kind of tunnel
underneath the trees as opposed to making the big hole there.
Sam Mancino: As it relates to the future possibility to hook up to Crestview. Some years
ago we were requested to come to the city Planning and City Council meeting and we have a
note from February 7, 1990 which made a City Council recommendation that at such time
that this plat was filed, that it should be amended to provide the right -of -way for the
12
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1
r
extension of Crestview Road...feet which basically though it doesn't lock in the exact location
of the road, either positions it through here or possibly through here as long as there are some
proper buildable lots. So I think that there is some notice in the record that that is a strong
'
preference from staff at one point that recommended that we hook up at that time.
'
Nancy Mancino: Yes, that is true. That when the Shivley's went in and did, I think it was a
subdivision in here. That staff asked to make sure that we had access to the north. And the
particular road alignment, where that access is. Whether it's between here and there, it was
not drawn out. It was not stated exactly where it is. That there is an outlot that was created
'
to have a roadway to go into the new property. But the exact location is between there and
there ... very comfortable that if it isn't right here, it could come over the cul -de -sac and also
'
allow for our entering onto Galpin and there would be two accesses into the property so there
would not be a long cul -de -sac.
1
Sam Mancino: Just to reiterate my point. Though we've looked at the possibility of bringing
in a flow through road, we do believe that we, long term will serve the community's needs to
flow a road through into Crestview, which will create the circulation and the need. The other
'
thing is that in terms of violating and ripping and tearing the property, there's two discreet
private drives that would be built to city roadway standards would probably be ... virtually no
different than a road easement for full service roads. We don't feel that that's much of a
'
burden on the adjoining property owners and we have offered to help in landscaping the road.
The private drive going in there to be able to minimize the impact on that. And it also
facilitates a better sequence of any future development, whether it's ourselves or someone
,
else in the future because there are a number of options for sequencing in this area.
Nancy Mancino: No, I don't think there is. As just stated, we would recommend that under '
the condition of the staff approval that number 28 be changed. Instead of having a street
access off the, the applicant shall provide a right -of -way and street and utilities to the east
boundary of the plat and tying in a temporary cul -de -sac which will be signed on barricades '
to indicate this street shall be extended in the future. That we do recommend that two
accesses, two private drives between Lots 15 and 16 and Lots 19 and 20 ... be approved. Also
there be a 30 foot conservation easement on the perimeter of the property that abuts the '
Gestach- Paulson property.
Scott: And from looking at the staff report, you've discussed the private drive issue with the ,
Gestachs and they've.
Sam Mancino: We haven't. Unfortunately haven't been able to work out all of the details of
that. As they said, they are, as I understand, they are more than willing to bring a road up at
either of the locations. In some conversations we've had we have asked for two private I
13 1
G
C
I
J
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
drives in lieu of a single road. At our latest discussions, I think that they would prefer a
single road, full sized...
Scott: Okay. Good.
Nancy Mancino: Any questions?
Sam Mancino: Any questions?
Scott: Okay, thank you. Would anyone else like to speak at the public hearing? Yes sir.
Lee Paulson: My name's Lee Paulson. I live in St. Bonifacius. Gestach- Paulson Construction.
We've already gone over this private driveway stuff. My partner's talked to staff and talked
to Mancino's and our experts tell us that it would ... our development by having these private
driveways running through our development. We don't want private driveways. We agree
with staff with Option A or B. We just don't want these private driveways in there. I don't
believe staff really wants these driveways. The way I understand it, want the driveways
either and we'd like to see this moved on to, voted on and moved on to the next step. Thank
you.
Scott: Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak at the public hearing?
Steve Buresh: I would like to comment.
Scott: Well why don't we see if there's someone who would like to speak first. Or for the
first time. Yes sir.
Peter Davis: Yes, my name is Peter Davis. I live at 6640 Galpin Boulevard which is that
kind of odd shaped, rectangle in the upper right corner. I just wanted to be recognized as an
interested party. I haven't been involved with the other discussions and just to save my
remarks for item 3.
Scott: Okay. Thank you. Anybody else like to speak at the public hearing? Sir, if you can
make your comments extremely brief then.
Steve Buresh: Now that it's been outlined here and made a little bit clearer, since this does
pretty much go along with the concerns that I have for the next item on the agenda too and
that is the area that adjoins Galpin Boulevard there. This whole area along Galpin Boulevard
is 2 1/2 acres and larger lots and I think that, I don't know exactly what the size of the lots
that are being proposed for this section, for that small pan handle section there that runs up to
14
3
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 ,'
15 '
Galpin Boulevard but I would strongly recommend that those lots be no smaller than an acre
and a half in order to fit in with the aesthetics of the area. This area is also very, there's very
much wildlife in the area. I've got deer that go across my property all the time. That's one
'
of the reasons that I moved out there. I was raised on a farm so I like the open spaces and
basically I feel that that probably is the reason a lot of people are out there with the large
'
sized lots. So I guess I'd ask the Planning Commission to monitor what size those lots should
be in the panhandle section there of that development to make sure that those, are, would fit
in with the area.
'
Scott: Good, thank you. Would anyone else like to speak at the public hearing? Seeing
none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing please?
'
Ledvina moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
'
Scott: Ron.
Nutting: I guess I haven't, perhaps I ... what is staff's reaction to the private drive issue?
Hempel: Maybe I can address first from a utility standpoint. Depending on the length of a
'
private driveway, it's typically 200 feet is probably maximum for the sewer and water
extension for a single service. The...we looked at servicing additional lots and properties and
trying to get a full sewer line or a water line in there... The other issue is basically ... for a
'
single lot or two lots for a private driveway that responsibility is with that homeowner to
maintain that line. Whereby if it's a city street, it's obviously maintained by the city and so
forth. With the roadway extension to the northeast corner of the property, it leaves the option
'
for the Mancino's to either explore a full service street through there or explore stubbing off a
private driveway to serve up to 4 lots off of that cul -de -sac. There is significant elevation
change from the north end of the property to the south end of the property where it may be
,
somewhat difficult to extend the private driveway down to service that area where the
southerly private driveway the Mancino's are requesting. That end there ... will be served
internally through a private driveway through the Mancino's but again there's some steep
'
slopes and ravines and the private driveway would have to meander in order to do that. The
private driveway would have less environmental effects, less trees, less grading, to do that but
'
the ... so I think staff's position is that we're obligated to look at providing adjacent properties
street and utility service and I believe that's what we're doing in this circumstance. Without
a full fledged development proposal before us from the Mancino's, we really, there's a lot of
'
options in developing the property. The Mancino's are requesting large lots. That's fine.
That's great here. It would be nicely preserved with that. There's also potential that the
Mancino's would sell the property at some future date to another developer and we would
'
15 '
' Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
have potentially a 15,000 square foot lot subdivision. So it's critical from a street and utility
aspect that it provide the infrastructure and street right -of -way to service that for a full
' fledged subdivision.
Nutting: Did I hear correctly, did the applicant prefer Option A or B and not C?
David Gestach: Yes.
' Nutting: ...Option C.
Aanenson: That was before—we asked Mancino's to explore whether or not, there was a
' portion of this plat that is on the Gestach- Paulson that's called Outlot A. This portion isn't
being platted right now. That's a future development... Mancino's looked at going out
through there and we asked them to see...
Nutting: I think there are a number of issues here. I think I'm going to defer maybe some of
those to the other commissioners.
' Scott: Okay, Diane.
' Harberts: I guess just from my perspective, I'm certainly torn with regard to the opportunity
to develop the land on both parties in the way that they want to. When I go back or revisit
our other plans with regard to how important it is to the community with regards to it's
' natural resources, and the uniqueness that exists on the Mancino property. I guess I'm not
quite sure. I think there's a lot of, I think the commission should maybe have a discussion
with regard to some of those values that we place on our natural resources and see if this
' might be one of those projects that we might want to have some kind of special consideration
because of what we're dealing with. The development itself with regard to the applicant, I
' guess I'm okay with it in broad concept and I guess my concern lies more with that overall
picture, especially when we're dealing with some of those special resources. And I'm just,
I'm undecided. I really am.
Scott: So you need more time to consider? More time to think about it or.
' Harberts: Well mine is, I think maybe it is a matter of more time to think about it because
we have a really unique feature here and when you look at some of the work we've done
with our other developments, I think it deserves a little extra special consideration here. And
' you know, I mean Kate kind of characterized it well when she said we don't have all the
answers but we're trying. Maybe at this point that's all we can do but it sounds like both the
applicant and the Mancino's are trying to work something out. I guess personally I'd like to
16
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 ''
see this resolved for all parties, including the city. If we're locking ourselves in by some
type of approval on it tonight. I'd rather then table it or like I said, see it resolved. If we're
in fear of locking ourselves into something if approval is given tonight. '
Scott: Okay, Ladd. 1
Harberts: Did you find your page?
Conrad: I found my page, yeah. I like the staff report. I think they covered most
'
everything. It seems like a good staff report. I like one of the additions the Mancino's made
about the tree easement. I think that's important. I think what everybody is talking about is
sort of unclear in my mind right now. I'm not really sure. Road alignment for Lake Lucy I
,
think should be as per the original. I don't like Alternative B for Lake Lucy. I like the way
it was originally specked and I think that's where it should be. In terms of access to the
'
Mancino property, I really appreciate what they're trying to do. It's a little bit, yeah it's
funny you look at it, it's not based on what we typically do here in our bigger lot
subdivisions but what they're trying to do is what we endorse. But to a degree it seems a
little bit, it's hard to totally grasp what they're trying to do. I'm not sure I understand it yet.
I certainly don't mind an access to the north off of the proposed Brenden Pond cul -de -sac
going into their property. I'd reduce the number of lots on the plat that I'm currently, on the
subdivision that I'm seeing. I think if a road were to swing to the north off of that cul -de -sac,
I'd really, I think I'd be eliminating a lot there. And I also, I think there's yeah. I'd be
eliminating a lot up there and swinging at least a road or a cul -de -sac into the Mancino
'
property. I'm not sure how to deal with what they're requesting for the private drive to the
southwest of their parcel. Bottom line. Like the staff report. Like the tree easement. Road
access to Mancino is, I'm up in the air on that. I guess I do want an access on the northwest
'
corner. I'm not sure if it's a private driveway or if it's a connection to that cul -de -sac. If
that cul -de -sac literally dead ends into the Mancino property. If it dead ends into it, I'd keep
a lot, Lot 15. I want to have a full lot there so that would back up to the school. I don't
'
really know what I'm talking about because I haven't walked the property and I know Matt
has so again I guess I'm going to, maybe Matt can persuade us a little bit because I know
he's been out there and maybe he has a better feel for it.
Scott: Okay, Matt. Thanks. I
Ledvina: Well the issues that are associated with the plat are real thorny ones and the
problem that I see the Mancino's face in terms of their development is that the west part of
their property is isolated by a ravine and they feel the need to maintain that landform and also
the trees that are associated with that. Because if they go blowing roads through there, I
mean they're going to wipe out a tremendous amount of really beautiful area and. I
17 1
i Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
' Scott: Can I stop you for just a second? How would this fit in with our bluff ordinance?
That ravine. Is that considered a bluff?
' Aanenson: I don't believe it would be, no.
' Ledvina: I don't think it would, no.
Aanenson: There is a ravine that topographically. I mean we looked at putting a culvert in
there and yes, it does pose a significant... but maybe not.
Scott: Okay. I just thought maybe with that ordinance.
Ledvina: I don't think that comes into play but in terms of the access. I would generally
agree with Ladd that the northern access be provided. I don't know about the access towards
the southeast corner of the Mancino parcel. I don't know how that would work. There's
still, according to the grading plan that the applicant has proposed, there'd be some, it would
' really run havoc with their grading plan because they do have some steep slopes right in that
corridor. I don't know. It would almost seem that although the property lines have served to
kind of define the vegetation for landform to the western part of the Mancino property is
' really with this subdivision or with this parcel. And so it's always hard when the lines get
drawn on the maps and I think that's the exact same thing we're going to see with the other
parcel to the east and in relation to Mancino's south line there too. Although there's, the
trees have been come up because of the amount of time. Still it's, you're dealing with kind
of a related land area in terms of the slopes, etc. Okay. Having said that, I would feel that
there should be a way of running that northern street to the property line and extending some
kind of private drive to the south. I don't know. I think that possibly the south private drive
could be reviewed to see if that could be eliminated. I didn't have an opportunity to review
the grading plan before this evening and I guess I do have some concerns immediately as I
look at this grading plan. I think the, first of all I think that a conservation easement of 30
feet along the property boundary abutting Mancino's represents an excellent idea in trying to
preserve those trees but you, the grading plan as indicated this evening grades right to the
property line with some severe slopes so I don't know how off the top of my head, I don't
know how to remedy that or reconcile the situation with the conservation easement and the
grading as shown. Obviously if they're going to grade right to the property line, that would
actually affect some of the trees that actually are on the Mancino property so that essentially
is unacceptable. In the other portions of the subdivision I see that the developer is relatively
conscientious of the trees that are bordering the wetland on the west part of the parcel and
' then even in the south. They've done a pretty good job of staying away from the wetland
area so it's essentially that difficult area near the southeast or southwest corner of the
Mancino's that I think has to be reworked and I don't know if you change the grades here, I
18
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 11
don't know how that would change the street grades. Or what can be done there. If
necessary, perhaps retaining walls represent an option. I don't know. The other thing that we
normally have with these plats before we make decisions relates to the tree conservation and
we generally have a tree inventory associated with these developments and although I can, I
generally have the feeling that the trees along the western part of the development, adjacent
to the wetland, I have a feeling that the grading doesn't go into those trees. I don't really
know that. And again, along the east boundary I have concerns there too. There also is quite
a bit of grading in Outlot A that doesn't appear to be necessary. And again, I don't know
what trees are down in that area and how that's going to affect what could be done there in
the future so I think that, I don't know, can they grade on Outlot A? If this is all platted
together.
Al -Jaff: Yes.
Ledvina: Okay. So that would be something that I'd like to see also. Yeah, it appears
they're grading quite a bit there. Well at any rate, I didn't have very much time to study that
plan. Let's see. I guess as far as the street layout, it seems to be utilizing the area fairly ,
well. I don't have a problem with that. Just for looking at some of the conditions of the
staff report, there's some duplications in here I think. Number 8 is repeated as number 14.
And then 25, 26, 19 is also repeated. Let's see. As it relates to number 9. Dave, I had a '
question on condition number 9. Talking about Lake Lucy Road. Would we also want to
identify that those lots that are platted with, or that are developed with Outlot A shall be
limited to interior streets or I guess do we have to define that at this time.
Hempel: I don't believe we do. The other problem we have here is if Lake Lucy Road
alignment does get shifted northerly, there is a potential lot site or two on the south side
which may be appropriate so I guess at this stage we would have another chance at Outlot A.
That would have to be platted and brought back before you to address that issue.
Ledvina: Okay. So we would see Outlot A as a preliminary plat before us again, okay.
Hempel: That's correct.
Ledvina: Okay. I don't know what else I need to comment on here. I guess my overall
feeling is that I'm a little uncomfortable. I am uncomfortable with the situation with the tree
inventory. I would like to see the developer and the Mancino's try to work a little bit more
on the access scenario because it appears that they're worlds apart. The developer does not
want the private driveway and it appears that that's the preferred technique for development
for the Mancino's and I don't know that we can get between that process and try to resolve
that here tonight. And it's important because it really will affect how that area associated
19
C i
I I
C
1
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
with the ravine gets developed and whether there's extensive grading in there or not and
associated tree loss so I think we could see a little more work on this one.
Scott: Dave I just, I have a question. Just a question. I noticed that the official, it looks like
the official alignment for Lake Lucy Road shows the road, and I'm talking about the area
between West Baptist Church and the Carlson property. It appears that there's quite a bit of
clearance inbetween the property to the south. When I look at the applicants drawing, it
comes right up to the property line. My question is, what kind of an impact, since we're
talking about adjoining properties, we really have not spoken about the Carlson property.
With the change in the alignment, what sort of impact is that going to have on the Carlson
property? It looks like the road, the applicant has shifted the road and I can't tell you how
many feet or what it is. I mean it's obvious if the road goes straight through there, they're
going to lose, probably lose 2 lots.
Hempel: I believe that roadway alignment for Lake Lucy Road has been established as a part
of the feasibility study the city has conducted.
Scott: On the applicant's plan? Okay.
Hempel: That's correct. My understanding.
Ledvina: It looks a little different.
Scott: Well it's a lot different. I mean I'm looking at this.
Ledvina: Yeah. The section just east of Highway 41. In terms of the feasibility study and
what the applicant is.
Scott: Yeah I don't know, is this an official map here of the proposed Lake Lucy alignment?
This is, okay. Well when I compare this to the alignment to the east, or the west side of the
applicant's development, it touches the property line on the south side. So I'm trying to
figure out if this is official, it's not the same as what the applicant has on their property.
Hempel: I believe in the feasibility study they showed 2 or 3 different alignments for
extending out to the Westside Baptist Church directly affected the Carlson property to the
south. There is a degraded wetland on that southwest corner of the Baptist Church site. That
was one option. I think—elected to align.
Scott: Swing it up, yeah.
PA
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1 1
Hempel: ...rejuvenate or restore that wetland...
Scott: If you have a preliminary plat map you can, if you happen to have that, you can see '
how there's a difference between the road alignments and my question is, where is it going to
be? '
Aanenson: I think the simple answer to that is, Mr. Engelhardt, Bill Engelhardt designed
Lake Lucy project and he's also the project engineer for the Gestach- Paulson piece so we're '
confident that he matched the alignments. That would be our qualification on that and Mr.
Carlson, as Dave indicated, is aware of this alignment that was approved by the City Council
as part of the feasibility study. So they should match... '
Scott: Okay. Well I just was concerned because I saw some differences that were visible in
these two. ,
Aanenson: ...again, we put this in for your edification...
Scott: Okay, that's fine. I don't have any other comments. Can I have a motion please? '
Ledvina: I would move that we table preliminary plat for Subdivision #94 -10 for Brenden
Pond.
Scott: Is there a second?
Harberts: Second.
Scott: It's been moved and seconded that we table this item. Is there any discussion?
Ledvina moved, Harberts seconded that the Planning Commission table action on the '
preliminary plat for Subdivision #94 -10 for Brenden Pond. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. (Nancy Mancino did not participate in voting on this item.)
Scott: So we'll be seeing this, what on the 7th?
Aanenson: If you give the staff direction? '
Scott: Okay, pretty easy. Matt is going to need the time and the rest of us are going to need
the time to review the grading plan. We need a tree inventory.
Aanenson: We have a tree inventory that was done. I
21 1
-1
0
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
Scott: I mean a graphic representation of where they are. I mean we went through this with
Lake Susan Hills 9th Addition. We had a listing of all the trees but we had no idea where
they were. Something like that where we can see the locations and then also staff's best
guess of the trees that are going to be removed due to streets, utilities and pads. Building
pads. What did I miss?
Harberts: I'd like a little further work, consideration with regard to the environmental
resources here. With regard to full road versus perhaps that private drive concept and
recognize that it's probably not the usual way that the city likes to conduct business but again
I guess I'm just pointing out that I feel we have a unique situation here with regards to the
environment and maybe just revisit it. Maybe the applicant, the Mancino's and city staff can
sit down and maybe there's a resolution. It sounds like you're close. See if there's some
alternative that is palatable for everyone. But I personally think there's some environmental
issues here that we should be sensitive to. Thank you.
Ledvina: Mr. Chairman, also along that, the east property boundary and dealing with the
grading in relation to the conservation easement. I think that has to be addressed somehow.
And how that affects the grading for the entire parcel I don't know.
' Scott: Okay. Ladd.
Conrad: Just as a point of clarification. I know we can serve the two lots the Mancino's want
' to serve on the northwest with an extended cul -de -sac into their property. Dead ending into
their property. I know we can. Well I'd like to know if that's possible. Same street
standards as not a drive but the same street standards as we're using on the Brenden Pond
' roadway and then the question again is, how do we service the, can we service the two lots to
the southwest and the Mancino property. Is there a feasible way of doing that and is that
besides the private drive that was recommended.
' Scott: Okay. Does that help?
' Aanenson: Yes, thank you. I'm sure we've got everything.
Scott: Well I'm glad you asked. We need that sometimes.
' Yp
Nutting: Part of the hypothetical here is you're talking about a plat for the Mancino property
which doesn't exist and may not ever exist and I think, I sense in thinking through this
process and what, where staff is coming at this from is you know we may never get the
applicant and the Mancino's to agree you know sitting down so then we're left with making a
decision. That decision either takes away a lot from the applicant or impacts the potential
22
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1
' sell ,
development which the Mancino s may or may not do. As we say, they could se the land.
Someone else could come in and the northerly entrance may not be a significant issue. So
what I struggle with in this whole thing is, we've got the applicant before us. We have to ,
make the decision on how we're going to impact that on the basis of what might be impacted
in the adjacent development. I'm not sure where we, you know the dividing line in terms of,
I guess we're playing a little bit of, we're developing the Mancino property here with the '
street proposal that we're making.
Harberts: But I think what we're also doing is. '
Nutting: Or we're moving towards that. I
Harberts: And I'm not disagreeing with you Ron.
Nutting: I'm not on one side or the other. I'm throwing out the position here and I think we '
need to be a little careful as we, or it's very definitely it's a piece of property with a
resources that for all of the ... this is the type of thing we want to be careful about and make '
sure that we preserve what we can from a development standpoint but I struggle with what
we do with assuming they can't come to some agreement down the road as to accessing
private drives or if staff doesn't feel there's any room to give on the private drive issue '
versus Option C that they're proposing. What direction we turn.
Harberts: And I would just add or comment or take it from there on that perhaps what we're ,
facing is perhaps a situation in which in the true sense of planning, after all the numbers are
ran and all of this, it's like what does my gut tell me because this is really what we're doing
is guiding land use. I think that's the real, one of the real elements here that we have to deal '
with. And there's nothing wrong with that...but that's where my frustration or going back
and revealing all of the things that we've done with other developments. The Lake Susan.
The tree inventory. The conservation. All of those things. To me it looks like we have all '
of those elements here. Wait a minute. Maybe we need to just stop and revisit that.
Understand what we're doing. Because of this site we don't have, I don't know if there's a
whole of other sites like this but it's just a matter of taking a little extra time. Understanding '
what we're doing.
Nutting: I agree. '
Scott: Good. Thank you for your comments. Thank you all for coming. I
u
=3
�
u
., Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
-j
PUBLIC HEARING:
' REZONE 37.92 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO
RSF, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMH Y, PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 37.92
ACRES INTO 52 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND A WETLAND ALTERATION
' PERMIT LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF GALPIN BOULEVARD AND
PROPOSED LAKE LUCY ROAD EXTENSION, 6730 GALPIN BOULEVARD, ED
AND MARY RYAN, SHAMROCK RIDGE.
' Public Present:
Name Address
Dan Herbst
David Gestach
Lee Paulson
John & Mariellen Waldron
Martin Kuder
Steve Buresh
Peter & Marg Davis
Sam & Nancy Mancino
7640 Crimson Bay
8001 Acorn Lane
St. Bonifacius
1900 Lake Lucy Road
6831 Galpin Blvd.
6651 Galpin Blvd.
6640 Galpin Lake Road
6620 Galpin Blvd.
n
I
I
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item.
Scott: Questions?
Harberts: I just have a point of discussion. You know I certainly respect the amount of
time that staff and the applicant put on this. I know it takes a lot of work on the staff's time
and I respect the time that the people have taken to come here to make comments. I feel, I
guess I'm just looking at, in terms of time and good use of time, with all of those issues and
not really having a complete packet. I guess I'm a little concerned about spinning my wheels
because I don't know, I see some of these aren't maybe requirements with regards to lots.
Things like that. I don't know if that's then going to change this drastically and it's just, I
guess I just don't like spinning my wheels with other things going on with my time. But
anyway, that's just a point of discussion.
' Scott: Okay. Can I just ask a question? How many residents are here for this particular
issue? Okay. Well we are scheduled to have a public hearing and we will have a public
hearing.
24
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 '
Aanenson: Can I make a point of clarification?
Scott: Sure.
Aanenson: We had the same issue at staff. These are three properties are very, very '
complex. The reason we put it on, even though there's a lot of issues unresolved, we need to
give them some direction... We came forward with our recommendation. There was no
concurrence so we felt the best thing to do was to put it in front of the public and give them '
some marching orders so they know so they're not spending their time...so we are trying to
make that, give them some clear direction on where to go with their plat so that's...
Harberts: That's a good point. Thank you Kate. '
Scott: Okay, good. '
Harberts: I still think I'm spinning my wheels.
y y Scott. .
Oka An other q uestions from the commissioners for staff. Would the applicant '
like to make, or their representative like to make a presentation? Please state your name and
your address. '
Chuck Plowman: My name is Chuck Plowman, the project engineer representing the Ryans.
Mary Ryan is here this evening if there are any questions that I am unable to answer. Ed '
would have loved to be here but he was involved in an accident and he's still recuperating so
he's not able to attend the meeting at this time. Let me start with just a little bit of the '
project background. Lake Lucy Road, can you just put that map up there that shows the
outlot. I'd like to see the one where Lake Lucy Road ends... specifically to give the Ryans an
opportunity to evaluate their plat. See what might be most feasible and practical '
and ... involved with the properties. So we've been spending the last 3 months going over
different plans and different options and looking at exactly that. So what I'd like, I gave
Dave a copy of something yesterday which is a modification for a lot of the things that we're ,
talking about tonight and I think if you could just bear with me, I'll shed some light on a lot
of things involved with bringing up some major issues. Let me just start with, the initial plat
was submitted, let me call it Plan A showing Lake Lucy Road up at the top. Staff told us '
that this was not a good plan because of the impacts on the environment and the excessive
grade, actual grading up into the property north of us. So we came back with trying to
address those concerns. We did another plan, without much input from staff but just giving '
some, they gave us some direction and we just come up with a second drawing that we
submitted to them prior to the last scheduled meeting that we were going to be on. That
showed Lake Lucy coming right down the center of that corridor. And what I liked about '
25
n
J
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
this one so much was that it was the most sensitive to the environment. ...all the trees along
the north. Gave us long lots this way. Long lots this way. Stayed out of the wetlands. It
was just the most favorable as far as environmentally concerned. It gave us some nice
walkout lots here and some liveable lots here because we've got a lot of room in the back to
do some grading. This was bumped down because staff said that we don't want all of these
driveways connecting to Lake Lucy Road. So that brings us to the plan that we have before
you tonight. This is almost identical to the one in your packet but there was a couple things
done to it to address some issues ... Here we're 60 feet south of the property line with the
beginning of the right -of -way of Lake Lucy Road. That enabled us to construct the road
width along... boulevard and also a 3 to 1 slope and if we do get into the trees, it's very, very
minor. And it also allows us to have two cul -de -sacs, one to the south and some very
desirable lots looking over a wetland. This is what we're really studying the entire plat for
what's economically favorable to the plat and also what's favorable to the environment. So
we've come up with this plan. We are not encroaching on the wetlands. We're not taking
out the trees. We're coming up with a favorable plan for development and we feel this is the
plan that's best. Let me just talk a little bit about this. This is with the Lake Lucy Road
going with this original alignment to the south. With the cul -de -sacs going to the north. We
end up with tuck under lots. Two for sure, possibly more. We end up with destroying
another tree ... because of the elevation of the road. The slope will require some wedand ... so
this one's not favorable from a development standpoint. It is definitely not favorable from
the environment standpoint. Let me just back up a little bit to the staff report. Let me just
talk about Options A, B and C. Option A I believe was the one I just showed you. Option A
was the... Okay, I really just went over that and described to you why that's not a good
choice. Option B, which is the one that we just talked about, which we like. As far as the
location of Lake Lucy Road. Option C is not at all favorable to the Ryan's because it's going
to, this number of lots are going to be getting up here plus they're ready to develop now.
They want to develop now. And initially we had hoped when we started a few months ago,
they were looking only at the alignment and wanting to get some location or connecting point
set. That has changed. They spent the money to have all this work done, and research done
and they've got a different mind set. They do want to develop. They don't want to wait 2
years, 5 years, whatever. So they're here. They're here to get your approval so they can
develop. So Option C is not a good option. And I was understanding it also is not very
good for the future plans for a cul -de -sac to come down into this property through the trees
so that to me would be another reason to not go with that one. Let me just touch on some of
the issues. I know Dave's aware of some of them that I addressed. Things have been
happening so fast. I get a short notice about some things that need attention and then Dave
gets a short time to look at it so again, it's kind of works both ways. The 300 foot spacing
from Galpin Blvd to the first street. The initial thought by staff was that this was going to
have a ripple effect. It's going to change all these intersections. When in fact it didn't. This
intersection moved I figure about more like 100 feet. 110 feet or something like that. But
26
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1
I
'
this one really idn't change all except for that moving over making these lots deeper and
Y g P g g P
these were excessive before so they fit the plan. What we did also with that is, instead of
having, see how the street is moving up and in fact it's going to the right. Once we switch
'
this street over, it was not workable doing it that way. Now we had a previous plan that
showed it coming this way so this is going back to that plan ... Plan B so we kind of referred it
back to that on this plan and we think it works much better. We did lose another lot. Now
'
we're down to 49. We're moving in the wrong direction. So I guess the effect of the 300
feet was not a major issue, and I know that's ... not only your's but mine. But that
wasn't... everything stayed the same... Along with this reconfiguration right here, the 17 foot
'
by the way was also added to Galpin. The wetland setbacks. There was a drafting error on a
couple lots which showed this pad down here so it was ... and was obvious that it was too
close to the wetland but when in fact there is room there so that's not... The storm water
'
treatment ponding area was also an issue and before we turned the configuration things, we
had no choices where the inlet and outlet was going but since then we reconfigured this,
which allowed us to construct a pond in this fashion. And also discharging the storm sewer
'
at this end of the pond. Outlets at this end of the pond. We have plenty of volume. As you
can see it's quite large. So we do have an ideal situation with the discharge and the outlets
'
being offset into the pond and that's what Dave was looking for. Something in that fashion.
On the wetlands itself, can you differentiate between the green and the yellow? Okay, the
yellow is actually fill that's going into the wetland. This area is not filled because we're
'
actually excavating in here. But wherever fill is taking place, you have to follow rules to
mitigate for that. The green areas are mitigation areas. And those areas sum up to a little
shy of being 2 to 1. So we need to confer with Diane about what our options might be.
'
There's no credit given for storm water ponds according to the rules, even though we're
creating wet ponds, it doesn't apply for mitigation. The option I was looking at was—the cul-
de -sac a little bit. Reducing the fill so it is workable because I did ... find where I can do that.
'
Lower it down and reduce the ... that 2 to 1 ratio. Time is running short so this is what I came
with. I looked at the canopy coverage, because that was one of the things that they were
looking for, and I count 10%. So there was an error made by one of the fellows...came up
'
with, what was it?
Generous: 75.
'
Chuck Plowman: Yeah, so 10 %. We do have the issue of these lots fronting on Lake Lucy
Road. The idea of private drives is real negative for the same reasons that were mentioned
'
before because who wants to live with a private drive, even if it's facing out, a private drive
between these homes is just not good. And we certainly don't want to do that. I guess what
I would like to ask is that separation would be given a common drive for 2 of them instead of
'
one for each because I know the city does allow access to collector roads where there's not a
good alternative. I think this is the case where there is not a good alternative. We've done
27
I
.1
1
LJ'
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
real well in keeping everything off Lake Lucy Road. I think this is a piece of property that',
no matter how you slice this up, it happens. You can't get away from it. Again I think I'm
just going to reiterate but I feel this is the best plan. This is the plan we want and we want
you to consider this for approval tonight contrary to what staff is recommending so all the
actions from here are taken into account with some items I've clarified and addressed. Not to
make it any lighter, I wanted to also mention the fact about the potential of using 50 foot
right -of -ways. Staff discussed with us ... about doing that. I forget which layout we were
looking at. But the advantage to 50 foot right -of -ways, for example here. We could use the
10 feet and pull this right -of -way in. Along with that we pulled the grading slope 10 feet in.
It's a plus as far as... 60 foot right -of -ways are really something that have been used for many
years and more and more we're going to 50 because the utilities are now going in a common
trench so we don't need that room we used to have in the boulevards and the easements that
they used to have for gas, telephone and electric. They're all going in one trench so the 50
foot right -of -way's working well. We can live with the 60 but I think if it's possible, we'd
like the 50. I really had no further comments unless there's any other questions, I'd be
happy to answer them.
Scott: Good. Any questions for the applicant?
Harberts: Could you just take one more minute and just kind of resummarize why you prefer
the alignment of Lake Lucy? You know your preference as to why again.
Chuck Plowman: Sure. This location of Lake Lucy Road was pulled away from the north
property line so that we could preserve this tree line along this north property line, and I
know the Mancino's are very concerned about that and... So this location allows us to build a
road with the boulevard and ... it's very tight but I'm saying we can get ... in here and preserve
the boulevard and save trees. On the other side, we're not encroaching onto the wetland with
any fill. We do have a nice location here for a treatment pond and discharging runoff before
it goes into the wetland. As far as the talk of there being mass grading, I've been involved
with a few sites that are like this. There's going to be mass grading, I don't care how you
look at it. And it's not a problem. You know we need to be sensitive to the trees. The
wetlands. We can move a lot of dirt. It doesn't cost that much when it comes to developing
land. I mean it's, there's a limit obviously but this isn't a problem as far as, you know if you
move 2 feet of dirt, the tree's gone. If you move 10 feet, the tree's gone. It doesn't make
any difference.
Harberts: Thank you.
Chuck Plowman: Do you want to hear the reasons why I don't like the other one?
28
I I
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1
residential single family. Thank you. I
29
Ij
Harberts: No. I got those down. I just wanted to again, just make sure I clearly understood
the preference of why on that one. Thank you.
'
Chuck Plowman: Well obviously from a developer's standpoint, we have lots that we can
sell for a good price. If we put the cul -de -sacs up to the north, we lose lots or value.
Scott: Good, any other comments or questions? Good, thank you sir. This is a public
hearing and can I have a motion please.
'
Ledvina moved, Nutting seconded to open the public hearing. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The public hearing was opened.
Scott: The public hearing is now open. If you'd like to speak about this particular item,
please step forward and give us your name and your address. Don't all stand up at once.
'
Thank you sir.
Steve Buresh: Steve Buresh again from 6651 Galpin Blvd. One small question. Now this is
also a proposed approval of a preliminary plat drawing for the area.
Scott: Yeah. And then a rezone from RR to RSF.
'
Steve Buresh: Right. Well that in fact is what I had the biggest problem with. This
particular asking for, which I guess has been revised down to 50 now, single family homes,
may fit in with the residential single family but the residential single family rezone does not
fit in with this area at all. The area is large lot. The lots on Lake Lucy Highlands area are 2
1/2 acres. That is probably some of the smallest lots in the area. And I think that if we
'
allow it to be subdivided as it is currently, we're totally going to destroy the look of the area.
That's probably something that we want to attain at some point. I think we have to strongly
look at the people that are in the area now. What their wants and needs are but also consider
the future obviously. We can't have all this land if it's not going to be developed at some
point in time. That's just not feasible to believe that that can happen. But I guess my
recommendation is not to rezone it as residential single family but in fact keep it as rural
residential and work out some kind of agreement like we've done in the Lake Lucy Highlands
area and I guess I wouldn't see a problem with it being even 1 1/2 acres per lot. This would
fit, still fit in with the aesthetics of the area and this particular location of this proposed
development is right in the middle of the deer migration path. I know in fact because I wake
up every morning and have deer crossing my property. They go right into this area. This is
going to destroy the wildlife in the area, but I'd like to reiterate that it's just destroys the
aesthetic value of that area. So I strongly recommend that you do not rezone this as
residential single family. Thank you. I
29
Ij
�I
0
0
0
C
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
Scott: Okay. Kate, RSF. 15,000 square foot lots. This is approximately what, averages 20.
Generous: 22.
Scott: 22, okay. The reason why I brought that up is that, and this has been guided in our
comprehensive plan as a RSF area. What the applicant could have done is put in 15,000
square foot lots and would have met the minimum requirement for lot size in a residential
single family. So we feel that this is preferable. It's beyond what the minim would be
but your comments are appreciated. I think that development is going to happen and
basically what we see, our position is that we try to get the best that we can for the city and
it's very rare and I think since, in the last 2 years that I've been involved here, I don't think
that we've put through a development that met the minimums. I don't think we really accept
the minimums. We try to encourage better but no, you're comments are well taken because
you know you're used to a certain type of lifestyle and what we're trying to do is trying to
manage the land use as best we can but they always have to be subject to the ordinances that
we deal with but thank you very much. Would anybody else like to speak at the public
hearing? Yes sir.
Peter Davis: Yes, I'm Peter Davis, 6640 Galpin Blvd. Could I ask that that map be put back
up which showed the two different properties. I wanted to speak to several items, specifically
I was encouraged to hear that there is a concern over the aesthetics and the ambience of the
area. We just recently moved into the area. We knew that this development was about to
take place. What I wanted to point out, and since some of you have started to walk the
property and is generally aware of the aesthetics and what some of the unique features are.
This gentlemen spoke of some of the migratory habits. There are a lot of ecosystems that are
really coming into play here. Not only the deer but we have snow owls and bat populations.
Pheasant runs that are taking place from across Galpin Lake Road where actually coming up
from other wildlife areas to the northeast coming through this property and out into these
wetlands and then going and spreading out back across Galpin in both directions. So what I
wanted to point out was the fact there are actually quite a number of different ecosystems,
both plant and wildlife that are going to be impacted by this development with all of the rapid
that has been taking place in Chanhassen. I think it's very important that there's some
considerations being made. We're very encouraged by the Mancino's efforts to set up some
buffer zones and we would like to recommend that you actually consider some of the other
effects of grading, as I understand it, some of the mitigation land that would enable some of
the protection for these migratory patterns that exist and cutting from the northeast to the
southwest. Secondly I wanted to recommend that from an ambience standpoint in the area,
the use of private drives. We currently share a private drive with the Mancino's that was, has
subject to a lot of easements and what not and are finding that the arrangement to be quite
workable. We want to encourage some of that kind of development because I think it adds to
30
C
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1'
the area. It promotes somewhat of a lower density which is why we actually chose to move
out to this area. And lastly I wanted to speak to the nature of the development in terms of
the overall road and density and I wanted to encourage the city to do anything it could to
accelerate any traffic work that was going to go on as was mentioned tonight to us earlier
about the light at TH 5. Since that, there is quite a bit more traffic that is already coming '
into some of the developments on the south. Thank you.
Scott: Good, thank you. Would anyone else like to speak? Yes sir. I
Sam Mancino: Sam Mancino, 6620 Galpin Blvd. To get back to a point we made earlier.
We know that this... potential to develop but we would like to revisit this plan for a moment
because we are going to... What I'd like to borrow these for a minute if I could. To remind
you of the configuration of our property. The lines okay start immediately south of our
property line. And there's a stand of trees along here that straddles either side of the line on
that property and there's some bluffs here. When we first became aware of the Ryan's intent
to develop, we went out and tried to understand the impact that that was going to have on us
and understand it from an access point of view and a utility point of view, from land use
'
point of view, and from conservation and things like that One of the things we had to
understand first, what was going to go on next to us and what basically was the land use
intent and a lot of the first things that we found was the original design pushed Lake Lucy
Road up to the property line. That the intent was to grade basically all the way through the
tree line and on this site plan that would put that grading about here where our house is. So
that concerned us to begin with. Just a little concern. Throughout the process of seeing the
,
plans start to evolve here, what we've seen is a continual kind of a paradon that was drawn
originally on a flat piece of property but has ultimately translated itself into turning the land
into a flat land. They're trying to take all of the ground from here and transpose it over on
'
this side by grading all the way up. And I think that what we've heard is just basically to
maximize the number of lots, which is not our point to comment on other than it does tell us
about the size, the shape and configuration of that and that it no way is that compatible with
'
what we see going on up here. That we would like to argue against forcing any penetration
at this point because we think we can access our property through here, ultimately migrate
out through here—for a connection at this point. We are concerned on a few other things. As
their grading plan started to evolve, even their latest version which pushes the road down 60
feet, still has severe grading and as their engineer has said, we won't lose too many trees here
'
but as he's also said, if you grade 2 feet you lose trees anyway. So what we would like to
request is a 30 foot easement, conservation easement along here. The consequence of their
grading, any of the remaining trees on their property, which are indicated through this section
and show up on some of these plans, will all go away. They're not preserving a single tree
that I'm aware of in this section of the property so at minimum we'd like to be able to
request that this be a buffer be provided and that we be given an appropriate utility easement
31
u
C
n
J
LI
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
for the lot to the edge of the conservation easement for future access. We also agree with
staff that in their current plan, I'm not sure if it will show it on here but what is shown as
Lot 10 is an unbuildable lot and they're trying to build some very, very steep retaining walls
and do some severe grading again on the premise that more lots equals more money and I'm
not certain that that's an acceptable premise. It's possible but I'm not sure that I believe that.
And that I think as another by product of this 60 foot piece, if you look at the grades here,
it's probably very doubtful whether they'll be able to grade out and... encroaching on the
required conservation land. Charles, is there anything that you'd like to add?
Charles Stinson: I'd like to add to if I could. I think a lot of it, Charles Stinson.
Minnetonka. I think the point being that we're real concerned about anything that happens
across there, just as we're, I thought your comments on the last project were just very good
as far as taking the time to identify really what's happening here because I think just having
hiked this site and I think the same thing across there and I'd suggest that maybe if
everybody could, it'd be really helpful because I think you can really see how the lay of the
land is and what's going on and how both access. How important it is for the access points
here without disturbing the change of topography here as well as down here. That if you
brought the utility lines, the utilities up here and here to the tree zone, we could have access
here. But leaving everything unmolested so to speak, especially the road coming up. One
thought I had and this isn't I talked to the Mancino's and I'm not having these comments
representing them. They're just my own as a citizen but could you put that back up on the
screen. Just a thought I had is that I believe there's always a winning solution for everybody,
including the land owners and all the neighbors but it always takes a long time to get there. I
think Sam had a great quote from Mark Twain that was, if I had more time I would have
written a shorter letter, and I think it really applies to development. The longer you think
about it, you can always find a simpler way of doing it than makes everybody happy. But I
think one of the thoughts is, I think one nice thing about having a road at this point was the
fact that, and I liked the other idea about the road coming up here instead of right here. I
guess I'll do one thing at a time. I think the engineer's idea of coming up here I think was a
good idea. Cul -de -sac this so you don't have a road here and I was just wondering if you
could do the same thing with that one. Cul -de -sac from here so you don't have anything so
close to the intersection there, just as far as safety to that corner and you're just having the
streets, two openings here. But the thought over here, the nice thing about having a little, and
just for the citizens driving by as you're looking across the wetland and you're not doing
anything to it and it's kind of a pleasant drive in the midst of a lot of development. The
ideal thing for here would be perhaps some private drives or do some as private drives going
up here. But the other thought is, I just whispered to the Mancino's to see if they'd be
interested but you know there's a value that you put on on this piece of property that you're
going to get from developing and selling it and if you back out the cost of what it costs for
the roads and utilities, maybe there's a land value that the Mancino's would just buy from
32
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1
' still have '
you and then you wouldn't have to worry about developing it. I know you sa e the
pheasants running around and the deer and everybody'd be happy but I don't know if there's
any, if that's possible to discuss about that but it just seems like there's a lot of development '
happening in a small area and that's it.
Sam Mancino: One other thing that I'd like to add. Throughout this process I've appreciated '
the difficulty that staff has gone through in trying to put all these pieces together. They've
worked awfully hard at it. They have made an alternative suggestion about C, about exactly '
a variation on their point which is as much as this area relates to development from that site,
given sequencing, yes. This area up here does actually relate more to development but
there's a definite sequencing issue. We have had very little time since the report came out to ,
think about how C would work. I know this was a sketch but when I actually put the pen
and the ruler on it, we found that our house was actually right here and so we, before we
comment on that we'd like to have a little time to understand the engineering implications of
that kind of a plan. So we'd like to reserve comment on that at this particular time, if that
would be okay.
Scott: Good, thank you. Would anybody else like to speak at the public hearing? Okay, '
seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing please.
Ledvina moved, Nutting seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Scott: Matt.
Ledvina: Okay, where do I start? Mr. Buresh made some comments as it relates to the '
zoning and the zone change and I think you made some good points as it related to that but
the other thing that I, another important factor we look at when dealing with zone changes
and looking at the comprehensive plan for how this is developed in the ultimate relates to ,
how is this going to fit in with the other parcels and as I look at this parcel, the Shamrock
Ridge, you look at County Road, or Galpin here and in the future that area, or that road will
be a 4 lane road. So you have that as somewhat of a buffer between the other land use to the ,
east. And then also I think the developer has done a reasonably good job of orienting the
ponds, etc to provide some open space beyond that to the west before you actually get into '
the development area with the lots that are indicated. And even the lots along that side are
fairly large size lots in comparison. They're above the average in size. So we understand the
residents concerns as they relate to transition with density and I think we're trying to do as
good a job as we can as it relates to the ultimate development for this area. So we try to
work that into account. Looking at the staff report and walking the area and kind of getting
a feel for the relationship of this parcel with the other two parcels. This is, they're definitely '
33 1
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
' all together and really you have to look at how it's going to work. I think the staff is pretty
close in terms of their ideas on this. I would choose, or I feel that the Lake Lucy Road
alignment as originally proposed by the city along the southern portion of the parcel, is the
best alignment. The other major point that staff makes relates to the western 1/3 of the
property. That essentially that arm west of the wetland area there. That appears to be
' premature in terms of the development of this area at this time and I would support that area
being platted as an outlot at this time. I mentioned it with the other plat. I look at this
extremely steep hill and it's, the views to the south over the wetland are really actually breath
taking. It's a very beautiful area. I can, from my perspective, if I could see this whole area
being graded flat and I don't know, I just can't see what would be gained by that process. So
I think the road probably has the least impact on the area in it's proposed alignment. I did
have one question for you Bob. As it relates to the tree stand on that western portion. I look
at the tree inventory. I think it's, let's see. Something like 621. Is there 648? Somewhere
in there. There's quite a few reasonably sized trees. Do you know if those trees will be
' saved with the alignment? The proposed alignment of Lake Lucy Road. The city's
alignment. I know, I don't want to put you on the spot but I.
Generous: No, I haven't really...
Ledvina: Right, right. Well whatever. I think the possibilities of those trees being saved
increase. I don't know for a fact but I think the possibilities increase there so, and that's
something that I'd like to see looked at. I had a question about trails and that recreational
opportunities. We have a trail proposed along Lake Lucy. Lake Lucy Drive. Is that on the
south side or?
' Generous: North side.
Ledvina: North side, okay. Are we proposing any trail or easement along the west side of
' the wetland area which you've identified as Outlot A? I know in the past we've done a lot of
trails around wetlands and I'm just wondering, this is a pretty large wetland and I don't know
if there's a good chance or an opportunity to have a trail around there and how that would fit
' into our trail needs.
Generous: I don't believe the Parks Department has looked at that. That's actually on the
' Carlson property so that hasn't been proposed with the development. This wetland continues
over to the west.
Ledvina: Right. Well, continues to the south where Outlot A is, yeah. Just a thought. I
don't know if you would take a look at how that fits into the overall scheme because I know
in the parcels further to the south towards TH 5, we've got trails that are along our wetlands
34
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1
there and those are nice amenities and if we could do something like that here, at least get an ,
easement there, that might make some sense. Let's see. I guess I'm not going to look at a
lot of the details but I would support the staff recommendation of generally I think they've '
done a good job of evaluating this and I think that this thing, this plat would need some work
before it could really be considered tying into the overall development of this area.
Scott: What kind of direction would u give?
,
Y
Ledvina: Well, I would give I think, just as I mentioned, I would prefer the feasibility study '
alignment. I would prefer that the western 1/3 of the parcel be platted as an outlot. And that
area, that very steep slope area be developed somehow. I know Mr. Mancino mentioned that
the street goes right through his house. Obviously we don't want that but maybe there's ,
another alignment to the west that might work there. I definitely think that area should be
served via access from the north. And as I look at it, maybe there's a possibility of serving it
from the east somehow but by private drive as Mr. Stinson has mentioned. So I think those '
are the most important things. I generally see a lot of grading that I don't think is necessary
but it's not as critical in the eastern portion of the property as it is on the western portion of
the property so maybe some, a little more sensitivity can be used in the grading processes if ,
this is redeveloped.
Scott: Good, Ladd.
Conrad: I ask a question of Dave. Is it real clear to you that Lake Lucy Road shouldn't be I
shifted to the north? Is there any solution?
Hempel: I believe the City Council's already made that determination with the approval of... '
on June 13, 1994. They approved the feasibility study and authorized preparation of
construction plans and specifications for Phase 1 which is only up to that intersection of the
Brenden Pond but the intent is to continue with future phases on the southern realignment. '
Conrad: It sure seems like that portion on the western part of this plat relates more to the
Mancino development than to this one. I support the staff recommendations. I think the
developer should, has to work. There's obviously a difference of opinion and I think staff
brought up some, a lot of good points. I think they have to be ironed out before it comes
back. ,
Scott: Good, Ron. I
Nutting: I also support staff recommendation. The applicant has attempted to address some
of the issues tonight. I need to see staff's response to those items before responding to them.
35
i Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
' I can't act in a vacuum and so I would support tabling this application and addressing it. It
also, when you've got a key issue with just the southerly versus the northerly route of the
' road and it seems to, it appears from what was said here tonight that the southerly route is
somewhat cast in.
' Aanenson: I don't want to differ with Dave but the Council did, they did leave an option on
the Gestach- Paulson piece. That Outlot A that showed a portion over to the south so in
deference to what the Ryan's are trying to do. There was some flexibility. We know it has
' to touch down on a certain point on Galpin Boulevard. There were two proposals shown. A
northerly and southerly one in the original, in the original Lake Lucy alignment. A northerly
and southerly alignment and they gave feasibility for the supplementary phase, they left the
' option out whether it goes to the north or to the south so I think their response that they were
trying to decide what works best for them and they pushed it to the north. That's what they
originally came in with. And we said it just didn't work because they're grading into the
Mancino's property... Then we started moving up and down the property trying to figure out
where it works best. And going back to what Matt said, you can see the dilemma we were
in. Throwing out property lines. You just look at, how should this property best be served.
' That's what we came up with and that's, the problem is that the property lines don't follow
the natural topography and as Mr. Plowman indicated, once you ... 2 feet, what's the difference.
Well that's the problem. There are some unique natural features there that we're trying our
' best to try to maintain. And it's not a flat, square piece of property that you can lot out
15,000 square foot lots. It's got some unique features but they will respond to the option of,
' there are two options showed in the ... study for Lake Lucy. One to the north and one south so
that's what they were responding to and I just want to make sure that that was clear. And
that's what we were asking your direction to give to them. Do you want to go to the north or
' to the south and our preference was, to keep it south. That's what ... keep it towards the
middle.
' Nutting: The impact if it was to the north on the previous applicant's proposal, just looking
back at that. Do you have any drawings? If the road was to the north.
I Hempel: I'm sorry, which development?
Aanenson: The Ryan's?
Scott: Gestach?
I Nutting: No.
Scott: Gestach- Paulson?
36
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1
Nutting: Paulson.
Aanenson: Yes. ,
Generous: You'd have lots on the south side of the Lake Lucy Road and on the north side of I
Lake Lucy Road.
Aanenson: Street front facing lots. '
Nutting: Okay. So you'd have the issue of private drive.
Aanenson: Front facing lots on a collector street, yeah. Right. '
Nutting: I guess I would concur with staff's recommendation and Matt's observations as well I
in terms of the southerly route so I don't have any other comments.
Scott: Okay. Can I have a motion please? I
Ledvina: I would move that the Planning Commission table Case #94 -7 SUB, is that right?
Scott: Yes. ,
Ledvina: Okay. The Shamrock Ridge subdivision plan. '
Scott: Do we need to table 94 -3 and then the rezoning and the wetland alteration permit?
Okay, why don't you add that. '
Ledvina: And I would add those under the items as well. '
Scott: Good. Can I have a second?
Conrad: Second. '
Scott: It's been moved and seconded that we table the issue. Or all three of them. Is there '
any discussion?
Ledvina moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission table action on ,
Subdivision #94 -7, Rezoning #94 -3 and Wetland Alteration Permit #94 -3. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. (Diane Harberts had left the meeting and was not present to
vote on this issue or subsequent issues.) '
37 '
F
I Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
1
Scott: Okay, thank you all for coming.
' PUBLIC HEARING:
PRELIMINARY PLAT AND FINAL PLAT FOR CHANHASSEN RETAIL 2ND
' ADDITION CREATING 2 OUTLOTS AND CHANHASSEN RETAIL 3RD ADDITION
PLATTING OUTLOT B INTO 3 LOTS AND ONE OUTLOT, SITE PLAN REVIEW
OF A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING FOR PERKINS RESTAURANT, A SITE
' PLAN REVIEW FOR A 1,800 SQUARE FOOT WELDING FOR TACO BELL,
LOCATED ON THE CORNER OF HIGHWAY 5, POWERS BOULEVARD AND
WEST 78TH STREET, CHANHASSEN RETAIL CENTER (TARGET SITE), RYAN
COMPANIES AND RLK ASSOCIATES.
Public Present:
' Name Address
' Danny Chadwick Memphis, TN
Tom Palmquist Ryan Companies, Mpls.
Daryl Kighton Ryan Companies, Mpls.
' John Dietrich RLK Associates, 922 Mainstreet, Hopkins
Marc Kruger 4700 IDS Center, Mpls.
Maleah Miller DJR, 1121 E. Franklin, Mpls.
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item.
1 Mancino: Now Bob, these are brick. this Taco Bell is brick?
Generous: No, they'll be stucco.
Mancino: Okay. So it will be different than this?
Generous: Yes. The tile on the roof will be the same. The stucco is sort of a tannish. It's
something the applicant has some better photos...to show that. The color band, the canopies
' will be the same. The signage will be the same. They're actually using two tones and the
rest of the development... so they'll have the arches will be an accent band and then they have
the other colors on the rest of the stucco.
' Mancino: And is the band around it the corporate colors?
1 Scott: It looks like it, yeah.
1 38
C
e
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1
' k '
Generous: ...I don't know if its a registered trademark.
Mancino: Does this take—at all with the Highway 5 design guidelines about using corporate '
identity colors as an architectural element?
Scott: Or brick. '
Aanenson: I'm not sure. We'll get back on that. As far as the materials, we did look at '
that—The brick that you see on the photos there, we have met... Again, this is a PUD so
we're trying to make this part relate, not to the Byerly's but more to the Target PUD so
we're trying to blend. We're trying to pick up elements of the same. You have this '
green ... which is also an element on the Target so we're trying to pick up all those things.
Mancino: Okay. But I know that we had concern on the Highway 5 Task Force on the '
design committee task force, part of that about on Highway 5, that commercial property and
the design and architecture of their buildings have to be comprised of ..corporate colors so I
would like to look into that. ,
Ledvina: Colors though?
Mancino: Well some of them have like ... big bands that actually have a great deal to do with
the architecture. That becomes a design element in the architecture and that we were
concerned about that. So I just wanted to make sure that this did not fall into that.
Ledvina: Well they have tile bands. You know bands of file around—Does that represent a
negative thing?
Mancino: I think we felt that if it became a major part of the architecture it could. So I just
want to check it. I'm not saying no but I just would like to have staff review that and make '
sure.
Scott: Any other questions for staff? Would the applicant like to make a presentation? If '
yes, please give us your name and your address.
Tom Palmquist: My name is Tom Palmquist. I'm with Ryan Companies. Mr. Chairman, '
members of the commission. Staff members. We are in concurrence with all the items of the
staff report and the items of staff that you have had this evening. Yes, we do acknowledge
that we do have an access issue as it relates to the site plan. However, we've met with '
Charles Folch on numerous occasions and we've been unable to resolve the issue prior to this
meeting. We are confident that we can resolve the issue to the satisfaction of staff and I 1
39 '
7
C
r
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
guess we pledge to continue to work diligently with staff—agreement with the city.
Redevelopment here on the same side. I guess we respectfully request that the commission
recommend preliminary approval of the platting for the Chanhassen Retail 3rd Addition as
well as the site plan approval for the Perkins Restaurant and Taco Bell subject to the
conditions of the staff report and the... conversations which we intend to have with staff to
satisfactorily resolve those issues.
Scott: Any questions or comments for the applicant? No? Good. Thank you very much.
Tom Palmquist: We do have a perspective from, that does show the view of the site from a
location on Powers Boulevard just south of Highway 5...
Scott: Powers east with Target in the middle. So it's kind of It's Highway 5 on the right
and then there's Target's pylon sign.
John Dietrich: Highway 5 is down. You're approximately halfway, maybe if you can.
Scott: There's the West 78th Street alignment and it bends to the north.
Scott: West 78th Street.
Mancino: Where is West 78th?
Mancino: It looks like...
Scott: Well this is distorted. You see it looking straight down 78th.
John Dietrich: No, we have Taco Bell on the left. Perkins on the right. So that would be
approximately at the elevation if you were along Powers Boulevard. We've anticipated some
landscape treatment would be occurring within the gateway elements yet to be defined.
We're interested and to continue working with the city on the development of that but we
' anticipate with the gateway and the greenery, that that will be ... element. And the third
restaurant added would be back up in this area here and that has yet to be defined as a.
' Mancino: So what's open space there behind the trees will be a restaurant?
John Dietrich: Yes. The site plans do identify... where that third restaurant would go but
again, that would require site plan approval and go through the process until...
Tom Palmquist: If I might correct one item on that third outlot. The contract for private
40
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1
redevelopment that we have executed with the HRA provides that it could be something other
than a restaurant. It could be a... '
Mancino: I have one question from the staff report. The drive thru should be buffered from
all public views. Where's the drive thru and how is that being addressed? '
John Dietrich: In terms of the drive thru, the drive thru with Taco Bell facing West 78th
Street is on the south side of the building and you would access it either into the lots or '
coming back up and around and then progressing out. So the buffer area or green space
between the drive thru and this central entry drive would be green and these trees that are
identified as ornamental would be going to canopy trees according to the staff report. That '
any trees we put in here should be, have like a canopy of tree versus an ornamental. The
intent is that this green space and the trees would be the buffering to the Highway 5 to the
south. '
Mancino: It says from all public views. How is that buffered from Powers?
row of shrubs that are coming '
John Dietrich: From Powers we have a o g within this band space
here and ... future building structure. We only have to go within this area. There are utility
lines and watermain, sanitary sewer and buried telephone cables that these sites have been '
worked around so that those utility trunk line utilities do not have to be relocated so the
building location's pretty well set.
Mancino: So you will have a buffer on that side?
John Dietrich: Yes. '
Mancino: Would you go over the traffic flow? I mean like where are the stop points going '
to be into that drive thru on Taco Bell. If you're coming in one, from the south side or the
north side coming around. How do the two come together to go through the drive thru? Are
there stop signs? How does that work? '
John Dietrich: The intent would be as traffic would come in.
Aanenson: Let me just make a clarification before you respond. That's, there's an issue
there that that's.. just so they don't misunderstand that. That's where the issue lies is the
access to Target is further to the south and that was designed as a T access to service this '
property and that is an issue that we think we can work out internally. Staff and the
applicant. But it's the engineering department's feeling that that entrance is too close to West
78th and needs to be moved. '
41 1
I Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
' Mancino: For stacking.
' Aanenson: Exactly. Where it was originally shown, which cuts into the Perkins site ... they
have a concern but we think we can work that out. Just so you're not misled when they
show you that because...
u
0
0
n
r
Scott: How would you propose to gain access to the third parcel? That is as an outlot. How
would that happen? Is that just drive straight through and in or?
John Dietrich: At this time, yes. It would be driving straight through and then we would
anticipate some type of circulation into the center.
Aanenson: Typically it'd be a common drive with cross access agreements is what we would
require. All parcels have easements across each other...
Scott: Okay, good.
Mancino: Can you go ahead with the internal?
John Dietrich: Certainly. The intent would be to allow the traffic flow to come in from the
Target lane and access the two sites. In terms of exiting the site, the drive thru would be
coming through on the south side and we would anticipate a stop sign so that the traffic flows
through the parking lot and would be able to move out and they would be just yielding.
Mancino: But you have two lanes that go into the drive thru, right?
John Dietrich: I would like to have Maleah Miller, who represents Taco Bell to respond to
the number of lanes.
Maleah Miller: Good evening Planning Commission. My name is Maleah Miller and I
represent Taco Bell tonight. Typically we only have one lane going through our drive thru.
Mancino: There's two coming into it.
Maleah Miller: We have the one. One is coming in. Entering into the drive thru lane and
it's 12 feet wide and it wraps around the south side of the building. This is our pick up
window at this point. They pick up their food and then they continue on and can exit out.
Mancino: I'm sorry, I'm not being very clear.
42
11
7
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1
John Dietrich: I think I see your point now. In terms of you have the opportunity to access
coming from the west side and also an opportunity to access coming from the east side.
Mancino: Okay. So how do those two merge into one lane that goes through the drive thru
and how do they ... is my question. ,
John Dietrich: In terms of the traffic coming through, since this would be on the right hand
side, we would anticipate any traffic coming through this way would have the right -of -way. '
Perhaps we need a sign that would say yield to traffic coming through.
Maleah Miller: There is quite a few stacks coming back to this point. Now in your drawing ,
it has 7?
John Dietrich: I believe 7. 1
Maleah Miller: 7 stacks.
Mancino: Can a car with a ... on the back get through there. Can I get your opinion? I've
never seen a drive thru having.
Hempel: The turnin g movement from that direction, the outside, may be somewhat tight for '
vehicle...opportunity to go the other way to more easily negotiate that turn.
Aanenson: I m uess understanding is it was always cued to go the other way. I mean if
g Y g Y
you come in, you would go into the restaurant. You would exit that way, not through the
drive ihru ... so in other words you can't go towards West 78th. We'd only be exiting on
there.
Mancino: How does the applicant feel about that? Just limiting it to access through the drive ,
thru one way?
Maleah Miller: We would probably just put our signs for the drive thru at this point hoping
they'll, encourage the people to come through. I think it's very important for the whole
circulation of the site that people, once they enter in here, they can exit out ... so there's still
the circulation of the site that people once they enter in here, they can exit out so there's still
the circulation.
Mancino: So there'd be a one way sign.
Scott: Could make it one way? I
43 1
n
I Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
Maleah Miller: Yes. So we'll ut the sin here saying drive through this way majority
p g y g g y so a
of the people will know to come in this way. This movement is hard to make...
Scott: See a sign for one way, do not enter.
' Mancino: Yeah, or something.
Maleah Miller: Or even this, when they get to that point, just drive thru with arrows that
way. So people know to get to the drive thru when they first enter the site, it is coming in
and going towards... encourage them to go this way. Tell them to go, this is the drive thru.
' Mancino: Okay. Thank you.
Mancino: It seems to make a lot of sense.
Scott: Any other questions or comments?
Mancino: Bob, I know that you said that we're asking for a revised internal parking lot
landscaping. What's being planted, and I'm sorry I haven't opened it up to the right page.
' On the parking islands, one of the things that we've talked about conceptually as a Tree
Board is asking for vegetation on the islands as far as something like daylillies, hosta, instead
of rock because the rock just carries the asphalt feeling more and what we were trying to do
' was to have some green space inside of our internal parking lots. Not overstory trees but also
on the actual landscape islands. And is the applicant doing that?
John Dietrich: As part of the revision the code, landscape code requires that the landscape
islands be a minimal of 8 feet in width. And this plan-for example, those islands would have
to be 8 foot in width where that is one of my... In terms of the ground planting, again a
' variety of materials that could be utilized so that we could look at a lower plant material so
we'd like to have something that would be hardy. That would take salt. That would take
snow loading so if it was not going to be a perennial like a daylily that would die down ... die
down completely. It would be something like spirea that could be ... grassier, softer type plant
material versus a woody type plant material like a lilac.
' Mancino: Or a juniper.
I John Dietrich: Or a juniper.
Mancino: Versus rock, yeah. Just putting in rock into a parking lot. Okay.
1 44
7
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1
Scott: Any other questions or comments. This is a public hearing so if I could have a
motion please.
Ledvina moved, Conrad seconded to open the public hearing. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The public hearing was opened. '
Scott: Would anyone like to speak at the public hearing about this item? Let the record
show that no one wishes to speak at the public hearing. May I have a motion to close '
please?
Mancino moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and
the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Scott: Ron. I
Nutting: I don't have much more to add. It sounds like the applicant is in agreement with
staff's recommendations as in the discussion earlier. I think I'm ready to move forward with
this.
Scott: Okay, Nancy. 1
Mancino: I feel pretty comfortable too. One of the things that I'd like to bring up is I'd like
to make sure that Taco Bell and Perkins knows that when they do come in that they will, I '
would ask that they follow the new sign ordinance that will be passed when we pass it and
that they abide by that and that for now obviously we follow the old one and when the new
one comes into effect.
Aanenson: We do have PUD standards that were spelled out for this project. When we put it
together we said there could be one free standing sign and each individual tenant's limited ,
to ... and that it be architecturally compatible. That was already spelled out in the PUD
agreement. I think that would be consistent with the sign. The one they showed you... '
Nutting: Did I see a pylon sign for Perkins on that earlier drawing that you had put up?
Generous: Those, I gave you a revised plan that I put on your desk tonight. That should
have a black and white picture and the pylon sign ... the 34 foot height would not be permitted.
They'd get a maximum of 20 feet on the pylon.
Aanenson: And that one again, that was spelled out in the PUD for the entire Target and
Outlot B. One pylon sign ... for all three tenants. That was up to their choice and then
45 ,
11
u
it
1
1
Ll
11
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
each—would just be given an extra monument sign.
Nutting: How is that planned to be used? Is it just Perkins?
Tom Palmquist: The intent at this point is that this pylon will be divided into three panels
with each of the three users represented on some ... basis.
Conrad: Horizontal? Vertical panels?
Tom Palmquist: It will be horizontal.
Aanenson: I think we may want to see that again. We had some concerns with that as far
as ... Maybe the signs can come back as a separate.
Nutting: It's laid out in the PUD in terms of the.
Mancino: But that can come back separately.
Aanenson: Certainly. That's something we haven't had a chance to review specifically
except for what you've seen there ... I guess we want to stay as uniform as far as if there's
different logos on it... However, if they all their own corporate logos on it with unique colors
and all that ... we'd like an opportunity to review that. Again, it does tie in architecturally...
Mancino: I'd agree with that. Are you done?
Nutting: Yeah.
Mancino: One thing about one sign per street frontage. Where is that in our staff report? I
remember reading that.
Generous: It's under the PUD standards. The development standards. They're only
permitted two wall signs. Two elevations per building to get a sign.
Mancino: Is this the sign we're talking about?
Generous: That's the Taco Bell.
Mancino: But don't I see four?
Generous: You see it on the drawing but they're only getting two.
46
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1
Mancino: Oh! Is the applicant aware of that?
Tom Palmquist: As we mentioned earlier, we are in concurrence with the recommendations
of staff in the staff report. '
Mancino: Thank you. Thanks for going over that...
Aanenson: Can I just clarify ... as far as the banding. We did go through these conditions '
when we wrote the report and what it says as far as, it says colors shall be harmonious and
bright or sharply contrasting colors may be used for accent purposes and that's how we '
interpreted it ... as long as it's an accent. It doesn't address what it's supposed to provide and
that's how we interpreted this...
Mancino: Thanks. Well I appreciate your checking. I don't have anything else. I think if ,
we can work out the internal working and the flow of traffic. I'd leave it to staff to make
sure that the interior parking lot landscaping is quality. Quality, quality, quality being this is '
a PUD and that's it.
Scott: Good, Matt. '
Ledvina: I guess the only thing I would ask or maybe question relates to the landscaping and
how it fits in with our proposed planting on this corner and you know essentially the Outlot ,
A is reserved for our.
Aanenson: The city retained ownership of that. The City Council and the HRA are working
to do, this is one area they looked at gateway treatments. They have Hoisington - Koegler
working on those gateway treatments. They may not go anywhere but we are keeping
ownership and we are under obligation to landscape that... '
Ledvina: Well I guess what I'm wondering is, is there a chance to coordinate the landscaping
of these buildings with what's ever done on the outlot or the gateway treatment if you will. I ,
mean does it.
Aanenson: You mean coordinating or signing?
Ledvina: Coordinating it. ,
Aanenson: Are you talking terracing?
47 '
l
I Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
Ledvina: Well yeah. Whatever. I don't know what that means necessarily but other than
making it all kind of fit together. If you've got a row of shrubs and then something else that
' goes in in front of it that doesn't work on our chunk of land, you know. That we want to try
to avoid that situation obviously.
Mancino: Like compatibility of architecture.
Ledvina: Right.
Mancino: It's the compatibility of the landscape.
P Y P
Ledvina: Right, so how can we do that?
' Aanenson: I think we can work that out. As we've indicated, they need to look at those
species and we can coordinate that with what Hoisington - Koegler is looking at as far as
that..., we can certainly look at that before it goes to City Council.
' Ledvina: Okay.
1
Tom Palmquist: If I may add. The intent is to begin grading this fall. The landscaping
would not physically go in until next spring so there would be an opportunity to make
adjustments or modifications to the approved landscape plan is that Hoisington- Koegler plan
was not complete or you know to the exact level—this time.
Aanenson: And you may want to make that a condition.
Ledvina: Right, I was just thinking can we tack that on somewhere? Maybe condition
number 20 I suppose. On the site plan?
1 Scott: Ladd.
0
Conrad: Impervious surface ratio has to be 70 or under? Is that what it is for impervious
surface.
Aanenson: Over the entire site. What we did is started with over.
Conrad: 76.
Aanenson: And obviously we picked it up...
48
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1
Conrad: And this site says 68. So 68 and 76 I don't know how it, I haven't been sold that '
we have the final numbers here. '
Generous: Well I think we're pretty close. I estimated that they were at 66% and with these
two developments they needed like .05 acres onto the third site and that will be easy to make
on that. '
Conrad: Okay. It seems like if we change the access point, and I don't know how much '
we're changing it but you're saying we're changing it. It changes the whole plan quite a bit.
The access point, you know if you change it 2 feet, no big deal. If you line it up with the
Target, it is a big deal so I guess I'm not sure. How much is this going to change when you '
start negotiating with the folks.
Generous: Well that's ... the Perkins parking lot doesn't change. I tried three different '
alignments for the eastern half. It's feasible. One of them you have an island that runs along
the east. It's like, almost a boulevard type that would parallel the Target and then basically
turning back up and then incorporate that middle boulevard area again for access to the third '
site. It would be changing the orientation. There is one alignment that Charles Folch would
like that you'd sort of diagonally go through that property.
Conrad: Well, you know we've spent some time talking. I probably should have talked first. ,
Really if we change the road access we really don't have a site plan. Everything changes.
I'm not, I guess I'm not saying I'm against what I see. Staff has some standards that they ,
want to implement. Given the staff standards that they want to implement, I don't think I see
a plan that is something I can react to. Second thing, when Target came in I really pushed
for sidewalks and I don't think anybody, at least dividing the Target parking lot with a '
sidewalk down the middle and Target persuaded us not to do it, or somebody else not to do
it. We don't, Vision 2002 talks about sidewalk access and we made Wendy's connect a
sidewalk. I'm curious staff, we don't have sidewalks coming into here. What's our posture '
on that?
Hempel: We do have sidewalks running along the south side of West 78th Street. Could ,
easily be adapted to connect into the site plan requiring Taco Bell to open as a train of traffic
there. '
Conrad: I guess I'd be interested. I'm not sure what we want to do with it but if Brad
Johnson were here and said people don't walk, and that's kind of true. I really feel badly that
we didn't do something in the Target parking lot so like it's been compromised there and so '
do I really care. But a lot of people are giving a lot of lip service to pedestrian traffic and
here's a case where we got a chance to do that. I don't know that people are really going to ,
49 '
n
7
C
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
walk but on the other hand, I don't think we considered sidewalks coming in or going out and
I don't know how I'd do it here but.
Aanenson: I guess we've got the sidewalk on Powers too.
Conrad: But that doesn't get you in.
Aanenson: No. But ... somehow get to the Perkins over there and up and around, I guess
that's.
Conrad: It's not like I'm going to make a case. I'm not going to make a case for this. If
somebody else wants to make a case or are concerned, then we should take a look and see if
we really do want pedestrian foot traffic coming in here. I always get uncomfortable when,
you know when we put out 3 restaurants together. It just looks like a lot of stuff. You know
it looks like we've got roads all over and no real pockets. You know if I, I wouldn't design
it this way. It looks, it doesn't look like what you get out of a PUD but I don't know how
I'd redesign it. Make it three restaurants. We have a lot of car traffic going in there. But
it's, I guess my biggest concern is going back. We have an access to, we have an access
point that's not really where it is on this plan and I think it's going to change it quite a bit.
That's all my comments.
Mancino: I want to respond to your sidewalk... Going to those Vision 2002 meetings, you're
right on that we certainly don't want to deter or say that we're against obviously car traffic
because everybody's going to drive to the center of the city but we also said we want to
balance it with pedestrian traffic. And maybe someone would come and say well people
aren't going to walk through here but we never created a space, a welcoming space for
people, for pedestrians to walk and maybe they actually would take advantage of that if we
do that.
Scott: Well think about the outlot and having that as a landscaped amenity. Benches and
stuff and I can see taking my fajitas over to the outlot. I mean something like that. I mean
this is an element that it should be tied in with this and if we're talking about pedestrian
walkways, I think topographically the outlot's pretty flat isn't it? Or will be. So that might
be conducive to, I mean although it's going to be on a major intersection or something like
that. And they're talking about some sort of a gateway treatment but from what I understand,
we're reluctant to be investing any significant sums in a sign that says we're Chanhassen,
you're not, or something like that, right? But yeah, I would have to agree with your
comments on the walkway area. And once again the whole idea about planning is that we're
talking decades here and 20 -30 years, maybe the automobile is not going to be the method of
getting around that it is today. I don't know but we can't forget that the idea of planning,
50
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
we're thinking decades, not just years.
Mancino: So you'd like to see them investigate more of a pedestrian friendly walkway
between the restaurants?
Conrad: At least getting into them. I'd like to see the trade offs. If you put a sidewalk in,
you take out vegetation.
Ledvina: Yeah, and if it's just a couple of rows of sod.
Conrad: Yeah. If we're moving sod then it's not a big deal.
Scott: Is there a motion somewhere?
Mancino: I'd like to move that the Planning Commission approve...
Scott: Well there's two of them.
Tom Palmquist: Point of clarification?
Scott: Ah no.
Mancino: That we approve, or recommend approval of #92 -5 PUD for the preliminary plat
for Chanhassen Retail 2nd Addition and Chanhassen Retail 3rd Addition as shown on the
plans dated July 25, 1994 and subject to the following conditions. Conditions number 1 as is.
Number 2 as is and number 3 as is. That's it.
Scott: Okay. Is there a second? So at least in my mind you're willing to move along the
PUD but not the site plan review.
Mancino: Yeah. Because I want to add conditions to the site plan.
Scott: Okay. Is there a second?
Ledvina: I'll second that.
Scott: It's been moved and seconded that we approve Case #92 -5 PUD. Is there any
discussion?
51
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
Nutting: Can I have the ability to hear what he was just going to say?
Scott: No. Public hearing's closed.
Ledvina: Now this is the PUD.
Aanenson: What you're looking at is the subdivision for Chanhassen Retail 2nd Addition
which creates Outlot A, the city is going to maintain and then the Chanhassen Retail 3rd
splits Outlot B into 3 parcels.
Ledvina: Okay. Alright, just to make sure.
Mancino moved, Ledvina seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval
of #92 -5 PUD for the preliminary plat for Chanhassen Retail 2nd Addition and
Chanhassen Retail 3rd Addition as shown on the plans dated July 25, 1994 and subject
to the following conditions:
1. Developer shall petition the city to vacate the old West 78th Street right -of -way which
traverses the overall site.
' 2. The following easements shall be dedicated on the final plat:
a. A 30 foot drainage and utility easement centered on the existing sanitary sewer
' alignment through the site.
b. The existing drainage and utility easement obtained with the underlying plat of the
' West Village Heights 2nd Addition shall be maintained. These easements cover the
City's existing watermain and one of the telephone cables.
J
c. An additional 20 foot wide drainage and utility easement shall be granted along the
south line of the previously described West Village Heights 2nd Addition drainage and
utility easement.
3. It appears that the northwest corner of the Taco Bell building would encroach into the
proposed 20 foot drainage and utility easement and be approximately 5 feet south of the
existing buried phone cable. The developer shall obtain approval from the phone
company for this condition and if obtained, a subsequent encroachment agreement shall be
executed for this condition.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
52
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1
Scott: Do you want to make a motion on the 94 -6?
Mancino: I recommend we approve Site Plan #94 -6 as shown on the plans dated July 19,
1994 and subject to the following conditions. Conditions 1 through 19, a, b, c, d and I'd like '
to add number 20. That the landscaping plan for the Taco Bell site, the Perkins site and
actually the future restaurant site, be compatible with the final plans that the city implements
for Outlot A. 21. That the applicant and staff work through the parking lot realignment as it '
states in which condition Bob?
Aanenson: 8. '
Mancino: Okay. And if there are big differences. If the sites become.
Aanenson: Significant changes. ,
Mancino: Changes that come again for the Planning Commission to okay. And 22. That the ,
staff and the applicant work through the internal traffic flow of the Taco Bell parking lot in
regards to one way in and one way exit. Especially a one way entrance into the drive thru.
And number 23. That the applicant investigate a pedestrian friendly walkway that would tie '
the restaurants together. Or that would access the restaurants.
Scott: Maybe just have the staff and then the applicant develop a pedestrian walkway system ,
connecting the Perkins and Taco Bell?
Mancino: And the future restaurant. '
Scott: With the existing what? West 78th sidewalk on the south side of West 78th? That
was rough but is that. '
Mancino: ...my words. And the last one, I think it's number 24 and I guess I don't have to ,
say anything about the new sign ordinance, do I?
Aanenson: Well I think what we would like is to bring the signs back. The sign package. I
Mancino: Oh yeah. 24. We would like to see.
Aanenson: We haven't seen what's going on it yet. If they're putting 3 logos on it or 3 ,
name plates.
53 1
i
I Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
' Mancino: Okay. So we would like to see the sign, all the signs for this property. And
approve them.
' Scott: Okay. Is there a second?
' Ledvina: I'll second that.
Scott: It's been moved and seconded that we approve 94 -6. Site Plan review subject to the
' additional conditions. Is there discussion?
Conrad: So that means you don't want to see it back?
Aanenson: Unless there's significant change.
' Mancino: Unless there's significant changes when they do the parking lot realignment.
Conrad: And the drive will swing how many feet south?
' Generous: About 100 maybe.
' Mancino: Now if you'd like to do a friendly amendment as to what constitutes significant
changes, I'd be open to that.
' Generous: No, I don't know.
Ledvina: Well perhaps if the staff feels that they can't come to resolution with it, considering
' the optimum traffic circulation, you know then maybe bring it back to us and say, what do
you think? Whatever. We can't keep...
' Conrad: They'll be able to handle it.
Ledvina: I think so too but in the event.
Generous: And there will be significant changes.
Conrad: But the rest will go to City Council. It may come back.
Aanenson: ...there is some design constraints on the two northerly pieces as far as the
footprints and maybe you can correct me if I'm wrong but we've got a lot of utilities running
through there and there isn't a lot of movement for the Taco Bell and the other use. The
54
u
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
only flexibility is the location of Perkins and obviously they want to put it on that corner but
not the parking, which we also want for Highway 5. We prefer to have the Perkins there as
far as the visibility giving that a nicer look. And it screens the parking so, obviously—so
we've been giving them some options that they're not happy with but you have to realize too
that they need to split this property to make it easier for cross easements. The less crossing
you do makes it easier for them so they're trying to make it as clean as possible to sell off
the three lots...
Conrad: Just out of curiosity, why didn't we push the Perkins and the future restaurant
footprint to the outside of the property so the parking's internal?
Aanenson: We can go way back when we originally looked at the Target. When they came
in, we did the design charette when we had Barton- Aschman sit down when we learned
Target was looking at coming into Chanhassen. So we did some designs as far as the Target
in there. What would be the configuration of the remaining portion and that was one of the
options that you looked at. A row of buildings screened and as you recall, originally we
looked at this whole package. There was probably 6 outlots on the development and I think
we threw 6 out right away when we were looking at it and then we came down to 5 or 4 and
through negotiations with the city ... But then you really start getting in again to some of those
design things that we talked about with the utilities that run through there. There's some
fiber optic cable and some of the issues that makes it really tough to try to locate some of
those... and obviously Target has agreements as far as making sure them maximize views to
their building and some of those issues all came into play as far as how they're laying this
out. But that was a consideration as far as lining those up as far as visibility. That was
originally looked at.
Mancino: Because you could pull the Perkins building closer to Highway 5.
Generous: 20 feet.
Aanenson: As far as the Highway 5 setback was 50 feet.
Conrad: So you accomplish splitting up the parking.
Aanenson: Again, you have three separate tenants and that's what it comes down to. That
market force of having 3 separate tenants having their own property ownership.
Conrad: What's the potential. So we've got an exit from Taco Bell on the west. Or an
entrance. And then the future restaurant is, is that roadway going to be a common roadway?
55
u
i
i
J
n
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
Aanenson: Yes.
Conrad: So we won't have an island and another roadway there.
Aanenson: It will more than likely be a continuation of the...
Mancino: What do you mean...
Conrad: Well we have entrance /exit for Taco Bell on the left hand side and then we have
another restaurant. But potentially they should be using the same street to come out or enter.
I just don't want two side by side roadways there. Not logical to do.
Aanenson: Ladd, maybe this will make it clearer. This is a...
Mancino: It will go back. It will go west and go into that future restaurant so there will be
one common driveway.
Aanenson: Yes. But we're saying it needs to be down here where the curb cut was shown
and it needs to curve up and then go over.
Ledvina: Is that curb cut actually there for a new Target site?
Aanenson: Yes.
Generous: Yes. It shows up on your subdivision plan.
Conrad: The outlots always worry me because when they come in, we sort of dictated how
they're, based on what we just saw, we dictated how they're going to develop and that's too
bad because there will be no leverage to make the road. You know the opportunity here is to
minimize the number of roadways and cross traffic and again, I'm not a designer but I'd sure
like to cut off some of the, if I were designing three restaurants in a group, I'd have one
entrance to each one of them rather than multi entrances coming in and it makes it clear and
less pedestrian, fewer pedestrian problems. So I guess I'm going to stop talking but you
know, that's probably not my design that I'd want if I had three restaurants sitting on a semi
circle or a square. I think there's a lot of benefits. There's a lot of good things. They're
both good tenants that we're looking at and I think but it's, I don't think we've improved,
other than space. I think we've got some green space down there but I don't know that
we've really done anything in terms of sinking them together. There's a road coming in and
we've got accesses off the road but anyway, those are my comments. The comment section
was before. This is discussion. It's not coming back more than likely.
M
I
� I
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
Mancino: ...the question and try to see some sketch plans along that ...and see how it would
work.
Conrad: I wouldn't bring it back for that.
Scott: And you wouldn't bring it back for the change in the entrance?
Conrad: Yeah.
Scott: You would?
Conrad: Oh yeah. I think it's major. I don't, you've got stuff flinging around and I don't
know how they're going to do it so.
Mancino: So you would like to see if there is a change, it back?
Conrad: Again, I think your motion is valid. If it's a major change it should come back but
it's all, in my perspective, it's got to be a major change. It's going in a road down here.
You're changing some, I don't know how the traffic patterns go through Perkins lot and gets
you up to Taco Bell and then swings out to the future restaurant. I don't get that.
Mancino: Is staff comfortable enough with that so we get it back if there are major changes?
Generous: Yes.
Scott: Should we vote on the motion and see how it goes and then.
Ledvina: Yes.
Mancino moved, Ledvina seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval
of Site Plan #94 -6 as shown on the plans dated July 19, 1994 and subject to the following
conditions:
1. Developer shall be responsible for obtaining all necessary agency permits associated with
the development of this site including but not limited to watershed district, PCA, MWCC,
Health Department.
2. All proposed storm sewer and sanitary sewer and water services within the site are
considered private and shall be maintained as such.
57
II
I
J!
i Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
3. Developer shall submit to the City Engineer drainage calculations and a drainage map for
the entire site showing areas and quantity of flow to the Target pond and to the County
' Road 17 pond that are consistent with capacities of the existing storm sewer system.
4. Stormwater drainage from the Taco Bell site to the West 78th Street storm sewer shall be
' directed into the easterly storm sewer lead from West 78th Street immediately north of the
parking lot.
' 5. Developer shall indicate any quantities of borrow material and/or material to be hauled off
site including a proposed haul route.
' 6. The applicant shall develop an erosion control plan in accordance to the City's Best
Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water Management Plan requirements
' for development.
7. Developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with protection of the existing
public utility facilities within the overall site. Developer shall also differentiate on the
' final site plans which lines are public and which are private.
8. All internal streets and drives within the overall development are considered private and
shall be maintained as such. The main entrance to the site shall be located farther south
to align with the existing curb cut across from the entrance to the Target parking lot.
' 9. Fire hydrants shall be incorporated as per the Fire Marshal's recommendation.
I 10. The developers shall enter into a site development contract with the City and provide
the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of approval.
' 11. Construction access to the parcel shall be from the existing Target driveway and not
West 78th Street or Powers Boulevard. The applicant and/or contractor shall install
and maintain a gravel construction entrance until the access driveway is paved with a
' bituminous surface.
12. but the parking lot for Taco Bell does not meet the required 20 foot setback for
' parking lots from West 78th Street and must be revised.
13. The applicant must also verify that the height of the pitched roof element will screen
the rooftop equipment from the high point of Highway 5 and from the high point on
West 78th Street.
58
r
Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994 1
17. The minimum peninsular landscape island width is 8 feet. One tree per each 250
'
14. The develope r must provide a trash enclosure location for the Perkins site. Trash
,
enclosures shall be architecturally compatible with and of the same materials as the
principal structure. Trash enclosures shall also be vegetatively screened from all right-
'
of -ways.
'
15. The applicant must revise the landscaping plan to replace all ornamentals and
'
evergreen within the vehicular area with overstory type trees.
16. The developer shall screen the trash enclosure for Taco Bell with evergreen plantings.
'
17. The minimum peninsular landscape island width is 8 feet. One tree per each 250
square feet or fraction thereof of landscaping area. Each landscaping island must be a
,
minimum of 200 square feet and must contain at least one tree. The applicant shall
install an aeration/irrigation tubing, see figure 11 -3 attached, in each peninsular island.
'
At least one peninsular landscape area shall be provided along the northern parking lot
stalls for Taco Bell.
'
18. The applicant is permitted wall signs on only two walls per building up to a maximum
of 15 percent of the wall area. Taco Bell and Perkins elevations shall be revised to
comply with this condition. In addition, one pylon side is permit for the three lots.
'
Each parcel may have an individual monument sign on their lot.
19. Fire Marshal recommendations:
'
a Additional fire hydrants will be required. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for
exact locations.
'
b. Install "No Parking Fire Lane" signs and paint curb yellow in designated fire lanes.
Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact locations of signage and curb painting.
'
c. Submit turning radius to City Engineer and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and
approval.
d. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees,
shrubs, bushes, NSP, NW Bell, cable television transformer boxes. This is to ensure
'
that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated. Pursuant to Chanhassen
City Ordinance Sec. 9 -1.
'
20. That the landscaping plan for the Taco Bell site, the Perkins site and the future
restaurant site, be compatible with the final plans that the city implements for
'
59
'
i
I Planning Commission Meeting - August 17, 1994
1 Outlot A.
' 21. That the applicant and staff work through the parking lot realignment as it states
in condition 8 and if there are significant changes made, that it come back to the
Planning Commission for review.
' 22. That the staff and the applicant work through the internal traffic flow of the
Taco Bell parking lot in regards to one way traffic flow through the site and into
' the drive thru.
23. That the applicant investigate a pedestrian friendly walkway that would tie the
restaurants together or would access the restaurants.
' 24. The sin package shall come back to the Planning Commission for approval.
g P g g
Mancino, Ledvina and Nutting voted in favor. Conrad and Scott voted in opposition
and the motion and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2.
Scott: Reasons for voting nay Ladd has expressed. I would agree. That's it.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mancino moved, Ledvina seconded to approve the Minutes of
' the Planning Commission meeting dated August 3, 1994 as presented. All voted in favor,
except Ladd Conrad who abstained, and the motion carried.
CITY COUNCIL UPDATE.
' Kate Aanenson reviewed the Report from the Director dated August 11, 1994.
' Ledvina moved, Conrad seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m.
' Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Planning Director
I Prepared by Nann Opheim
.1
i
CHANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
' REGULAR MEETING
JULY 26, 1994
' Chairman Andrews called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Andrews, Jane Megers, Jan Lash, Jim Manders, Ron Roeser
' and Fred Berg
MEMBERS ABSENT: Dave Huffman
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director; Jerry Ruegemer,
Recreation Supervisor; Dawn Lemme, Recreation Supervisor and Michelle Braun, Recreation
Intern
I APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Andrews: Are there any additions to the agenda that anybody has at this time? Of course
i we're free to add items later.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
PRESENTATION OF MINNESOTA RECREATION AND PARK ASSOCIATION
AWARD OF EXCELLENCE, LAKE ANN PARK PICNIC/RECREATION SHELTER.
Hoffman: Chairperson Andrews, members of the Commission. Tonight we have among us
' some distinguished guests from both the MRPA. Our Executive Director, John Gerben and
from the city of Shakopee Park and Recreation Department, Mark McQuillan. Mark works
on the awards committee for the MRPA Award of Excellence and the City of Chanhassen
was fortunate enough to be recipient of that award in the category of facilities for the Lake
Ann Park shelter. With that I'll turn it over to Mark.
' Mark McQuillan: Thank you Todd. Appreciate this opportunity to appear before you tonight
to present you with what we think is a very prestigious award in our profession. As Todd
eluded to, I serve on the MRPA Awards Committee and I think this is about the third or
' fourth year now I've been on this committee and it's a really interesting perspective to see a
lot of different projects and programs and facilities that are presented to us for awards and it's
gaining a lot of popularity. It's getting more difficult every year to try to judge. We'd like
to give everyone an award and establish this criteria and it's really difficult sometimes
because I think really the recreation movement is really catching on and the benefits of it
that, I don't want to steal the thunder from John who's here to talk a little about the benefits.
The MRPA Awards Committee presents awards for facility, programming, volunteer
r sponsorship, and demonstration. The projects are submitted to the committee early in the
year and generally under the criteria that they have to be completed the year prior to the
presentation to the committee. It's my understanding that your Lake Ann picnic shelter
project is actually almost 10 years old from it's very beginning when it was first initiated. I
think one of the things that stands out as far as to the committee on this award was the fact
' that the persistence that your community has to make sure that this became a reality. I think
that's something that you should be commended for. In addition to that, we want to present
an award and so it's, and I'd like to maybe ask your Chair, Mr. Andrews, if he'd like to
come out and do you have a picture. It says the Award of Excellence, which is presented to
the City of Chanhassen for the Lake Ann Park Picnic and Recreation Shelter for setting the
standard of excellence... recreation and parks... services, 1994 and it's presented on behalf of
the Minnesota Recreation and Park Association. I would also like to now ask that John
Gerben, who's the Executive Director of MRPA come forward for a short presentation.
' John Gerben: Short? Todd mentioned that I would give about 30 minutes. Actually he
threw me off right at the beginning when he referred to me as distinguished. I absolutely
didn't know and I've gotten further thrown out that usually when I do a presentation, I'm
used to people leaving the audience but never walking in and sitting down as a part of the
audience so if I'm a little uneasy, that would be why. The Minnesota Recreation and Park
Association is a professional organization of parks and recreation in the State of Minnesota.
' It's not a State funded organization. It's funded by a membership that's funded by the
members that we have here and we're pleased that 3 of our professional members are from
Chanhassen. We also have agency memberships and corporate sponsorships and all this kind
of fits together through the membership fees. Through our recreation and sports commission
that sanctions softball and youth events and State conferences is how our association operates.
The purpose of our association is to further the parks and recreation efforts throughout the
' State that we hope improves the quality of life for everybody in Minnesota and certainly by
trying to encouraging communities like Chanhassen to continue to develop a fine park system
with things like the Lake Ann shelter there, certainly encourages us that the message is being
' received by the communities and that in fact the quality of life in the communities throughout
Minnesota is improving. And I would venture to say that without the outstanding park
system that's emerging in Chanhassen, I wonder what the quality of like would be. I wonder
what some of the attractions to this community would be. It's been very clear in a number of
studies that have been done that a strong park and recreation system in your community is an
' attraction for people to come there and to live there and to be involved. It's one of the things
that help you become a community through parks and recreation department that does a lot of
your festivals. It does a lot of your special events and gives us that chance today in what is
' becoming an increasingly fragmented society where everybody's looking after kind of their
own interest, for a chance to come together and be a community. Kind of like the old days
and what it used to be and it seems to me that Chanhassen, in looking at their plans and what
they've done, is very cognizant of that fact. That you want those ideals that were around
from years past. You want to be able to manage the growth. You want that sense of
community in a strong park and recreation department. A strong park and recreation
commitment certainly helps that occur. What I have for you is really just two things outside
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
of my additional congratulations on winning the award. I have a fact sheet about our
Minnesota Recreation and Park Association. Just in case anybody is having trouble sleeping ,
at night, I'm told that by reading this you won't have that problem any longer. It does point
out a few things of our association. The other thing that we have is a reminder about the
benefits of parks and recreation and we put together this poster that explains some of the '
benefits to it. We encourage you to hang it up somewhere prominently. Either one of your
recreation facilities or perhaps right behind the Mayor as a reminder that when you're seeking
support for some of your endeavors, that you can point to the poster and say, I think that's '
point number 3 which justifies this request for support. So if I could Mr. Chair I'd be, I'm
going to have to see how this goes on brick. But I'd like to present you with our benefits of
parks and recreation poster. This is the handy carrying size. '
Andrews: Thank you very much.
John Gerben: Thank you.
Andrews: I'd like to say thank you on behalf of the Park Board. Both current members and '
our former members and also for our Park and Rec staff. You know the City Council has
given us the support we've asked for and the citizens as well so we feel fortunate that we
have been able to complete this project and hopefully we can continue to strive to improving
our park system, so thank you very much for the recognition and we're more determined than
ever to win it again. So thank you. '
John Gerben: If Mark and I leave, will you still have a quorum?
Andrews: Thank you very much. That should be good for a year end bonus Todd, right? '
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None. I
CARVER BEACH PAR HEAR REQUE OF PAULA AND LOREN VELTKAMP
6774 LOTUS TRAIL.
Todd Hoffman gave the staff presentation on this item.
Loren Veltkamp: Well the did shorten up that parking. '
Y
Paula Veltkamp: Thank you for that. '
Loren Veltkamp: I want to thank everyone for that. Last time we were here we had a list, I '
don't know how many items were on it, maybe 12 but I've reduced it now to 4 and I've been
3 1
' Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
talking ith people about it. You know people really didn't want o see the kin reduced
g p p o p p al y t parking ed ed c
there, even though the residents that I talked to and the people in the city were quite adamant
' about keeping that parking there. I don't really care about the parking. The issue that I came
out with originally was just the noise issue. You know we felt the noise had gotten to a point
where you know, it is better now. Although on Friday we had a real bad day and then on
Monday, yesterday it was bad. The weekend was fine. Saturday and Sunday people—no
problem but I can't figure it out. It makes no sense to me. There's been no fighting on the
' raft at all, which the kids were doing every day at about 4:00 they'd come down and fight on
the raft for 2 hours. That was very noisy but that hasn't happened one time since I've been
here before so it is better but there's still some problems. And then since you've shorten the
' parking, there's been a couple instances of people parking where the sign used to be. I think
they're probably just going in and thinking there's still a sign there but there's not. So I
called on that and one time there was 2 cars and they were completely outside of the signs
and I doubled checked because one time I called and the car wasn't all of the way outside of
the signs so they said, it doesn't count. So I thought okay, you know you can have this one
but this time they were clearly both out and when I called, nobody came out and I called a
' half hour later and I think I called 3 times. Now I think the second time I called, she said
somebody went down to look at it but they didn't see a problem. I said whoa. Two cars in
front...I told them it was a black Mitsubishi and a gray Buick or Chevy. So I don't know.
There's still a problem with parking but the parking's not an issue to me. It's only the noise
because that's what enters my residence you know so. I've only got 4 copies of this so I'll
give one to Todd and kind of spread these around up here. The noise problem, I guess
' reducing the parking is not what the people in the city want but I was hoping we could install
a sign that said something like quiet zone, which was what somebody brought up last time.
That would be probably pretty much take care of the problem because then I feel like I can
go across street and say, you know can you please keep it down and I won't have to call the
city enforcement because they're pretty late in getting down there anyway. So if we could
' have that, that would probably solve the noise problem I think and I would be willing to go
across the street and ask people to... I would also like to have a sigh that says no fighting on
the raft. There's a lot of fighting that goes on in the spring anyway and I think that from the
city's point of view, it probably is dangerous because I've seen kids fall on the raft and when
they get pushed they don't always land in the water. And the main source of noise is in fact
daycare. On Friday we had 7 adults. Now wait a minute. Last Friday we had approximately
3 adults in the car and about 16 kids and the kids were all in the water at one point. At one
time and it was exceedingly noisy.
' Berg: Excuse me, what time was that? Do you know, about what time of day that was?
Loren Veltkamp: Friday. Oh, I'd say early in the afternoon. There were people there from
about 10:00 to 7:00 on Friday. It was really a very busy day.
r
Park and Rec Commission Meeting -July 26, 1994 1
I
Berg: Was it the same group do you think that was there yesterday? Around early afternoon.
I was down there about 1:00 or so and it looked more like families but I wasn't, I'm not able I
to tell.
Loren Veltkamp: I can't really tell. I don't know. They come down with an ice chest in the '
back of their van.
Paula Veltkamp: It's usually a woman with 4 children and they range in age but they're all '
are between oh I would say about 4 and 8. So maybe conceivably they could have.
Loren Veltkamp: There was one teenager there and she was like 16. And I think there was... '
I don't really know.
Berg: Okay, it looked more like families amongst that group yesterday. '
Loren Veltkamp: It could be. Yeah, it could be. You know 3 big families coming in with ,
16 kids. I don't know. But that's the main source of noise right there. I mean I guess if
they're families, then no problem but if it is in fact daycare, you know then maybe we should
put a sign up that says no daycare because that's for sure noisy. And it's not a good place
for daycare for sure. But if an adult comes down there with 5 kids and you know, one's on '
one side of the beach and one's on another, there could be an accident. So I don't know,
that's something to think about I guess. I'd like to have a sign saying no shouting,
screaming, or excess noise. I think that would spell out for people you know what they ,
shouldn't really do when they're that close to a residence. The other problems are kind of
obvious. We talked about those last time so I don't see any point of getting into those again, ,
except the illegal parking problem. I would like to see, you know the little posts that they
have in city parks? You know that line the road so people can't park. If you put those in
front of the beach, and it tends to be another problem with illegal parking. ...removable '
because the guy that plows got to get through so you drop them in ... and you pull them out in
the fall. This would cost you a couple hundred bucks. I'd never have a parking problem
again and neither would you. So I think that's a pretty good solution. The sign costs you, I
you know $50.00 and I think that'd be the end of this problem.
Lash: Why do you think there wouldn't be a parking problem if we put posts going in the I
beach?
Loren Veltkamp: Wouldn't be? ,
Lash: Yeah.
L 7
Y, Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
' Loren Veltkam : Well if you bring them out into the road see people have to pull off the
P Y g A P P P
' road to park where there's grass and it's all one smooth shoulder. So it's very easy for them
to park anywhere along and you have people you know stopping in front of the park.
Emptying their stuff out and then they slam their doors and then they go look for a parking
' spot. Then they come back and they load their stuff up there so they use it for loading on
and off and that's a lot of noise because the kids are running around and you know, you got
this, you got that. That sort of thing. And other than that you just have people parking right
' on the park and that's been happening all summer long. The fishermen do it. Everybody
does it And it happens in the winter too because... people coming down to ice fish or
something park there so. We probably can't have the posts in the winter because of the plow
' but if you stick those posts in, I think that would really take care of it in the summer. I don't
really care about the winter because the windows are closed and it doesn't matter. It's pretty
inexpensive. I think that really takes care of it. If there's a sign out there that says-and I'm
' bothered by noise, I can go down there and talk to them. And I will, I won't call the city
about it because I don't like calling the city...
Andrews: One of our later agenda items is our capital improvement budgeting for next year.
I don't see any reason why these items can't be discussed at that time. I'm only speaking for
myself here. I don't these are very, these are reasonable requests to me and don't appear to
' be all that costly. Does anybody else have any comments to add to that?
Lash: Since I was not here ... and I didn't really feel comfortable commenting on it since I
' hadn't been here for the full presentation but I read over the Minutes and I went down over
the weekend and drove by it so ... and I happened to be there Saturday night and I was pretty
surprised because there wasn't a soul down there. It was beautiful on the lake there. I mean
' it was in the evening right after dinner and it was beautiful and there wasn't a soul down
there. But there were a couple of things that I wanted to point out and one being, I think it's
already been addressed. That the parking has been tighten up because it was supposed to
' only be 3 spots with 1 indicated as handicapped. So that would allow for basically 2 cars
most of the time, which is pretty minimal. And I was also curious, is there a typical park
rules sign down at that beach that we have at most of the rest of the beaches?
Loren Veltkamp: Yeah there is. No dogs. No this. No that.
' Lash: Okay. Because we have a standard sign that we put in all the parks.
' Loren Veltkamp: Yeah, it's the same sign that you've got over at the Greenwood Shores
Park.
Lash: Okay, so I'll go check on that. And then I just wanted to point out a couple of things
Park and Rec Commission Meeting -July 26, 1994
'
to you guys. One is that we still certainly consider this to be a neighborhood park. You
know you said you wanted it to be returned to a neighborhood park and it is a neighborhood
park and that's the designation that it will always remain. And I just want you to be
comfortable knowing that if you have problems with it, we're here to help you to solve
problems with your neighborhood park. We're not, we don't mean to be working against '
each other. We should pull together when there's problems so I want you to feel comfortable
when you do have problems, to come because we are here to help you. And we want to help
to enforce the rules and I'm wondering did Public Safety start to doing more regular ,
patrolling Todd?
Hoffman: I contacted Scott Harr and again, as far as regular patrols, that's as available basis ,
as far as responding to the calls. Obviously there they get a deluge of park calls and parking
and Lake Ann on the grass and South Lotus Lake ... so they are, they definitely have an
attitude about park complaints. Scott is working with the Carver County Deputy Department ,
in that regard. In fact they are looking to us to come back and try to make signage more
simplified and...
Lash: I know one of the ideas was just for a few weeks at least to really beef it u at sa ,
J Y P Y
10:30 or whatever to try and make sure to curtail any evening activity that was going on.
light an ,
Paula Veltkamp: ...we have a fi Bi ght outside our house too. g spot g ht d we flash them
on. Any teenagers on the raft are gone in a minute. There's no privacy at all so.
Loren Veltkamp: ...we just hit the halogen ... but I've honestly, I've never even heard it at
night. '
Lash: The problem that we're going to have is that we cannot control people's behavior.
You know we just, there's nothing that we can do. We can post signs until we're blue in the I
face and not control people's behavior.
Loren Veltkamp: I know. I don't really expect the city to do it and I don't really want the ,
city to do it. If the city puts up a sign, then I can go down there and ask them to be quiet
and I'm sure that will be enough. I don't think people like to disturb people in their
residence. I don't go over to their house and make a lot of noise. And I can't drive around... '
my stereo loud at night. I don't bother them. They shouldn't bother me. And I think people
understand that.
Lash: Well then another thing is that some of your requests or some of the concerns for ,
some of the things, basically I'm the senior member on the commission now and was here
when we had residents from this area in requesting the buoys and the raft and different kinds '
0
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
of things that went in down there so it's kind of hard now, just a few years later to have
people coming in and there's a lot of problems with it. You feel like geez, we just spent all
' this money to try and make people down there happy and put in what they wanted and now
people aren't happy with what we did and you know and want to have it removed. It puts us
in a tough spot.
' Loren Veltkamp: I realize that now. I didn't the first time but I began to feel that people
P Pe P
' really liked the raft and even though they don't visit the property, they really want to have
the parking down there in case they want to.
' Paula Veltkamp: I find it interesting though the people that requested those things moved
out.
' Loren Veltkamp: They got the raft and they got the parking in and then he moved.
Lash: His property value probably increased. And then there were some other, there was one
reference to the agreement between your neighborhood association and, as far as mooring
boats and things like that and I'm interesting if you have a copy or if one of your neighbors
has a copy of that agreement that would help us to understand what the initial, or original
' intention was.
Loren Veltkamp: I just heard that word of mouth. There are some older residents still
' around, so I don't think that there is any paper.
Andrews: The Council went through this process reviewing moorings quite extensively. I'm
' in another neighborhood on the lake that had some difficulties with that and that's an issue
I'm sure has been reviewed thoroughly over the last about 18 months. And if there was a
document, it would have had to been produced and word of mouth wasn't going to work.
' Because there were so many conflicting statements about you know, somebody said 5 boats.
No, it was 10. No, it was 3 and it was neighborhood versus neighborhood. One
neighborhood said we want boats but we don't want their neighborhood to have boats and so
' it got to be, well unless you can prove it with some sort of historical document, then word of
mouth wasn't going to work. So that would be an issue you would have to take up with
Council if you really want to do it.
'
Lash: B if r i m kin f m i i 1 actually be neficial But there s some d o agreement, t would be, t would actua y be be just
c �
' to have it on the record for future. So if you can...
Loren Veltkamp: I'll ask around.
' 8
t
Park and Rec Commission Meeting -July 26, 1994
1 r
Manders: I have a question pertaining to a comment that was made about later evening
activity. And you indicated that you didn't seem to think there was much problem like after '
10:00 or after 9:00.
Loren Veltkamp: Not where we are. Not where we are but I'll tell you, on either side of this I
I think there might be.
Manders: That's what I'm wondering. Do you recognize that or do you notice that at all? I
Loren Veltkamp: No, I don't but people who, people to our left like the Gundersons, they're
right in front of the fishing dock and there's a lot of people that go down there at night to ,
fish. Now we have some night fishing in front of our beach there because I think people like
to go to walleye because it's sand in there. So there's some walleye fishing in front of our
place at night but it really hasn't bothered me so I have no objection to it. Now they are '
bothered because of I don't know, I guess there's been people taking out canoes at night.
Banging the canoes ... them up and the dock out there is aluminum so when people walk on it,
it makes noise and that can wake them up because their bedroom's right in front of the house. '
So they've got some problems. And then the people at the south end have complained to us,
just when we were talking to them out walking the dog, about people in the woods drinking.
Because see there's no woods in front of our place. It's just a narrow strip. So there's no '
place for them to hide so they're not going to drink there. Plus we have our halogens so I
don't think they're going to drink... But the people on the south end have complained to us
about it. '
Lash: ...and when you said south end, are you talking about the south end of this beach or I
the other beach?
Loren Veltkamp: The other beach, yeah. The south end of the park. The main beach. I
Andrews: What I'd like to do is discuss your request as part of our capital improvement
discussion which is a major item for us later tonight because most of these issues would '
relate to spending a little money for a sign or some posts or some minor improvements and
that's exactly what we're going to be talking about here probably in about an hour.
Loren Veltkamp: I could et m money back in one summer b not having those ... I mean I ,
P g Y Y Y g
know they don't like that. I've talked to them. I know they don't like to be running out all
the time checking up on this stupid parking. ,
Paula Veltkamp: I had a question about the handicap parking. There was one time I called
and there were two people parked ... but they didn't ticket it, or maybe they didn't get them... '
9 1
0
l
. 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
they would fine one person and the car that stayed. And I called back and asked, well why
wasn't there a ticket issued and the response was that it doesn't really look like it's illegal.
And I don't know what makes a legal handicap and what doesn't but she said, a lot of the
times you just can't ticket people because it's not official. So I don't know if there's some
' way to make that more official. So people don't abuse the handicap area.
Lash: How is the handicap parking designated?
' Hoffman: With a sign. Did you call Carver County or the City?
' Paula Veltkamp: I called the.
Hoffman: Dispatch?
' Paula Veltkamp: Yeah the dispatch.
Hoffman: Again, each individual deputy will have a different opinion when they're writing
tickets. Whether or not it's justified or not so—there is that perception. If there is, what
problem them have with it...
Paula Veltkamp: There was one time in the handicap, a couple of teenagers down there once.
The teenagers were talking back to the police and they were saying, well why do you—so that
' was it, they got a ticket.
Lash: ...just shooting their mouth off.
' Paula Veltkamp: And I got the feeling that the police really don't want to ticket down there
because they don't want to create bad PR. I don't know. Maybe even a legal handicap
' wouldn't give them—way to ticket anyway so I don't know if that would make any
difference.
' Loren Veltkamp: That's the point you know. They don't want to come down there and get
on people's bad side when they're just sitting out at the beach.
' Berg: I just had a couple things. One has to do with signs and I'll wait until maybe a more
appropriate time to talk about that. The other thing that concerns me a little bit is requests
' for not allowing certain groups to use the beach.
Loren Veltkamp: Oh daycare?
' 10
I-
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 1
Berg: Yeah. I personally have a little bit of a problem with that.
Andrews: I do as well. '
Berg: I don't think we can seriously think about closing the beach to certain groups of I
people. That's my own opinion.
Andrews: I think we ask for proper behavior but we don't determine what group is allowed.
'
If they don't behave properly, then we deal with it but we can't decide what groups are
eligible. I agree with that. Thank you for your patience and we appreciate the chance to
work with you.
LAND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL, PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 46.5
ACRES INTO 36 RURAL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND ONE OUTLOT. HALLA'S
'
GREAT PLAINS GOLF ESTATES, LOCATED SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD 14
(PIONEER TRAIL) AND WEST AND EAST OF HIGHWAY 101 (GREAT PLAINS
BLVD.)
'
Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this item.
Andrews: Thank ou Todd. Mr. Halla � if Y ou'd like to speak to us about this issue, we'd be
Y
happy to hear more from you.
'
Don Halla: I don't know that I have any pros or cons to it one way or the other. The
decision that you folks have to make with regard to it. One correction I will say that it is
approximately 56 acres on that side of the property. Not 25 to 30. We originally had the 35
'
lots located on the west half of our property, somewhat in configuration that you see ... resulted
from having 2 1/2 acre lots. Being asked to make it down to roughly half acre lots and now
we're back to 2 1/4 acre lots. And we're back to using the whole property again. So the city
'
has been moving us around from one way to another way to another way, depending upon
who's planning. Excuse me, who the City Planner is at the time and the... As far as we have
an interest in it as a park, that's something that you folks have to make a decision on and
'
move accordingly. One way or the other. I know that part of the thing has been told to us in
the past why we've been jockeying back and forth and yes, there was a desire for a park on
'
this site. Yes, we really want to buy the nursery on the other side to expand the golf course.
Nobody wants to be up front. Basically just want to have us go back and forth trying to meet
different criteria from different individuals to prevent the development. And one way or the
'
other development's going to happen. This plan that we have today I think is horrible city
planning. I have a daughter who's a landscape architect out in Baltimore ... and I can say that
the way we are right now with what to do on this third go around now doesn't serve the city
'
11 1
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
I
well as far as tax money goes. As far as concentration of homes and so forth. When you're
using as much land as what's being used. We're playing the city game. That's all I can tell
you. And as you can see what some of my feelings that I'm expressing here, that I'm ... but
we're doing what we're asked to do and we'll continue to do so until it gets approved. I
don't think there's anything we can't improve on this one. We've gone full circle from
where we started and trying to meet them at every angle that they ask us to do and...
' Andrews: Okay. Todd's recommendation is that the Park Board table this until August 9th
so we can have our last chance really to take a look at this property as a potential park site.
Knowing how short land is going to become, I guess I'm asking you if that would be a
suitable or would it fatally impair your project that we could table it to August 9th? I think
at that point, as a commission, we would be able to make some sort of decision. Are we
going to really pursue this or not. Nothing's going to get built this fall I don't believe. Even
' with the fastest processes of the city I don't think they can get things done that fast but do
you think we would be able to ask for your indulgence through August 9th?
Don Halla: We asked for delays and being forced to do what we're forced to do. It's the
city who's pushing us. Not us pushing the city. So I'm just not going to let the city figure a
method out that they can prevent me from putting lots on my property and having it
subdivided. The city's got to come to grips with what they're trying to do. We said that we
wanted to let the land basically sit and not develop. We already have a 2 1/2 acre
preliminary plat approval on it. We're being forced to go back and forth on this other—so it's
the city who's in the, forcing us to do something. And I'm just going to do what I have to
do and make sure that I can put lots on there according to what was approved earlier.
' Whatever that means, if you want to delay it and not rule it against me, I could care less.
But I'm not going to do anything that's going to jeopardize my getting the number of lots on
there so I can get value out of my property.
r Andrews: I guess to ask a question. Are you saying that you have no interest in potentially
selling this at a fair market value as park property? That's kind of what I'm.
' Don Halla: It depends upon what you call fair market value for park property.
Andrews: Well that would be your decision obviously. You're the current owner so you
decide what's fair.
Don Halla: We have a preliminary plat approval of this property for the same, I believe the
number of lots that are on it now. 2 1/2 acre lots and that's basically what this is in size. 2
1/2 acre lot development. Just a different configuration than what's already done.
12
Park and Rec Commission Meeting -July 26, 1994
Manders: Just to reconfirm the east portion of this property is how large?
Don Halla: The area that you see with the lots on it is 46 acres. The area that you show as a
big section on the bottom right hand...
Lash: And the ones on the west side?
Don Halla: The west side is another 46 1/2 acres. Plus 2 1/2 acres that's already been '
subdivided. It's just under 50 feet. It's 49. 8 or 9. Total.
Andrews: Does that plat show the proposed straightening of the highway? Is that what that
ghosted in line is there?
Don Halla: If it ever happens, yeah. This right through here is for the straightening of the
road. And that easement has been already granted. The trail easements have been granted.
The widening of 101 has been granted. The city has all those easements and so forth on the
understanding that we were doing the subdivision of the property. We've met all their
requirements.
Hoffman: Just to clarify, there is 46 1/2 acres on each side of the road there?
Don Halla: 46 1/2. My brother owns 10 acres on the south there that shows as future
development. It's not my property.
Lash: But you own 46.
'
Don Halla: I own 46.
Lash: So we can forget about the 10 because that's not your's.
Don Halla: That's not mine. If you needed more land, there's probably another 20 acres '
available to the south. But our property was all graded for the nursery purpose so it was
made into a pretty level site. There's enough for drainage across it and...
Andrews: Well as usual the pressure of development is much quicker than our ability to deal
with it, it seems as a city and as a Park Board. As a Planning Commission. As a Council.
The pace of development is just always surprising to me. We're already reacting rather than
anticipating it seems. I feel as a Park Board that we should accept Todd's recommendation,
which is to table and look at this and make a decision. You know either we're going to
pursue this or we're not. I think it deserves discussion. There's going to be very few pieces
13
-' Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
' of property that are otentiall suitable for an athletic complex in the southern area of the city
P Y P
and I guess I feel it'd be irresponsible to not take a serious look at it. I make that as a
motion to the board here if somebody wants to second that.
Manders: I'll second that.
Andrews: Okay, we'll move that this issue is tabled and will be on the August 9th meeting
date.
Andrews moved, Manders seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission table
' action on the Halla's Great Plains Golf Estates land development proposal until the
August 9, 1994 special Park and Recreation Commission meeting, at which time this
item will be discussed. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
LAND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: ED AND MARY RYAN TO REZONE 37.92
ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO RSF,
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 37.92
ACRES INTO 52 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND A WETLAND ALTERATION
' PERMIT LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF GALPIN BOULEVARD AND
PROPOSED LAKE ROAD EXTENSION, 6730 BOULEVARD, SHAMROCK RIDGE.
Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this item.
Andrews: I have one question and that would be, is there any potential north/south trail that
would connect somewhere internally in this big section of land that we should be looking at a
potential trail easement on that western edge of this property.
' Hoffman: There will be a north trail heading off this extension into the Minnetonka
Intermediate School but that's farther on down the line. As far as south, you run directly into
some wetlands. Some years ago there was an extension of the trail. The trail system up
' along the interceptor, the Lake Ann Interceptor which is very close to the south of this plat
but that has since been removed and it's been—instead of going cross country, that will
come ... and Lake Lucy.
Andrews: The property directly to the west of this has not yet come in, is that correct?
Hoffman: No.
' Andrews: It makes me nervous not to consider, even though we have no plan at this point to
14
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 1 1
have any trail there, to not have a potential easement on that. On the western border that
could coordinate with the development on the Highway 41 end that might provide us some
connection. I mean it seems like whenever we say we don't need it, then we come back later
and geez, then we wish we had taken something or thought about something.
Lash: Are you talking about on the western edge?
Andrews: The western edge of this development.
Lash: Running north and south?
Andrews: Yep. Is there any potential value to any connection. '
Roeser: It doesn't reach TH 41 there then, right?
Andrews: No, no. But I'm saying there's another big chunk of land that will come in some
day over there and would there be any value to having a north/south connection trail. Would
it connect up to any other east/west trail that would be of value to the south of this or to the
north of this. Because you're talking a huge.
Lash: There's oin to be a trail on Gal in and there's ultimately going to be one on TH 41.
g g P yg g
You're saying just something somewhere inbetween those two.
i
Andrews: I mean how wide s this? Is that like a half a mile? A mile? It looks huge on the
map. '
Hoffman: I didn't notice that anything—but its difficult.
Andrews: I retract my question. It's only about 1,000 feet from the middle to the edge. So '
that's not really a hinderance to ask somebody to walk 1,000 feet to a trail. So I don't think
that's necessary. Never mind. It just looked a lot bigger than that on the map. Any other I
discussion? If not, a motion.
Manders: I'd move that we accept the staff recommendation and approve this proposal.
Andrews: Is there a second?
Roeser: I second.
Manders moved, Roeser seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend I
15 1
-' Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
' that the City ouncil require the following conditions f approval in
y q g o regard to park and
trails for the Shamrock Ridge plat:
' 1. Full park fees be collected per city ordinance.
2. An 8 foot bituminous trail be constructed parallel to Lake Lucy Road. This construction
to be incorporated into the Lake Lucy Road Extension Project. The developer shall be
' reimbursed for the cost of said trail from the city's trail fund.
3. Sufficient county road right -of -way /easements be maintained along County Road 117
(Galpin Boulevard) to accommodate possible future trail construction.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Andrews: Item 5 is the CEP work session. Now the work starts.
Hoffman: If the Commission would like to entertain completing the rest of the agenda.
Andrews: Yes, let's do that and then come back and kill this one at the end.
PROGRAM REPORTS:
A. 1994 4TH OF JULY CELEBRATION EVALUATION.
' Ruegemer: Would it be helpful for the commission for us to go through each event or do
you want, I take it everybody's had a chance to take a look at the evaluation of the 4th of
July celebration. Is there anything that isn't covered in the evaluation itself that the
t commission members would like to touch on?
Andrews: Yes. I guess I was just curious why you felt you'd like to change from the Hi-
Tops, being that people seem to like them so much.
Lash: That's what I had on mine too.
Ruegemer: I think what we're trying to do is I guess with our department we're always
trying to move on. We're always trying to create a new look or create maybe a new
experience for the celebration. The Hi -Tops have been playing around here for 7 or 8 years.
We felt that it's time for a change. To give this celebration, we just celebrated our 10th
anniversary. Maybe now it's time to look for something else.
1 16
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting -July 26, 1994
�.
Andrews: If it ain't broke, why fix it.
Lemme: Well there's a lot of great bands out there though.
Lash: Yeah, well I think the White Sidewalls are great but it's not like it's going to be a
drastic change ... type of music and I know the White Sidewalls are expensive and I think they
get booked up pretty far in advance too.
Andrews: Yeah, I guess I had the same question. It seems like we're just looking at '
basically the same style music. Why change the name of the band if the music's going to be
basically the same. If we're going to make a change, I guess it would make more sense to ,
me to look to a different style of music and I guess I feel that I would not recommend a
change of style. I think what they play is easy entertaining type of music. A lot of people
can dance to it and have fun with it and it doesn't get too rowdy or too crazy so. '
Lash: And you have a different style of music ... I guess I'd be willing to look at some
different alternatives. If you want to show us some different prices and stuff. I think for the '
price...
Andrews: We'll look at it.
Lash: I have a question on the water wars. I know that was really popular and when I was
in line and watching, I heard somebody say well we could just, why couldn't we just build
one of those. That wouldn't be hard to build one of those so is that a possibility that we
could just, the maintenance guys over the winter build a couple of those things.
Ruegemer: Yeah, we took pictures of the water wars.
Lash: From all angles.
Ruegemer: And we even had a citizen say he would draft something up on his CAD system I
so that's being looked at for a winter project.
Lash: That was real popular. I thought that was great. And then I had one other question.
A comment that I had directed toward me was the sand sculpture ... and someone suggested to
me that we either come up with more effective age brackets or have like just a kids one and a
family one or something so that it's not as, you know we have like I can't remember. It was
somebody who was in it and he said, gee I feel guilty because...
Lemme: I heard that too and people had ... more competitive category versus a family I
17 1
., Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
category and then also to really separate off the areas so that people aren't stepping on each
other's sand sculptures and I think that would be easily done. Just with that...
' (There was a tae change at this point in the discussion.
P P )
B. SEPTEMBERFEST PREVIEW.
' Lemme: We could block off areas so people could ... It might be difficult but we still
thought—We're looking at maybe getting some more civic organizations like the 4H or
something to operating them. Whatever the Lions Club does not sell. If they want two
' booths...
Roeser: When is it going to be?
' Lemme: September 24th.
I Lash: That'd be kind of fun. If people brought their pumpkins.
Andrews: Will the new store be open by then? Is that what they're targeting?
1 Ruegemer: Byerly's?
' Andrews: A year from then? Is that what they're shooting for.
Hoffman: They want to be open for Thanksgiving but it's more realistic before Christmas.
' Berg: What are you thinking of doing with the teen dance? I mean besides the obvious.
Having a dance for teens.
Hoffman: They didn't warm up to this idea very well but the nighttime activities just slow
me down so we said if we needed a daytime when people would come out in the morning,
' you know 9:00. Bake sale. Farmers market and everything and wind this thing down about
4:00. We've got tents and tables and all this investment out there. I said if we bring in an
$800.00 band or could use some of this local stuff and what's the number one thing teenagers
want to do is hang out. It's also an age group which we miss in our city. My staff, my other
staff partners they just don't know if that will do it. So we want to hear from you. Will that
do it? If we just have a tent there and we have nobody else there but teenagers and we just
' throw this rock band up in the center of the city for 3 hours during the evening, will they
show up?
' 18
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Berg: Add one other element and you've got a better chance. Lots of food.
Hoffman: Pizzas. We talked about that. '
Lash: Prizes. I
Andrews: Pizzas would do it.
Lash: I mean almost like your teen dance that you have at the middle school, only it would '
be outside and any age but.
Andrews: I think that'd be a cool idea. I think kids would really like that.
Berg: My first thought was to agree with Jerry and Dawn and say, oh. But we've been
,
talking since I've been on the board about we don't do anything for teenagers and I think we
could, I think we've got to try.
Lash: And it might be scary.
Manders: Where does this happen? Up here at the city center.
'
Hoffman: Right here.
,
Andrews: I think we need to do something ike you give eve kid like a coupon for 2 slices
g Y g every P
of pizza and he gets into the dance.
'
n' have o have a band. What if we just did a DJ thin again? That
Lash: You wouldn't a e t � g g
seems to be very popular.
Berg: Do a DJ with some lights.
Lash: It wasn't somebody who was just totally obnoxious and you could still have some
'
adults there.
Andrews: I think we ought to really target the teens here. I think that's a good idea. I think
a DJ may be better than a band because if you haven't go the right kind of band, you've got
a bad deal.
'
Hoffman: We thought about that. We'd go talk to the Youth Commission. If there's
somebody hot out there... Let them pick their own band. We're not the ones to pick it. I
19 1
I Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
I Ruegemer: We could just contact a new DJ services this morning so.
Manders: I understand that they've got a new guy at KDWB.
Hoffman: Yeah.
' Lash: Well we probably don't want him.
Andrews: Alright.
Hoffman: Anything else?
' Berg: In anticipation of one of these things, make sure Minnetonka finds out about it too.
The teen dance.
' Andrews: I was oin to et to that later.
g g g
' C. MID- SUMMER REPORTS.
Ruegemer: This is just really an FYI. Just bringing to the commission's attention how we're
doing with parking revenues. As of, just for conversation sake, I just threw in the totals at
the end of June this year versus the end of June last year. That's where we're sitting. The
July report should be coming in roughly in a week I suppose but here's where we were at as
' far as the end of June so we are far ahead as to what we were last year. I believe that's
directly related to the nice weather that we've been having. We've had a couple crappy
' summers and, two years in a row and everybody's just pleased as punch that we have decent
weather and they're coming out and using our parks so.
Manders: This isn't year to date, it's just the month of June?
Ruegemer: No. Just from early May to end of June so.
Lash: And that used to be what it was for the whole year.
' Ruegemer: Right, and as we wrap up the summer we'll have a final report on revenues that
will reflect...
Lash: Hopefully we can have a discussion at that time about this procedure.
Andrews: Pardon me? Oh, about the gates?
20
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 '
1
Lash: Yeah. When he does the year end thing.
Ruegemer: Just another topic of discussion too is with the picnic evaluations coming back, ,
the groups that have been using the park, probably 9 out of 10 have been coming back that
we do pay fees to facility and felt that the parking fee was over ... on our part. '
Hoffman: Gouging.
Ruegemer: ...some of those picnic evaluations were enclosed in the Admin. Section but more
come in every day so we'll tally those at the end of the season and take a look at those.
Andrews: Alright. '
Ruegemer: Item number 2 is, this is mine as well. It's just another FYI for you. Picnic has '
also been overwhelming this summer. We've been going through a lot of picnic
conversations on a daily basis. As of today, I probably as of today, I've probably had over
80 since I've written the report so they just keep coming in. Again, this is at the end of June ,
of this year in comparisons to last year. This year is $3,749.13 as compared to last year at
$1,900.00 so we're way ahead. Projections as of last year and we should have no trouble
reaching the goal of $5,000.00 for picnic revenues. '
Lash: So if we take parking and the picnic shelters, can we raise that money to buy the Halla
property? '
Ruegemer: That might be difficult. '
Hoffman: An acre.
Ruegemer: So just a FYI for you and I just included, just to bring you up to date... '
Andrews: Alright, let's move ahead. Let's quickly get through the, do you need to talk '
about the concession stand revenue? That's up too so. Item 7, special meeting date August
9th. Let's move on to item b. Second quarter park and trail revenue report.
Hoffman: We need to catch with Dawn on the Lake Ann concession.
Andrews: Well it's all there. I mean pardon me but if we're going to get through the CIP '
we're going to be here until midnight. If that's okay. I read through these and they're pretty
self explanatory.
21 1
J
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
' Lash: But I have a uestion on August 9th one J re just in and to the selection of vendor for
q g g
the play equipment. I noticed that the vendors, that the substitutions were sent to and it
' seems to me in my recollection, one of the vendors on that list we've had a little difficulty
with in the past. I was just wondering if there's some more reason why we need to continue
to send out to that vendor or should we try someone else?
Hoffman: We could expand that list. The vendors which are on the list are really in order
P Y
' local vendors. The person who we've done a lot of business with and then a person who
we've done some business with who's... If that's your criteria, if you want to eliminate that
one due to past experience, that's at your discretion. If you want to direct me not to send this
to the vendor, you could certainly do that
Lash: Well I'm just speaking for myself but if I've had a bad experience with someone in
' the past, I probably would not go and order from them again. I think it's sort of a waste of
our time and a waste of the vendor's time and we might want to go find a different vendor if
we want to send out 3 bids. Find somebody that we think would be more satisfactory. Is
' there anyone who.
Andrews: Well I think that's great. I mean why, we have had a problem and I forget which
one it is but I wouldn't want to do business with him. I mean just why bother. We've had a
very unsatisfactory experience with a lot of finger pointing back and forth and I just don't
think we need to deal with that.
Lash: And I think we were very clear originally when we placed our order that if it did not
work out, that this was, this would be his shot and if you blow it, you blow it. And he blew
' it and I meant it when I said that so if you have any questions about it...
Hoffman: We'd like to start the review ... but I can let that person know.
' Berg: Jan, what park was that again?
Lash: That we had the problems?
Berg: Where we had the problem?
Lash: Was it at Herman Field?
Hoffman: Carver Beach, Herman Field.
1 Andrews: Okay, let's move on to, let's delete him from our considerations. I don't think we
22
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
need a headache.
B. SECOND QUARTER PARK AND TRAIL REVENUE REPORT.
Andrews: It's great to see those kinds of numbers.
Hoffman: To be honest—obviously are driving that are Byerly's, the apartments and multi
units you see going up over here. The industrial you see going up over in the ... and a healthy
amount of residential single family as well so it's a combination of factors that has led to this
revenue increase. But again, it's all good news but it's going to go away fast.
'
C. CONSIDER CHANGING 4TH OF JULY CELEBRATION TO A SUMMER
FESTIVAL.
'
Braun: Alright, this is pretty self explanatory, if you read it. We're considering changing our
annual 4th of July celebration to a summer festival and more than likely prior to the 4th of
'
July. We just need to know your comments.
Andrews: Why?
Hoffman: It's a combination of factors. The attendance is flat and the population continues
to increase. We have, first of let me preface my comments by saying we have no problems
'
continuing with the tradition. We just want to explore giving the community the most bang
for it's buck and a lot of people are out of town. They have plenty to do on the 4th of July.
They don't need another activity scheduled on their 4th of July weekend. However, we also
,
recognize that a lot of people consider this their 4th of July weekend and their tradition so if
you move it away, you're going to taking away their tradition. But they also have the
opportunity to join in with the summer festival. So that is the sole reason behind it. There's
'
no hidden motives. It's just a consideration. We spend $25,000.00 on our festival. Should it
be on a weekend when we think we can deliver to most of the residents. The picnic didn't
have any more people than any other year and I'm just anticipating that we should have more
'
people. We had a 3 day weekend this year when people leave town. On a 3 day weekend
next year. The 4th is on Tuesday so many people will take advantage of that 4 day weekend.
They'd like to be in town but they're going to be up north or visiting relatives or doing other
'
things so that's the only consideration.
Lash: I guess what I, my original thought too was why I like it, I like it the way it is.
Although I can see in the last couple years it's been convenient because it's been falling on
Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday. It's always working around the weekend but next year
23 1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
it's going to be Tuesday. The next year it's going to be Wednesday and then how are we
going to do these 3 days worth of things when the 4th is on a Wednesday or something. It's
going to screw everything up big time. So I guess what I would be willing to look at, if it
falls on a weekend, keep it the way you've been doing it. If it falls mid -week, maybe have
it be the weekend before or the weekend after. Just because I think you'd have a higher
attendance rate. I don't even know how you'd do it. I don't know how you did it in the
past when it was in the middle of the week. How did you do it?
Hoffman: Just split it off.
' Lash: Did stuff on the weekend and then just had some stuff the 4th of July.
Hoffman: The tradition has always been that the fireworks have always been on the night of
the 4th, no matter when it hits. Many times the family games were that same day. Just the
thought process related to being a day off and then the weekend activities still went on.
' Lash: So you had like the fishing contest and the dance and all that on the weekend.
Hoffman: Yeah. On the weekend, on a Saturday night or Friday. Just food for thought. We
' think we have a very strong tradition going for 10 years but always changing towards the
most bang for the buck.
Ij
LJ
Andrews: I think we have a long line of people here, if we try to change it, and certainly
have not had a line of people here asking us to change it.
Lash: Well I look at people who have a family, or not a family but have a tradition of doing
something away, still have that tradition. And if we take away the 4th tradition that's been
built here, I mean there are some people who have now made that their tradition. If we take
that away, then they have nothing to do and then they've got to start looking for something.
Berg: I'd like to see us extend our energies towards increasing the numbers of people. Look
at it from that angle instead of changing it. Look at ways to get more people here. What
those are I don't know without doing some thinking about it but.
Lash: I think there's a very healthy turnout considering the fact that it's a holiday weekend
and a lot of people are, or a holiday and a lot of people do leave. I think we have a very
good turnout. I don't know that I would want to see 15,000 people. I mean that's pretty...
Andrews: Well we've got new facilities coming into the city too. We have the new school
property. Maybe as that becomes ready, that becomes part of the festival. Maybe there's a
24
1
t
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 '
soccer tournament or another ball tournament out there for a different age group or whatever
so I think we'll be able to expand what the city offers as we have more facilities to offer. ,
Berg: And I think it was the case with us too. It takes people a while once they move into a
community to get used to the kinds of things that are traditional in the community and if we '
start jockeying the times around, all of a sudden that tradition is gone. Maybe we should just
give these new people some opportunity and time to get into the community. Get settled
down and oh, this is what we do in Chanhassen on the 4th of July. ,
Lash: Well and if you don't know anybody in town, to go to something like that isn't really
very fun. So your first couple years maybe people don't take advantage of something like '
that but as you get to meet more people through different activities, and you hear more about
it...
Manders: Personally I don't have a problem with this idea of trying to establish this summer '
festival idea. I wouldn't mind that. Then I could take advantage of some other 4th of July
activities someplace else. I don't necessarily want to pass on this but then that would open ,
the ballgames up. I can see the pros of doing a summer festival and for people to get
together and mingle, certainly they have that option this other week. It doesn't have to be
that 4th of July week. My views.
Hoffman: The only reason that that came to mind. My neighborhood was virtually empty on
the 4th of July weekend. There was nobody home. And then you have 6 or 7 other '
competing events going on in neighboring communities so, only so many people can show
up. So for that sole reason, I fully support the tradition and all this sorts of things but in 1996 ,
the city will celebrate it's 100th birthday celebration as well so then you'll be forced to
consider if you want to play that on the 4th of July weekend or the park commission will
most likely be charged as the organizing group for that centennial celebration. Whether
you'd like to do it on a separate weekend. '
Andrews: I think it makes more sense to look about building on either side of this rather '
than changing the core program that we now have because tradition is important. I know for
the kids especially, whenever you make changes, kids seem to be really sensitive to those
things and they don't want to see, they don't want to see anything taken away. As the city,
and I guess I was thinking here as you were talking, what are some things we could do to
create more attention. Maybe we have a Tour de Chanhassen the weekend before. You
know a bike trip around the city to every park or park scavenger hunt or something like that.
Just to create some activity the weekend before or the weekend after. If it falls in the middle
of the week. Something like that. We could talk about it more but I guess I'm reluctant to
say let's scrap the 4th of July and look at something else. I think we should leave that alone
25 1
n
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
and build around it. That's my opinion. Are you looking for formal direction here?
Lash: If there's a centennial celebration, I think that's just one more parry we'll have.
D. APPOINTMENT TO DISTRICT 112 COMMUNITY EDUCATION ADVISORY
BOARD.
Braun: Basically... Community Education Board is looking for someone... position and is there
anyone willing to apply for that position?
Andrews: Is there anybody that would like to have the job?
Lash: Didn't Dave say something about it.
Andrews: I notice in your note here that you say that if one of us does not volunteer, that
you're asking us to find somebody. That in itself would be a project I think. There is no one
here that's interested in doing this?
Hoffman: Councilmember Mark Senn sits on the Minnetonka Advisory Board.
Berg: So?
' Hoffman: It's just that it's not unusual that the community education look for other city
officials to come down and get involved because we work so closely together that they would
like representation and direction from local units of government.
Lash: He's on the 112?
Andrews: 276.
Berg: Who was on this before?
Hoffman: There has not been an official Chanhassen representative and they're actually
adding this position.
Lash: What about some of the strong candidates that we've had applying for a commission
member appointment?
Megers: Like Chris Sones?
26
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 i
Andrews: He's in District 276, isn't he?
Berg: No, 112. '
Andrews: He's in 112? He'd be a good one actually. ,
Hoffman: He's in this district and he works in the Hutch district.
Andrews: An interesting perspective. A lot of knowledge. '
P
Berg: And his wife teaches in this district. I
Megers: Okay, I nominate Chris.
Andrews: Well being that we have no volunteer tonight, and I'm certainly not willing to
volunteer Dave Huffman without his being here, as much as we'd like to. I think Chris
Sones would be a good one to contact to see if he might be interested. If that is '
unsuccessful, I would say then we need to put something in the paper that somebody with an
interest in park and rec activities that would be interested in serving, please contact you Todd.
And try to move ahead on this. This is an opportunity for us to have more input in ,
coordinating programs and developing programs and we should try to take advantage of it.
Berg: And if we go through all that and we don't have anybody, let us know so we can talk '
about it again. Maybe somebody will change their mind.
Ruegemer: I have one more real brief Administration Presentation. We're talking teen
dances again here. We're still planning on doing some this winter. We had some, we did
two this year. October 28th and January 13th. The October 28th is going to be for 6th grade
only and then what we're going to do is do the 7th and 8th graders together on the January
13th date. In meeting with the different agencies that are sponsoring the programs, I guess
we're having a little bit of a logistics problem as to how to check people at the door. I know '
you guys wanted to do different age groups. That type of thing. I guess what I'm looking
for is maybe some direction or some comments maybe as to how that might be successful as
far as. '
Andrews: Kids don't have school ID's do they?
Ruegemer: ...and we talked about different things and possibly selling tickets through lunches '
like a couple days before. I know that kids are going to lose them by the time they get there.
We'll maybe do like a registration form that they would turn in that night from a parent or a '
27 1
1
.1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
guardian. I guess that's basically what we're looking for. Is some direction. Possibly g g Y g Y some
' ideas that you may have. How to stop some of those problems, solutions which we really
haven't had in the past. Just as far as age separation, that type of thing. I know it's easy for
the muddle schools. They hold parties right after school to do that but when we're in a
different situation and that.
Lash: What if you have a sign -up or some type of registration.
' Ruegemer: Like a checklist at the door?
Lash: Right. Then you have a checklist and you just come.
Ruegemer: We had talked about that in October and it really isn't a problem but once you
get into December and it gets a little bit colder, we do have quite a bit of a line at the front
door and we're just looking at things as far as speeding up the process when it comes to that
point. We had talked about that ... and we had talked about maybe do a selling tickets during
' the lunches and then creating a list at that point and just cross reference it. Would that speed
up the process? That's what we're trying to look through is some situations or scenarios that
would ultimately separate those two as we try to plan things from the standpoint where we
' would have possibly might not have girls or boys basketball game at home that night where
we would have maybe some of the older kids coming over and trying to crash. We've
always, we're trying to take a look at different things and plan these accordingly so if there's
any suggestions out there, we'd welcome those.
Berg: Is there any way you could have representatives from the two schools, like they used
to run the old elections way back 100 years ago and identify the kids?
Ruegemer: As far as having a teacher?
Berg: Teachers or deans.
' Ruegemer: We had talked about that, you know how possible is that to get a teacher on a
Friday night to come out.
' Berg: Well if you offered to pay them something. They wouldn't do it for free.
' Ruegemer: Well that's one of my problems too. If we have an unlimited budget here, I have
no problem, we can pull this ahead. But we have to look at things financially as well and we
haven't really made a ton of money on these but we haven't gone in the hole.
28
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Manders: So you really think that 7th and 8th graders are going to want to go to a 6th grade
thing? It's like, it seems to me that they wouldn't even want to, but I don't know. '
Andrews: I think that the ticket idea probably would handle about 99% of the problem and it
doesn't matter what you do, if somebody's determined enough, they'll find a way to get ,
around it. I mean you could use parents, permission forms but they could sign those
themselves. Tickets, they could give them to their buddies or take them from their enemies
or whatever but you could just deal with those people on an individual basis and hope that we '
catch most people. I think that's the best way to do it. Maybe have different colors so that
each party so that the kids don't keep them or exchange or try to swap them or whatever.
Y g
Berg: And I'm sure you will have thought of it too but remember the 6th graders are all over
the place now.
Ruegemer: Yeah, we talked about and what we're going to do is going to do a little '
campaign ... I guess going out to the Chanhassen site. Going out to Jonathan and the middle
school '
Andrews: Minnetonka.
Ruegemer: Minnetonka. There was talk about this is maybe an opportunity for all those
students to get together with their peers. That they might be in separate locations but this is
way for them to get together. '
Andrews: A rumble. Turf war.
Hoffman: Have we considered holding these at Minnetonka. Or do they do their own.
Andrews: They do have their own. It's paid for by the school district, not by the park and '
rec department. The school pays for it. Okay, okay.
Ruegemer: Are there any comments regarding—Thank you for your time. '
Berg: Thank you for breaking them up.
Lash: Yes, I appreciate that too.
1995 PARK ACQUISITION AND DEVELO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM (CM WORK SESSION.
29 ,
7
L
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Andrews: Let's move back to item 5 and hit the Capital Improvement Program here. I
noticed that Todd you made a note here that I was going to expedite this, lead us through the
brainstorming. I didn't bring my calculator tonight so I'm not able to keep a running tally of
where we're going here with that so do either you or Jerry have a calculator. Okay, good.
Last year I know we had used the target figure of $150,000.00 as a reasonable CEP dollar
figure and it appears as though that's probably a little conservative. Would you agree?
Hoffman: It depends on how much you want to bank roll for these land acquisitions or do
you want to spend.
Andrews: I think well, we're going to have different opinions on that but why don't we just
go through it and we'll wish list it first and then see where we stand. That's usually what
we've done in the past. Sometimes we've come in with our wish list at a reasonable number
and then we can just go with it. Let's start out with Bandimere, which appears to be just
continue as is. Just as a point of interest. There is a group that's potentially going to
approach the city about joint funding of some grading improvements at Bandimere to make it
suitable for ballfields or soccer fields in particular. At this point it's strictly just a concept or
an idea and we'll see where that leads but it may be an opportunity for the city to get the
park partially improved or completely improved at no cost to the city. And I'll talk to Todd
more about that later but there is a group of people that's thinking about trying to do that.
...you can still cut ballfields out of it. We've been wanting to get it graded for years anyway
and it may give us a way to get it done. I have no idea where this could lead but I think it's
something that let's take a look at. See where it goes.
Hoffman: Another parent talked to me. Had no idea that you were on the same track so it's
being discussed.
Andrews: Chuck Reinstra?
Hoffman: No.
Andrews: Oh okay.
Hoffman: They were looking at some land in St. Bonifacius.
Andrews: Yes, that's the same. I've heard about that one too but that's about 20 miles
outside of town and that's not going to cut it. People aren't going to drive 20 miles for
soccer practice.
Hoffman: ...endowed with some money.
30
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 ''
i
Andrews: Well the league has some money and they have the proven ability to raise some
money in the last couple years. We've collected some large sums of money for programs so ,
I don't know where it could lead. I don't know how much it could cost. But the league is
even talking to Minnetonka School District about helping them improve Minnetonka Middle
School West to put in more fields there so they're exploring any options because to be quite '
honest, the soccer program is at a breaking point as far as fields go. Field space goes. It's a
matter of do they cut the program or look for some communities to cooperate so something
that may come down the line. '
Lash: And I'm assuming Todd if there's anything that's been requested through your office...
Hoffman: It's all hearsay right now. '
Andrews: Bandimere Heights Park. Is anybody aware of any requested improvements for
that park? None. Let's move on. Bluff Creek requires nothing at this point. I'm trying to
refresh my memory. Was there an access road or a parking space discussion in the past years
about this one?
Manders: How does this tie with that rail? That Bluff Creek rail thing or is that just not
even connected.
Hoffman: Not connected but now there's a connection made with that Riley- Purgatory
watershed acquisition. They purchased a chunk of land there.
Lash: And I'm assuming they just did that to just preserve it.
Hoffman: That's what they're indicating.
Andrews: Okay, Carver Beach Park.
Lash: Is the south one or the north one? '
Manders: This is the beach.
Hoffman: This is the linear park. The beach. Both beaches.
Andrews: Condition of the rafts and docks and so forth, anything we have to look at there? '
Hoffman: No. The condition of all the equipment there is in good repair. The play
equipment is new at the south beach location. The buoys ... bench. The benches which will
31 1
I Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
' need to be replaced or repaired at the south location.
' Andrews: Okay we had a request tonight for some potential signage, a couple litter baskets, a
no picking flowers sign which I don't know. You could put up enough of those, you won't
be able to see the flowers. Also this idea Todd, I don't know how you felt about this idea of
removable posts to block people temporarily using the grass and beach area as an unloading
zone. Do you feel that's practical or advisable?
Hoffman: No.
' Lash: Can you explain why?
Hoffman: Removable posts are logistically difficult. They're not, it's not a $500.00 item. It
would be more complicated to engineer and would prove to be both...
Andrews: It may be nice trophies for the kids too.
Hoffman: Placing obstructions anywhere, not just on the shoulder of the roadway but in the
interior of the roadway. In places where liability is an issue. We cannot maintain a city
roadway and then place an obstruction within it. So I would think our engineers and our
public safety people would have some great concerns with that. In short, for the advantages,
which you're hoping to obtain. The ... which you'd be creating in my opinion, would far
outweigh that.
Lash: Do you have any projects over the different options? Something that would do the
' same thing.
Hoffman: To place park bollards and a chain in this park system have not traditionally been
' maintained. I've seen in other park systems where park bollards line every park road in some
of their community parks. Chaska, or excuse me. Shakopee's park there and the oaks just to
the north of town had bollards. And/or boulders. Now boulders could be placed at this
specific location to hinder the ice fisherpeople from driving on and off the lake in that
location. That's been done but as far as eliminating, pulling out parking and short of putting
an obstruction out in the roadway, you're not going to eliminate that. So even if you put
bollards on the roadway line, people can still pull over to it.
Andrews: How about a couple of litter baskets and some sort of signage that this is a
residential, I mean that is a tight area down there and also with water, there's a lot of sound
reflection and is there someway we could at least put one sign in the area to keep it down.
32
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 25, 1994 1"
1
Manders: Some kind of a noise.
Berg: I'm really arguing with myself with that one. I have a real problem with telling kids ,
on a beach that they have to be quiet.
Lash: I do too.
Manders: And 1:00 in the afternoon. I
Berg: And how are you going to enforce it.
Andrews: Well maybe it doesn't have to say be quiet but it might say you know, be sensitive
to the residents or something like that.
Lash: I mean kids will read that sign on the way in and it will be in their head for about a ,
tenth of a second and when they get out on the dock and in the water, it will be gone.
Manders: But all he's asking is for the sign so he can go down there. That's all he's asking
for.
Lash: ... et his house egged and other thin if he's down there too much all over the
g gg every g
kids. You know I mean, it's a beach. It's a public beach. Kids go there. It's noisy. I mean
I just don't, I mean I feel sorry for him, I do but I don't know how we can control people's i
behavior on a public beach. They're not doing anything that's illegal and this is like the no
smoking in the parks. We're going to say no screaming in the park? Pretty soon we're going
to have a sign that says, no fun allowed. I mean I just don't know how we can do it. I do ,
not know how to solve this.
Berg: I don't think a sign would do it anyway. It's just like the speed limit. We all know ,.
what the speed limit is but well, I can only speak for myself. But Jan's right, it's going to go
in one ear and out the other. They're going to be out there playing on the raft, oh I wasn't
supposed to say that. That's not going to happen.
Hoffman: We do have somewhat of a similar sign along the trails at Rice Marsh where it I
says trail abuts private property. Please respect.
Roeser: Yeah, that's really a good, that's a good sign. I
Hoffman: We have a neighborhood park, or neighborhood beach, please respect the adjoining
properties. Something to that nature. I
33
' Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
' Lash: Something like that. That's ood enough. I don't look at it at all as being a cure for
g g g
the problem. I don't.
' Andrews: No. It just gives us a little teeth if we have a problem that just has to et solved.
J g P J g
' And I don't think it's to that point.
Hoffman: In speaking with Loren, before I talked with him he Just was not willing to go and
talk to the youth that were there about their conduct. And I said, I do that all the time and I
do it more often than not. Testing my authority not as a park director but as an. adult figure.
So I'll do that when I'm in the parks and 9 times out of 10 they'll respect the adult figure in
asking them to turn down their music or pick up their glass or pick up that bottle that you
just threw down. So I think you'll find that successful. He still, as you heard tonight, feels
uncomfortable that without some kind of signage backing him up, that he feels uncomfortable
' with that. If we put something to the effect, if you have any wording or if I can come up
with some proposed wording for you, we can do that. Place it in that location. You could
have given direction to the teenagers on the grass and that's ... and he obviously is not want to
' be placed in that position but he's purchased a home which is in that position, thus he has put
himself into that position...
' Berg: He's really looking for more trouble than he knows. I commented to my wife too this
weekend when we were down there. What person in their right mind is going to start going
down and hassling these kids?
Roeser: I think the daycare thing is a little bit of a stretch too. When we start telling what
kind of people can come down there.
Lash: That was why I asked the question, does this park have the sign that all the other parks
have about littering and dogs and parking on the grass or whatever. Because that's basically
the rules that we worked on for a long time to come up with some consistent rules that we
thought needed to be enforced for everybody's benefit in all the parks. And granted different
parks have exceptions but the problem is this person's home is so close.
Andrews: And we can't change that.
Lash: We cannot change that.
Berg: And one of the times, I went down there a lot in the last 3 or 4 days. Half a dozen
times and one of the times, right next to the sign, I don't know why they didn't tie up the
dog right on the sign. They don't look at the sign. And if they do, rules, again I'm only
speaking for myself, are for everybody else. There were numbers of cars that were half over
34
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 11
the line in terms of where they were supposed to be. They were in the handicap spot. Signs
just aren't going to do it
Lash: Well I did read a lot of the residents commenting about how they pick up litter while
they're walking their dog. '
Berg: Where they're not supposed to be.
Lash: Right. And they're all saying, well we police that. I mean we police that. We're '
down there walking our dogs and we pick up the litter.
Andrews: Let's do the litter baskets. Can we do that one?
Lash: Actually I noticed one comment in the last thing that somebody requested and I said,
,
oh that wasn't. It was the other one. Not the mini one. The other one. The south one.
That was where...
Andrews: How much do those little mesh litter baskets kind of like what they have on golf
courses or whatever. You could move them where you need them to be or whatever. Is it a
few hundred bucks a piece or something?
'
Hoffman: If you want just a standard park barrel there, I can get them in.
,
Andrews: About 100.00 a piece or so?
dr $ p
Hoffman: We don't even need to put money in for the park barrel.
'
Andrews: Alright, let's move on.
'
Berg: Oh, I have a question about Carver Beach, the south one. I made a note that, do they
have pea gravel in the play area?
,
Hoffman: Not as of yet, unless. Not when I left last Tuesday.
Berg: Okay, is that budgeted already?
Hoffman: Oh yes. I
Lash: But could we move the benches? You said the benches are in need of repair. Could
we move that to '95 instead of '96? 1
35 1
1
i Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Hoffman: Yep.
Andrews: Let's do that. Okay, Carver Beach Playground.
' Lash: So wait a minute. What kind of a decision are we going to get back to Loren on?
Hoffman: Signage.
' Andrews: Let's do the respect the neighbors.
Roeser: See what you can come up with Todd that would...
Berg: That was a pretty decent one over there by the Rice Marsh. I like that.
' Andrews: Alright. And we're doing park benches and the city will come up with a couple of
baskets for us. Alright, let's move on. Carver Beach playground. Looks like we're in real
good shape there. Any comments that, or any other items we may need?
Hoffman: Oh the fence, I know that Dale Gregory, Park Maintenance Foreman has
recommended that some fencing be looked at. Replacement. There's holes in that fence.
It's been there 20 some years.
' Andrews: How long of a fence is that? That's going to be some big bucks then. Is that a
wood fence or a chain fence?
Hoffman: Chain fence. About a $10,000.00 ticket probably.
' Andrews: Let's put it in and see where we end up here.
Hoffman: I'll come up with a more conservative figure. We'll review...
i Roeser: We're talking '95 now right?
Andrews: Yep. I should be adding this up as I go here and I'm not. Let's move on to mini
park.
Hoffman: ...for that basketball court and we're grading the play area so we'll grade the
basketball court and the play area this year. What will be in that play area is a swing set,
which is ... every day so if you'd like to add, my visualization for that site is not a continuous
play apparatus. Just a slide...'95 or '96.
1 36
Lash: I wouldn't do it. I don't think it's worth investing that much money just to put in a
slide.
Berg: You're not getting much action down there. You're not getting much requests for I
anything on that one, are you?
Lash: We did have a request last year but I would rather invest the money in Rice Marsh I
Lake and make that better than to spend a bunch of money in this.
Andrews: Oh I agree. This is just the wrong spot.
Hoffman: You could argue under the guides of ADA that where we take it. You can put
down a swing and slide in the spring and if that would want to be contested, then you could '
point to Rice Marsh Lake as conforming to our accessibility...
Lash: And could we get by with that? If we could get by with that, that would be my... '
Hoffman: I don't know if you can get by with it but I don't know if you're going to get
pushed on the issue either. '
Andrews: I just don't think that's a great location to develop. I mean it's very isolated.
' in that eve ark had to have ADA access as long
'
Manders: I wasn't under the understanding at ry p g
as there was some acceptable replacement to that. I
37 1
r
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Lash: What's there now?
,
Hoffman:
There will be a basketball court and a swing.
Andrews:
Is a swing ADA okay at this point?
,
Hoffman:
Yep. Well ADA, no. CPSC, yes. Not accessible.
Andrews:
Does that mean we have to bring his u to ADA then to provide access then to
g P P
the swing?
Since we're improving the area.
Hoffman:
That's been our policy to date, yes.
Andrews:
Do we need to add a budget item for that then?
,
Lash: I wouldn't do it. I don't think it's worth investing that much money just to put in a
slide.
Berg: You're not getting much action down there. You're not getting much requests for I
anything on that one, are you?
Lash: We did have a request last year but I would rather invest the money in Rice Marsh I
Lake and make that better than to spend a bunch of money in this.
Andrews: Oh I agree. This is just the wrong spot.
Hoffman: You could argue under the guides of ADA that where we take it. You can put
down a swing and slide in the spring and if that would want to be contested, then you could '
point to Rice Marsh Lake as conforming to our accessibility...
Lash: And could we get by with that? If we could get by with that, that would be my... '
Hoffman: I don't know if you can get by with it but I don't know if you're going to get
pushed on the issue either. '
Andrews: I just don't think that's a great location to develop. I mean it's very isolated.
' in that eve ark had to have ADA access as long
'
Manders: I wasn't under the understanding at ry p g
as there was some acceptable replacement to that. I
37 1
r
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Hoffman: Every location and development needs to have like opportunities.
Manders: At that location.
Hoffman: Well, yeah. Again I was going through this with the neighborhood...
Andrews: I think we're getting on thin ice on this one if we don't do it right, it will bite us.
I don't want to get nailed for a bunch of money. What's the consensus? Do we want to put
the money into this one or not?
Manders: Just don't put anything in there.
Lash: I vote for that.
Andrews: Where we're at right now is we've got pea gravel and a swing and a basketball
court. That's where we're on line right now?
Hoffman: Right now the swing's on turf. When we regrade the park, they're putting a new
pipe through there as part of that street project. They're going to grade the park for us.
They're going to put the basketball pad in and then create a play structure and traditionally
when we grade that pea gravel area, we make it large enough for what we anticipate in the
future so I would ask for some direction. Would there ever be a chance because?
Andrews: Yes.
Hoffman: Okay.
Andrews: Make it big enough to accommodate potential future development. What do we
' need to put in for that then, anything? Do we need to put some money in for the pea gravel
and border for '95 then?
' Hoffman: Yeah, it would be.
' Andrews: Several thousand or?
Hoffman: Yeah. Border wood's the most expensive.
Andrews: What do you think they are, $3,000.00? $4,000.00?
' Hoffman: $3,000.00.
9T
Park and Rec Commission Meeting Jul 26, 1994
g Y
Andrews: $3,000.00, okay. Alright, Chanhassen Hills. Play area expansion is on line for
'95. Based on how our budget's been blown on every play structure we've touched lately, do ,
we need to up that? We've tended to go over budget or have to cut items in order to get
what we want lately.
o ,
Hoffman: Depending on, that may be a typo. That should be in '94...We awarded that.
Andrews: Okay, so we can skip that at the moment.
Berg: That is a beautiful park. Talk about a classic neighborhood park. When those trees get '
developed. It's just beautiful.
Lash: Have there been requests for anything else ?.. I
Andrews: Chanhassen Pond Park. It looks like we're in good shape there. Any comments
about Chanhassen Pond Park? '
Lash: How much repairs...'96. Have we got a liability—for it?
Hoffman: There's liability and then also to advance the condition of the stairway and the ,
trail. It would be our recommendation at some point to continue the asphalt to where it ends
up Laredo. Take the stairway right out and just asphalt that all the way down to the bridge. ,
And then continue to asphalt the other side of the bridge out to the steps which is there right
now. It's used fairly heavily for access to the school and ... at some point in the future replace
the—which is currently there ... We're talking about a series of trail improvements. If you '
recall the ... a little farther north that connects Carver Beach to this area. That's all in a line of
trail systems for people in those neighborhoods to use that. -There are times when you see
heavy use on that particular section of the trail—but the reason the stairs went in in the first '
place was because they were having difficulty maintaining the gravel because of washouts. It
would be the present project, blacktop in front of it. Take the stairs out. Put a contract in for
that and.
Andrews: Any guesstimate on numbers? '
Hoffman: Approximately $10,000.00 for the trail. Pheasant Hills cost $8,000.00 this year so.
Andrews: This is a more difficult area? '
Hoffman: A little more. I
39 1
fl
u
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Lash: ...extend trail or whatever.
Andrews: Let's put that in.
Manders: What was that observation platform? I guess just an item of information.
Hoffman: What was it?
Manders: It was a stand that was built as a Boy Scout project right there at the top of the
stairway. So you could walk up there and look out over the park.
Lash: Right off of Kerber. It was a pretty view from up there.
Hoffman: It came off of Laredo.
Lash: I thought were was one off of Kerber.
Andrews: Move to City Center Park. Just to give commission members a running tally,
we're at $25,000.00 so far.
Lash: Did you put this for in '95?
Andrews: Yeah, I moved the $10,000.00 in to '95. So we're at $25,000.00 so far. The
warming house is not listed here as a potential project.
Hoffman: Or the hockey rinks.
' Andrews: Nor the hockey rinks. Where are we going with that? I mean is that, are we
going to wait until there's some ultimate master city park redevelopment or are we going to
try to do this on a piecemeal basis?
' Hoffman: It's been the thought process to date to let those things, maintain them as on an as
needed basis until such time when City Center Park and the City Hall expansion becomes a
reality and that will be it.
Manders: Is the sealcoating on the tennis courts or what is that sealcoating for this year?
Hoffman: Not necess That money we p ut into sealcoating, the material which y ou see is
�Y Y P g� Y
' the sealcoating has not been done along Kerber but there was an overlay done as part of the
paving management plan for 1994 to receive the overlay. So this money will be shifted to
1 40
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 1
sealcoat on the trail.
Lash: What about the tennis courts. That usually needs maintenance. ,
Hoffman: Yeah, there was talk of maybe maintenance this year or next year... I
Andrews: It always bothers me that here we are talking about our capital improvement
program and the majority of the money is going to maintenance. Curry Farms Park. We
'
have a play area expansion, $5,000.00. Again, I look at that number and it concerns me that
it looks like a very small dollar figure.
'
Lash: That barely gets, unless we already have all the border and the pea rock in there, that's
about all you're going to get.
'
Andrews: That's not going to get much.
Hoffman: Can't even get the access through ADA.
'
Berg: That seems to be an area that gets a lot of use too.
,
Hoffman: A lot of requests.
o eq
Andrews: Again, we're at $25,000.00 so far and we're quite a ways through this already. I
'
think we should hit, if we're going to do these kinds of projects and get in there and do the
work, we ought to do them right.
Lash: Because if we have to put in border and pea rock and everything, I don't think
$15,000.00 would be out of line.
Andrews: I don't either.
,
Lash: By the time you put in the border and the pea rock.
Andrews: $15,000.00's going to be a real ordinary phase I nowadays, unfortunately. I
Hoffman: I can't even handle a Phase I. In talking to the vendors the $20,000.00 to
purchase the border wood, get the ADA mat, all those things. $20,000.00. We used to talk '
10 to 13. Now we're talking 15... Chan Hills, that is a typo. That was a 1994
improvement... wasn't completed so it...
41 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i1
'1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Lash: So you didn't have that...
Andrews: I'm lost here. Where are we now?
Roeser: Chan Hills? How we'd get back there?
Andrews: Chan Hills, okay. The 13 is '94?
Hoffman: Correct.
Andrews: Okay, so we don't need that in our '95. I did not put that in so we're okay.
Greenwood. Do we need to do anything there? I think we're okay there. I was going to
make the comment, do we need new no parking signs but I think we're okay with that.
Herman Field.
Lash: We need to discuss the tennis courts.
Berg: I was going to say, I'm sorry. I'm drifting. Back to Curry Farms for just a second.
They have I_think 5 picnic tables down there. It looked 3 of them were in really rough
shape. I don't know if we want to take a look at perhaps replacing a couple of those.
Lash: Have you been going around to every park?
Berg: Yeah. I decided I better do that.
Lemme: Some of those picnic tables have been moved from other places. When there's a
playground... shift so I don't know where those...
Andrews: Do we need to look at this getting some more tables for our inventory. Yes we
do? What does a picnic table cost? $300.00 - $400.00 a pop?
Hoffman: Three or less.
Andrews: How about 10 of them? Is that enough? 20 of them?
Lash: There goes our whole budget.
Andrews: No, that's not that much. 30 tables, $10,000.00? Do that many?
Hoffman: I don't know that we.
42
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 '
Ruegemer: We need to do a lot more ... we need additional tables there.
Lash: Our playground sites, couldn't we get by with just benches? '
Ruegemer: As far as the craft projects and. '
Andrews: They're nice to have too. I mean I've been to a few of the parks and it's just nice
to have that place to set things down. We'll come back to that one at the end here. We'll '
see what we're tallying up because we may want to hit that pretty big. Herman Field. There
was the comment about the tennis court. Who was that?
Lash: That was me. So is this.
Hoffman: That went in.
Roeser: It's up? '
Lash: How about the basketball hoop? ...so is that basically done except to add the
playground? And that's all they wanted? ,
Hoffman: It's not all they wanted but that's.
Andrews: All they're going to get. '
Hoffman: Those were the high priority list. The playfields and the picnic sites. The I
playfields, the ballfields and the play structure.
Andrews: Lake Ann. '
Lash: I see on the suggestions from the suggestion box, and I was the one who took the
suggestion from the woman and I was just there the night before I came when there was... to '
install bleachers at Lake Ann for the kids fields or some other type of seating. It does get to
be pretty uncomfortable when you're at Field #1 and you're sitting behind the backstop on
that hill. Is there something that we could, is there some kind of, build in something or tier
something or would that be just astronomically expensive?
Hoffman: Anything we did there other than what we have would be a major initiative. Both '
from the standpoint of accessibility and inability of pouring concrete for bleachers.
Andrews: You'd have to rip it all up again too which it seems like every time we get it nice, '
43 1
.' Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
I back in again.
C
Hoffman: It's one of those issues that it's always there. People are always coming at you
about ... how it was created in the first place was an amphitheater type seating on the hillside.
If you were to do a full sized bleacher, you're talking something which is more difficult...
Lash: When you're sitting there for about 2 1/2 hours, it's just not comfortable.
Andrews: Lake Ann, do we have any items there that need to be considered? It looks like
we're in real good shape there. Alright, let's move on. Lake Susan.
Hoffman: Jerry, did you have some comments on Lake Ann?
' Ruegemer: I just thought, I've been receiving comments this summer with our field shortage
situation we have been playing other games, baseball games, softball games, that type of
thing on Fields 4, 5. Whatever fields might be available that night. Jan, have you
' experienced anything with foul balls coming out in sitting behind, like on the hillside type of
thing? I take comments and calls from people who have gotten hit with foul balls. Stray
foul balls.
Lash: Coming from the new fields? Hitting into the old fields?
C�
I
Ruegemer: Anywhere, yes. Up on like fields 4 and 5...
Lash: I've had it happen on Field 1 also and I haven't been bothered at all.
Ruegemer: I was just wondering if you on the commission would like to see any type of
extensions on the backstop that would cover over. That would reduce that scenario possibly.
Lash: Is that the foul balls that are coming? Are they coming over the backstop? See if I
ever have to be aware of any, they're ones coming down the first base line and the third base
line. Not the ones going over, not that many go over the backstop. I don't think.
Hoffman: We've had one extremely concerned person that thought we were horribly
negligent.
Andrews: It does sort of put a finishing touch on the ball facility to have that protection. It
would be nice. You can't watch in all directions. You just can't. When you're on a
ballfield, the balls coming off of your diamond are easy to catch, especially if you're on the
base lines. But one coming over the back, I mean you have no idea it's coming at you.
44
7
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Andrews: How many ballfields are in that complex? 1
Hoffman: Six.
Andrews: I bet you'd be talkin g P a couple thousand a piece, at least. We need to put I
Y
something down just to give us a number to play with. 15? '
Hoffman: 30.
Ruegemer: Another element too would be possibly looking at Field #3, possibly fence '
replacement and possibly posts realignment... severely bowed out from people leaning against
that for fly balls. '
Lash: The back fence then?
Ruegemer: The outfield fence line, right. We had looked at that last year, or two years ago '
and I think at that time it was about $10,000.00 - $12,000.00.
Andrews: That comes out of maintenance doesn't it?
Hoffman: ...speaking of maintaining it, which traditionally has been taking a front end loader '
in the very early spring and popping the frost heave posts back down into the ground, that's
about all the maintenance. We have discussed with the City Council a maintenance budget
and we will be doing that again this year. ,
Andrews: I don't want to put that in there because we'll get hung for a $50,000.00 bill on
that and that should not be coming out of capital improvement. ,
Lash: Are you talking just fence material? The posts are already there...?
Hoffman: No. The poles... '
Andrews: Pull the whole thing out and do it over again and that would be a huge project. I
45 '
I I
1
Hoffman: Other ballfield complexes have considerably more both in terms of fencing
backstops and netting.
I
Andrews: Again, I would need to ask any kind of a dollar figure that would help us there.
I
Hoffman: I can come back with one.
Andrews: How many ballfields are in that complex? 1
Hoffman: Six.
Andrews: I bet you'd be talkin g P a couple thousand a piece, at least. We need to put I
Y
something down just to give us a number to play with. 15? '
Hoffman: 30.
Ruegemer: Another element too would be possibly looking at Field #3, possibly fence '
replacement and possibly posts realignment... severely bowed out from people leaning against
that for fly balls. '
Lash: The back fence then?
Ruegemer: The outfield fence line, right. We had looked at that last year, or two years ago '
and I think at that time it was about $10,000.00 - $12,000.00.
Andrews: That comes out of maintenance doesn't it?
Hoffman: ...speaking of maintaining it, which traditionally has been taking a front end loader '
in the very early spring and popping the frost heave posts back down into the ground, that's
about all the maintenance. We have discussed with the City Council a maintenance budget
and we will be doing that again this year. ,
Andrews: I don't want to put that in there because we'll get hung for a $50,000.00 bill on
that and that should not be coming out of capital improvement. ,
Lash: Are you talking just fence material? The posts are already there...?
Hoffman: No. The poles... '
Andrews: Pull the whole thing out and do it over again and that would be a huge project. I
45 '
I I
0
' Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Very expensive.
' Hoffman: The park and the city... maintenance and replacement budget, just like vehicles and
autos have to be replaced.
Andrews: We know what other cities do and they do it differently. They have a maintenance
budget for those kinds of items and those are not coming out of their capital improvement
fund and that to me is not what the capital improvement fund was intended to do.
Hoffman: I've preached on that for a long time—almost successful last year.
Andrews: Well if we budget it, we'll never get any relief.
' Berg: Right. I think we have to dig our heels in and say here's a need. We weren't able to
fund it out of our CIP. We've got to do something different.
' Hoffman: ...we did this last year...
Lemme: Todd, there's some items possibly even with just additional canoes and that kind of
thing. The money...'93 that are not...
' Hoffman: Yes ... budget it in '95.
Lemme: ...use of canoes is really increasing...
' Hoffman: Tonight was intended as your brainstorming session so as you get through it and
we see where you're at, we'll be plugging in all our suggestions and comments. We have a
' running list.
Andrews: Come back again.
Hoffman: Yep, rather than...
1 Andrews: Should we put in like a $5,000 catch all for some of these. That will take care of
some canoes. Cash register. Couple boat or two. I guess that's, we don't need to be specific
here yet but let's do that then. I'll write that in. We're at $45,000.00 so far so we're still
' very conservative at this point. Lake Susan Park. A track ride in the budget. Oh, that was
for this year. Did that get done? That's done. Okay.
I Lash: We had the ballfield lights last year and they're not there right?
1 46
J
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 11
1
Andrews: That was going to come out of HRA though wasn't it?
Hoffman: The HRA ... they would like to see a commitment from perhaps the Legion or the
Athletic Association to put those in and there is not a major initiative out there—to see these
lights go in. They're not banging our door down.
Lash: At Lake Susan. How about at Lake Ann? I hear them all time for out at Lake Ann.
Hoffman: As an initiative out of our department, they're out of the ark department.
P � Y P P
...commission to go ahead and light more fields, either at Lake Susan or Lake Ann, I think we
need to look at that. As these future needs change, Lake Ann is going to be the site for the
lit complex in the city.
Andrews: Be one of them. And the school property will be another one probably. '
Hoffman: The cost has also increased significantly from ... was put together. Costs for
lighting at Lake Susan are up around $100,000.00 or better. '
Lash: You're saying the HRA is willing to fund it if the CAA and the Lions and other
people will help to fund it? '
Hoffman: They'll consider it, sure. I
Roeser: But it's baseball lighting, isn't it? We're not talking softball lighting here. Much
more expensive. And if there's no demand for it, there's no town baseball team. Actually '
there's only one, the Legion baseball team is what uses it. And they haven't been asking for
it have they?
Ruegemer: There's other groups out there Ron that are certainly using Lake Susan. The '
different associations.
Lash: Babe Ruth plays there.
Ruegemer: Yeah. Minnesota Valley and Chaska District baseball just started a new program I
this year...
Andrews: We need to, we'll discuss this as this money has a sunset to it. If we don't take it ,
by a certain date, it's gone.
Hoffman: HRA? ,
47 1
I Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
' Andrews: Yep. And I also am not sure if they could spend it at Lake Ann, even if they
wanted to. It's outside the district so we're fairly limited.
' Hoffman: My point being is that Lake Susan is a ballfield and has some major potential... but
we do not see any grassroots efforts that you see in the other towns. Victoria is investing
$300,000.00 and the Lions—by the time they get done, they've got half a million dollars into
one ballfield. That's coming from an initiative of local groups. Other small towns you see
' that as well. Chanhassen is a different community... whereas families are busier. The
volunteer efforts in the form of grassroots organizations are ... not available but they look to
the city to provide more of the financing. More of the coordination and the organization. If
' you would like that to be your role, you could simply play that role.
Berg: Have they been asked? Has the CAA been asked if they'd be interested?
' Hoffman: Not formally, no. But informally yes.
Lash: I mean I have heard from quite a few different people in the CAA that they'd like to
see more fields lit. When they say that to me I always say, we don't have the money so I
think that they probably have heard that enough times now where they're figuring well what's
' the point of continuing to ask when they're always being told we don't have the money.
They've offered, in the past they've offered to help do fund raising. They've offered to
install them themselves and they told me that and I brought it up, I was told no. We couldn't
' allow that because of liability things so I think that there's been interest. It's probably mainly
at Lake Ann that I've heard about it but I think at Lake Susan, that's going to happen in a
couple of years because as our population is growing and there's not the population in that
' age bracket yet that they really need to have it at Lake Susan. But in the next I guess 2 or 3
years, that age population, now that it does enough to form these new leagues that are
starting, it's going to be in that age bracket and then there's going to be a demand and
' they're going to need to be playing 2 games a night every night. And that would be the only
field that would be regulation for Babe Ruth.
' Hoffman: It's just a point of economics. $100,000.00 is a heck of an investment and if
you're going to play a couple hours of lit ballgames, 4 nights a week for 3 months, what does
that come out to. So if you don't have unanimous unilateral support for $100,000.00
' investment, then that's something that...
' Andrews: However, the HRA has got money they don't know what to do with.
Lash: Yeah, it's not like it's our budget money. I'd be more hesitant if it was $100,000.00
' off of our budget. But if we can get some other sources to pay for it then eventually we
' 48
D
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 1
won't have to when the need is there. It will be done.
Hoffman: Okay ... HRA budget for '95.
Berg: Well then approach the Legion. Approach CAA. '
Andrews: Which HRA, that's the downtown HRA district?
Hoffman: Correct. I
Berg: And they could decide if they want to spend it someplace else. Let's give them the
opportunity to spend it on lights. '
Roeser: A lighted ballpark would really be nice. A baseball park.
Andrews: I'm just in to help them with their problem.
'
J trying P P
Lash: Well I know that the need will be there in a few years and if we can head it off, for '
once, and not pay for it.
Andrews: That's 100 grand that we save. '
Berg: It will be $150,000.00 when we need it. '
Andrews: And that will be $150,000.00 we can spend on something else.
Manders: The other question I have on Lake Susan is, is trail access on, I don't know what '
side of the lake it is but going up to that development. The trail kind of dead ends. Is there
access? I know there's a kind of foot path type access down to the trail but there isn't really I
no paved access into that development?
Hoffman: There will be. The developer of Lake Susan Hills West is on the itch to do that. I
They're just grading...
Roeser: So they will be connected to Lake Susan by a trail? I
Hoffman: All the way down.
Lash: That was one of my questions I got on the 4th of July from somebody. ,
Roeser: Yeah, that's one you hear a lot of. Maybe we'd like to be. '
49 1
P
0
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Hoffman: Actually the Chan Hills is more difficult. We have the beaver dam and then we
dug it out 3 feet and then we drained the pond and then we had a resident call, where did our
pond go. The beaver had it dammed up to such a point where the trail that was grubbed out
was becoming the new canal for the creek so we had to lower that down to get, complete the
trail to Chanhassen Hills it's becoming more and more complicated.
Andrews: Let's move on.
Hoffman: One thought about either Lake Susan or Lake Ann or any community park if you
will. The city has many nice play structures but we do not have a destination play structure.
Many of the park systems.
Andrews: Like a Chutes and Ladders kind of deal?
Hoffman: Chutes and Ladders. Starring Lake. Those are a highlight of many park systems.
We have 27 parks. We do not have at Lake Susan is one alternative location. The current
system there is very large but it's not something that's dramatic.
Andrews: We're talking huge dollars though for those.
Hoffman: Yeah, big dollars and if you want to look at that. If that's even an interest.
Andrews: That's a potential alternative to lights. You know you put 100 grand into one of
those deals.
Hoffman: So that's something to think about either on this site or Lake Ann, we don't have a
great spot for it or it could be for a future park in the city. As far as that poster, one of them
says economic activities. If you want to generate some economic activity, have a destination
playground in your city and you'll get a lot of economic activities. Field trip after field trip
after field trip after family car load go to these destination playgrounds. And then they picnic
here and they purchase their products and that in that particular city or location.
Roeser: Put it in City Center Park then. Then we could get it downtown.
Lash: ...some kind of distinctive topography to build into and I don't see that in most of the
things that we have. Lake Ann does but that doesn't look to me to lend itself. I know I
mentioned for Power Hill I wanted to try and do something but that's a neighborhood park so
we don't necessarily want to have car load after car load of families...
Hoffman: Yeah, you're right. Starring Lake has that island and that is a big problem.
50
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 1
Lash: Chutes and Ladders.
Andrews: Let's move on to Meadow Green, which has nothing.
Megers: How much money are we at? 1
Andrews: Right now our running total is at $45,000.00.
Berg: Is that bleacher that we have marked there for '93, is that the one that's in already or
is that budgeted for the other ballfield?
Hoffman: Second ballfield.
Berg: Okay, good. '
Lash: And if somebody needs to say that on the 4th of July too. It's so wet at the southern
field that they need to have some bleachers. Is that where this is going? r
Hoffman: Yes.
,
Andrews: Anything more for that one. Let's move on to Minn ewashta Heights. We do
have a play area refurbishment planned at $7,000.00 and again, does that need to be bumped
up to be more accurate as to what we'd anticipate? That seems awful low again.
Hoffman: I don't know that, I'll have to take a look at that. If that's necessary. We've done ,
a lot of things. Being forced to go ahead and do the compliance with CPSC. We've done a
lot of refurbishing out there...
Andrews: I'll leave it in and we'll see where we end up. It would always be nice to have ,
you come back and say, we had $7,000.00 budgeted that we didn't need to spend. North
Lotus. We've got a hockey rink scheduled. I guess is there anything that can be done with, I
don't think there can be anything done more for parking there. The neighborhood is over run
with cars whenever there's an event there, which seems to be frequently now.
Berg: Where's the skating rink going in relationship to the parking lot? I couldn't figure that
out.
Andrews: Just down below it.
Berg: The next tier down.
51 1
0
u
i
'i
iJ
F
�J
I I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Hoffman: But then the hockey rink will replace the skating rink. So you'd be forced to put
the skating down in the ballfields.
Andrews: You could put the skating down, there's another level down from that. There's a
second step down to the east. It's not really being used much right now.
Roeser: Is there a warming house that goes with this too?
Hoffman: This year we'll be putting in a skating rink and electrical service and then we'll
...satellite warming house.
Andrews: I know one thing that before we can put lights up, we'd better have a
neighborhood hearing I mean because I think there will be people that are going to come
screaming.
Lash: I thought it was just like one.
Andrews: One light. Okay, just a skating light in other words.
Roeser: Oh, it's not a lighted hockey rink?
Lash: No.
Andrews: Okay, that's different. That's not a problem then.
Berg: Will there be a light in the parking lot as well? Didn't we talk about that once? And
then running power off of that to the skating rink. Is that what we had talked about?
Lash: Well there was a request for a light in the parking lot down there and we decided to
skip it or something, didn't we?
Hoffman: It has to be two lights. One at the parking lot and one at the skating rink.
Andrews: That would be adequate for skating.
Lash: So you're saying before we move on in '95 to the hockey rink with lights, we'd have
to have a neighborhood?
Andrews: No, I was thinking these flood.
52
I.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 1
Lash: Well if you have a hockey rink with lights ... and that's coming next year.
Andrews: We're not talking a lighted hockey rink. We're talking a hockey rink and also a '
light to provide this minimal amount.
Lash: Well that's this year. A skating rink with a light. Next year it's a hockey rink with
lights.
Hoffman: I was only speaking to what the program is for '94. '
Andrews: Okay. Needs a neighborhood hearing, yeah. Yeah, I would love to see it. We ,
need something somewhere. $25,000.00's not a lot of money. The one advantage to that
particular park is there's really only one house even close and it's sheltered by trees and
shrubbery. It would be possible to light the rink with little overflow directly into houses.
Lash: But we need that meeting before we...
Andrews: Well I guess we have to gut check here and say, do we really want to do this. I
know we've talked about doing it. I think there is a need.
Berg: Well we've already rammed down from I think 4 or 5 potential hockey rinks down to
this one.
Andrews: And there was 1 or 2 and we were going to try it and see.
Berg: It was going to be Meadow Green and Carver Beach. i
Lash: And that was just skating. I
Berg: I thought that was hockey too.
Lash: That was with the warming house. We had about 8 of those spread around and we
trimmed that way back to just 1 up there.
Andrews: So we need to add that $8,000.00 back in or is that now budgeted through? ,
Hoffman: It's still in there.
Andrews: Okay, so we need to look at the $25,000.00 for a hockey rink.
53 1
i Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Lash: What kind of a feel are ou getting from...
Y g g
Hoffman: As far as neighborhood...
' Andrews: We have nothing.
Lash: No, I know we have nothing. But is there.
Hoffman: Absolutely... scenario trying to maintain a pond.
Lash: Well and it's a natural to put it there because if you're already sending a crew out to
maintain a skating rink, they might as well maintain a hockey rink too instead of having them
at two separate locations.
Andrews: Another thing we talked about, if you want to make this into more of a multi -use
rink, would be to consider putting some sort of a surface on it for Rollerblade. There is
definitely, I'm speaking personally here but boy there'd be people that would just go crazy to
have a place they could play roller hockey in the summer.
Manders: That's the strategy we're planning on at the school.
Hoffman: We dropped that because it was an $80,000.00 item.
Roeser: Yeah, I wouldn't consider putting it there. If you're going to put it as a Rollerblade
' rink, it would be better if you put it in a city center park or somewhere. This would be kind
of sticking it into a neighborhood.
Andrews: Too small. The other option was, they will get used by the soccer leagues. By
the little 8 year olds and 6 year old groups. They play those little half hockey rink games. It
will get used.
54
Andrews:
Fox Hollow's doing the same thing.
Hoffman:
Then you get into...
'
Andrews:
It's a lot of money and I'm not a hockey person but I think it's something that, I
think we've got to do it. I think it's an area that.
Hoffman:
It's something we can look at.
Lash: Well and it's a natural to put it there because if you're already sending a crew out to
maintain a skating rink, they might as well maintain a hockey rink too instead of having them
at two separate locations.
Andrews: Another thing we talked about, if you want to make this into more of a multi -use
rink, would be to consider putting some sort of a surface on it for Rollerblade. There is
definitely, I'm speaking personally here but boy there'd be people that would just go crazy to
have a place they could play roller hockey in the summer.
Manders: That's the strategy we're planning on at the school.
Hoffman: We dropped that because it was an $80,000.00 item.
Roeser: Yeah, I wouldn't consider putting it there. If you're going to put it as a Rollerblade
' rink, it would be better if you put it in a city center park or somewhere. This would be kind
of sticking it into a neighborhood.
Andrews: Too small. The other option was, they will get used by the soccer leagues. By
the little 8 year olds and 6 year old groups. They play those little half hockey rink games. It
will get used.
54
t
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 1
Lash: Well for $25,000.00 isn't even...
Hoffman: I need to investigate lighting and material costs for a rink which would most likely ,
we would build ourselves and install and...
Andrews: With the $25,000.00 we're at $77,000.00 so far which is still pretty good.
Pheasant Hill Park. We have nothing on our plan for that.
Lash: Let's scratch the double tennis court right off there. ,
Andrews: Yeah, that's not consistent with our plan. 1
Lash: We don't have to put basketball in would we?
Andrews: Power Hill Park. We have a play area budgeted at $18,000.00. That seems like a '
fairly good number in this case. Do we need to look at upping that at all?
Hoffman: 22 would be better.
Lash: What was the $2,000.00 for? I
Andrews: Prep work?
Hoffman: Prep work.
Lash: And then I know this is slated for beyond '96 but I don't even know if it's realistic to
put a picnic shelter over there. I mean I just can't imagine that anybody would ever invest,
knowing what a picnic shelter costs, that we would ever spend that...
Hoffman: You want to put one in the Huddle o f Lake Ann before y ou do anywhere else.
Lash: So could we just scratch that so people... ,
Manders: One point of curiosity up there with the parking lot that was put in. Was that '
problem ever corrected? It seemed to me that it was not real well done the first time.
Hoffman: Dale Gregory ... superintendent has talked to me. It will be corrected by... Chris
Sones was in this afternoon talking with Gary and he stopped by my office to get an update
on Power Park. They're having their neighborhood picnic.
55 '
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Manders: Is that hill going to be open this winter? That was a hot item I know.
Hoffman: If we can make arrangements with the adjoining property owner for runoff. He
don't know if there's sufficient property or not for a runoff. So we need that. Not that it
would be a problem.
Andrews: Why can't we get this stuff done the right way?
Hoffman: It was acquired 8 years ago as a remnant parcel. It's ... people are really convinced
that this is, if they want to make this a real neat neighborhood park and all it is is two
holding ponds and a remnant piece of land which we're ... it was not designed for a park.
Andrews: Alright. We're trying too hard in other words. Prairie Knoll Park.
Lash: That was one that somebody said something to me. Yeah, at the 4th of July. They
wanted to know when that playground... and I thought we had discussion not too long ago
about just skipping that altogether and leaving it natural.
Hoffman: Yeah, it's just a piece of land out there that, the concept master plan for the trail
from Dove Court to Powers Blvd and a play structure. And on that side of the road you have
a play structure at Lake Susan being the largest one in the city, so whether or not you want to
invest in that or if you want to make it off the master plans. Part of the 1995 cleaning house
will be an update of those park master concepts so we get a chance to take a...
Andrews: Good, then let's do it then. We'll revisit that one.
Hoffman: There's nothing in it for '95.
Andrews: Rice Marsh. Anything we need to add there? Nothing. South Lotus. We've
poured plenty of money into there, in my opinion. That's another HRA project wasn't it.
Lash: Shouldn't it say tennis court?
' Andrews: That was HRA. It's in. It gets a lot of use. Sunset Ridge Park. We have
nothing scheduled there. Right now we're at $99,000.00. Park rules signs. Do we need to
add a little bit there for next year, do we have some inventory or?
Hoffman: Wait for inventory.
I Andrews: Picnic benches. We said we'd get back to that one. $10,000.00 will get us what,
1 56
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 1
about 30.
Hoffman: We were at about 30 at $300.00. $10,000.00, yeah. ,
Andrews: Is that going to make, is that going to help us? Is that going to get us to a good '
spot?
Lash: What is we said $12,000.00 and that includes benches too... I
Andrews: Sound reasonable? Let's do it. Boy Scout project, do we have any takers this
year?
Hoffman: None this year...
Andrews: I'll leave the $500.00 in there just because we don't want to deny somebody. '
Hoffman: ...$10,000.00, it would be very nice. The problem is, at a minimum we're going
to work with 10 to 15...
Lash: How come we don't bring ... tree farm. I
Hoffman: The tree farms out there growing ... take a bunch of trees out and put new ones in.
Andrews: If Mr. Halla develops his property, hadn't he mentioned a willingness to let us
pluck some trees out of there or was he going to move those himself? Or are they too big?
Are they too big?
Ruegemer: They won't be giving any trees away. '
Berg: I got the impression that the city was making him develop that.
Andrews: That's kind of, I was having trouble reading what he was trying to say. I had a ,
couple items that were not listed here that I thought should be discussed. One is that the city,
or the Park Board has offered matching money to District 112 for putting in some playground '
equipment that they've never come and taken from us. District 276 has an interest in doing
some grading to, that they have a football field up at Minnetonka Middle School West. The
track there is, I don't know the word I heard was it's illegal or whatever. They can't even
use it anymore. They want to regrade that parcel so they can put two soccer fields in. Those
fields are used by Chanhassen residents and by a large number of those. I guess I'm
wondering if that's something that we would have any interest in participating in at all. I
57 1
i Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Another issue I had was the Highway 101 trail, which is my pet issue. It's the one I want to
keep pushing because if it doesn't get pushed, it's never going to happen. And last year we
' had put in $15,000.00 to that fund. I guess I would like to see the Board consider kicking in
some sort of money there to show that it's a continued interest. And then we have the new
school and several new parks coming on line that are going to be hitting us for big dollars.
' Lash: Can I, I need to always clarify n m mind how this works. This money is still sitting
�Y Y Y g
here, right?
' Andrews: Yeah, these reserves. Yeah they're sitting there.
Y g
' Lash: So if we wanted to add to it, we could do that.
1 Andrews: Yep...
Lash: Now for the general fund reserve, and the land acquisition west of Lake Minnewashta,
' how much, will those two figures be totally depleted by the time we're done with Stockdale
and the Lake Minnewashta West parcel that we're getting?
Hoffman: Most likely. The land acquisition west of Lake Minnewashta, whether you have
general fund reserve. How far that goes in, depends on what point we are in the year end
expenditures and revenues. But it will be hit.
' Lash: And new school site furnishings, that's just for like the lobby area and that kind of
stuff that we need to do when it's new.
Hoffman: There will be a ton of things going on.
' Lash: Is that going to be an adequate amount?
Hoffman: No.
' Lash: So what's more realistic?
' Hoffman: I don't have an answer for you. It depends on, the City Council will be funding a
variety of things out there for furnishings. What works best ... and benches. There's no play
structure budgeted anywhere for the site for the city portion. The city park portion. So once
you start spreading these things out.
Andrews: I'm not sure that's a good place for a play structure.
58
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 1
Hoffman: It's always thought that the siblings to do while the parents are with the other kids
so it's the same concept as Lake Ann.
,
Lash: City Center too.
,
Andrews: We could certainly, we're at $121,500.00 now. Last year's budget was 150 and
that was very conservative and I don't know, however the people feel. I think we ought to be
a little more aggressive this year in our budgeting but I think with all these different reserves,
,
yeah. We could go through the rest of what we have coming and we should designate some
money.
'
Hoffman: When it involves land acquisition west of Lake Minnewashta what I'll do is,
$225,000.00.
Andrews: But we're hoping the city will be helping us there, aren't we? I mean the Council
will find it's own money to help us there some. Any suggestions how we'd like to allocate
here? I guess I'd suggest that we look at maybe $175,000.00 as a number? Does that sound
'
reasonable? Does anybody have another suggestion?
Manders: What I'd like to know is what number we think we're shooting for and then we
'
can deal with these remaining reserves in terms of splitting them off.
Lash: We can't just pick a pie in the sky figure and say well we had $150 this year. Let's
,
bump it to $175. It has a lot to do with what's coming in and what the City Council's going
to approve.
Andrews: Well we've got 300 coming in already this year. I mean we took in double what
we thought we would take in. The year before we took in less than what we thought we'd
take in. So we had almost a 100% increase in one year. And we're going to be more than
'
100% increase in one year.
Hoffman: It's all basically... two major, Byerly's at $65,000.00 and the apartments behind
,
Byerly's which were a total of over $100,000.00 by the time it's done.
Lash: Well I'm just saying, we don't have a lot of money to spend. We can't look at that
and say we've got lots of money now because we're going to be with, what if we do get
tapped for some of this for Minnewashta. I hate to take it all in one time.
Andrews: That goes in the general fund reserve? The excess that will come in this year goes
all into the.
59 1
i Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Andrews: Where does that show on this fund 410 then? Is that anywhere? Is it a separate
item or?
Hoffman: It's a separate budgeted item.
Andrews: And it has no money in it now or?
I Hoffman: No. It has...
Andrews: I guess that should be shown here because that kind of paints a different picture of
what the future could be. I'm not suggesting we shouldn't put money in there. I think we
should but.
' Hoffman: I can get you the sheet... somewhere.
' Andrews: Well knowing that there's $400+ thousand dollars in that. And it appears as
though we're going to probably contribute somewhere in the neighborhood of another
$150,000.00+ to that fund. Not including costs of the Minnewashta Park acquisition. That's
an unknown at this point still.
Hoffman: It's ... and that's $30,000.00. You're going to write the check within the next 3
months.
' Andrews: I guess my question Todd would be, are we allocating only the dollars that we
receive over the 1995 year or are we allocating the excess collected this year plus what we
receive next year?
Hoffman: You have the discretion to ask the City Council to do whatever you like.
I Andrews: Okay. Boy, you don't make this any easier.
60
Hoffman:
It oes into the ark acquisition and development fund.
g P q P
'
Andrews:
Which is just a general fund?
1
Hoffman:
It's a capital improvement fund.
Lash: But it's our fund.
'
Hoffman:
Absolutely.
Andrews: Where does that show on this fund 410 then? Is that anywhere? Is it a separate
item or?
Hoffman: It's a separate budgeted item.
Andrews: And it has no money in it now or?
I Hoffman: No. It has...
Andrews: I guess that should be shown here because that kind of paints a different picture of
what the future could be. I'm not suggesting we shouldn't put money in there. I think we
should but.
' Hoffman: I can get you the sheet... somewhere.
' Andrews: Well knowing that there's $400+ thousand dollars in that. And it appears as
though we're going to probably contribute somewhere in the neighborhood of another
$150,000.00+ to that fund. Not including costs of the Minnewashta Park acquisition. That's
an unknown at this point still.
Hoffman: It's ... and that's $30,000.00. You're going to write the check within the next 3
months.
' Andrews: I guess my question Todd would be, are we allocating only the dollars that we
receive over the 1995 year or are we allocating the excess collected this year plus what we
receive next year?
Hoffman: You have the discretion to ask the City Council to do whatever you like.
I Andrews: Okay. Boy, you don't make this any easier.
60
it
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 1
7
j
Hoffman: You can say hey, we've collected another extra $200,000.00. We'd like to spend
it all this year. Or you can say we'd like to be conservative and we think there's going to be
'
a lot of other things coming up in the city and we want to be penny pinchers and that's the
line you've taken.
'
Andrews: Well I think that's the best way to do it because if you spend it, you don't have it
when you need it.
'
Hoffman: You've been, made it possible to go ahead and purchase this land west of Lake
Minnewashta. You guys have been conservative since you built the Lake Ann shelter. If you
would have blown that money every year, you'd be begging to get that money for that.
'
Andrews: We're talking about Mr. Halla.
'
Lash: And that's really ow we've been able to do almost anything.
Y '
Hoffman: Build it up and spend it.
Lash: Because we could never get a big ticket item...
'
Andrews: I guess to make things simple, I guess I'd say we're in the $150,000.00+ position
cashflow as of this year. You can take $100,000.00 of that right off the top and say, put it in
the general reserve. You know we don't know what we're going to do with that. I mean
,
anybody could propose alternatives here. We could go on all night saying well why don't we
put it here or there but general fund gives us the ability to designate it anyway we want it. I
'
mean we could designate it all to the general fund and just divvy it up later when we know
what the final numbers are.
,
Lash: Well I don't know that the City Council would. They're going to want to see why
we're asking for x number of dollars.
Andrews: Yeah, you're right. I mean if we don't designate some of it, Minnewashta's a
good example. I mean we could designate another $75,000.00 toward that project without
any problem.
'
Hoffman: Then you could designate $100,000.00 or $50,000.00 for initial levels in 1995.
'
Lash: Right, that's what I'm thinking. I have a list of some things that we need to designate
money for too so we need to think of all these different things that just as we've been talking,
obviously we need to bump the new school site thing. I don't know how much but it's going
61 '
I Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
to be probably at least double that. And then Y our, at Minnetonka, we have demand for
soccer fields and if Chan residents have access to that, if we want to contribute to that, I
' don't have a problem with that. We have the Minnewashta park that's going to be minimum
that we'll want to do out there is grade and seed it right away. That's a chunk of coin. And
then the Halla property and Bandimere development. Maybe we need to start just like we did
with Lake Minnewashta. Just each year designate a park and the same thing with TH 101.
You know bump that each year by however much we possibly can until we finally get it built
up to where it looks like we're serious about it and we can at least get support behind us and
maybe get help from somebody else to help us do it. But it's the only way we're going to
move on.
Andrews: Let's start at the top. Try to see if we can come up with some numbers. Lake
acquisition west of Lake Minnewashta. We know we're $75,000.00 short there. Is it
responsible to assume that the Council will pick up any shortage?
Hoffman: We have a grant application in for LAWCON.
Andrews: That's very speculative, correct?
' Hoffman: Very speculative, yes.
Andrews: Alright. I propose that we allocate $75,000.00 of our surplus towards that project.
' Manders: We're going to need it.
Andrews: Yep, we're going to need it I mean that's a minimum we're going to, we know
we're going to need that.
' Lash: Is Stockdale done? We don't need to worry about that anymore? That's a done deal
as far as money.
' Hoffman: To fund the purchase. It's coming right out of this fund. It's not even on here.
Lash: Okay, so we need to add that on here.
Andrews: How much is Stockdale? Remember him.
' Hoffman: I've got a figure here for you. $150,000.00.
Andrews: Well that's one of those we do some now and some later I think or totally on to
62
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 1
r
that one.
Lash: How much do we have to pay this year up front? ,
Hoffman: We did that about 3 years so it'd be $50,000.00 a year, was at least... proposal. '
Lash: So we can cut it to $50,000.00.
Andrews: They could take 50 now?
Hoffman: Yes. 1
Andrews: That would leave us, now you said we have about $300,000.00 in cashflow this
year to date? Or is that projected?
Hoffman: To date cashflow you have the exact number there. It's 300 and some thousand.
Andrews: So we're oin to even have excess of that.
g g
Hoffman: You're going to total out at $350 to $375,000.00. '
Andrews: Okay. I guess I would say that we have approximately another $50,000.00 of
excess cashflow for '94 that we could still allocate somewhere else before we dip into our ,
projected regular $150,000.00 cashflow projection for next year. So we could pick another 50
to go someplace. We know that the school site's going to demand dollars.
Hoffman: I'm just laying low right now for who's going to purchase. We know tables and
chairs and that type of thing, that the City Council will purchase. As far as recreational or... '
that's all going to add up. So we're going to have to have some money there.
Andrews: Why don't we double it to $30,000.00. ,
Manders: At least.
Andrews: That's $15,000.00 more. That leaves us with $35,000.00 more left.
Lash: Should we add another $5,000.00 to TH 101? '
Andrews: It's a token but yeah, I think we ought to do that. That leaves us with 30. This
speculative, possible proposal to get somebody to grade and possibly help us improve
63 1
1
I
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Bandimere, I don't know if we want to allocate or even consider allocating any money toward
that but that could be a real nice arrangement. If we could find somebody that's willing to
take half that on or most of it on. I don't know if you'd want to consider putting anything in
the budget for that.
Lash: What do we have left?
Andrews: We've got about 30. Out of excess cashflow. We haven't even talked about really
the, we're sitting at $121,500.00 for '95. So we've got about another 30 to allocate for '95.
Lash: I was looking at that $50,000.00 price tag right off the bat for the Stockdale.
Andrews: Yeah, we're going to be hit for that for 3 years in a row.
Lash: And that hasn't come out of that yet.
Andrews: No, no. I've put that in. That's figured in.
Lash: That is figured in? Stockdale.
Andrews: Yeah. So we've still got 31.
Roeser: Put it in Bandimere then.
Hoffman: Yeah Bandimere. If this other thing doesn't come through.
Andrews: We're going to need it someday.
Roeser: Yeah, it's going to happen there.
Hoffman: Something's going to happen there and right now the last figure, hard cost figure
was $800,000.00 to develop Bandimere Park per the concepts which were in the drawings so
that's a million dollars easy. So if you go to a referendum, if you do this open space
referendum and you tag the development Bandimere on there and you say, the city Park
Commission's got $250,000.00. We need $750,000.00 more, that's going to get you a lot
farther than saying, we just haven't planned for it. We've owned it for 5 years ... so if you
start chunking away some money, it's going to look better.
Andrews: That leaves us with about $30,000.00 more in our typical year planning. We've
been kind of staying at the 150 level for the last several years. $30,000.00 more roughly.
n
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 1
Lash: How about the Minnewashta property out there. Is that going to be coming soon
enough that we would want to have that graded and seeded.
Hoffman: Not this year. Graded and seeded next year which would be '95.
Lash: That's what I mean.
Hoffman: ...'95 item. 1
Lash: So how much would we need?
Hoffman: It depends on how fast you want to push it in.
Lash: Face it you know, we can't drag our feet on that one. I mean that's been so long in '
coming and they're so short out there that once we get that property, we need to try and at
least move forward a little bit each year on it.
Hoffman: The last similar contract for a parking lot grading and seeding was at Herman
Field. That was $50,000.00.
Andrews: Let's kick 25 into that one. Does that make sense? That leaves us with about '
$5,000.00 of slush and.
Lash: What if, for this Minnetonka West Jr. Hi '
Las h. o g
Andrews: I think we can stay out of that one, to be honest. I think between the District and '
the soccer clubs or whatever, I think they'll find a way to get that one done, if it's really
meant to be. To be honest, I think if I were going to try to push something that made sense '
for the city of Chanhassen, I'd be trying to convince them to put money into a joint project at
Bandimere. Because if you could get some, if you're going to get the equipment up there to
start the level, you might as well keep going as far as you can. ,
Lash: But $5,000.00, that's pretty lame.
Andrews: Yeah I know but it's, if you've already got equipment up there, $5,000.00 more
could make a big difference you know as far as the number of soccer fields you could get. It
could be 1 or 2 more just to have that one more day or two more days worth of grading done. I
I guess I'd just propose that we tuck the balance away into a general reserve.
Hoffman: What did we just put in Minnewashta development? I
65 '
i
I
0
n
L
J
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
Lash: $25,000.00.
Andrews: Actually I'd like to see that $5,000.00 go to Highway 101. I guess I think that's a
pretty minor commitment to say that we're going to go from 15 to 20 but.
Hoffman: Maybe that's something where having that in the budget is a good issue. The trail
is not going to wag the dog out there. The road is going to have to happen in order to put
the trail bed down so our best avenue is to continue to lobby the county and...
Andrews: I was at a meeting with some county officials and it's the same old story. You
know everybody says talk to the guy over here. Although the State is coordinating meetings.
They're talking about planning so maybe something's finally going to move on it. I know
several of the people that are in charge of the projects are nearing retirement so maybe
they're hoping to go out with some sort of an accomplishment. I don't know.
Lash: What about Stockdale? Is Lundgren grading that for us?
Hoffman: No.
Lash: So ... over there, we need to bump some...
Andrews: We put 50 in. That's just to buy it though.
Lash: But we only have $5,000.00 left. It's not like $5,000.00 is going to.
Andrews: Throw it into the reserve and we'll find something.
Lash: That or we should bump it back into the school thing.
Hoffman: We're talking about $5,000.00 now.
Andrews: Just put it in the reserve. We'll spend it someplace.
Hoffman: We'll rehash this and put together—establish tonight and see if there's anything left
after that...
Andrews: Thanks everybody for helping to get through that quickly.
M
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 1
1
COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS:
Andrews: Are there any Commission Member presentations at this time? '
Berg: I've got one. The old Red -E -Mix site. The old cement site. Is anybody else I
concerned about the fact that it's turning into a car junk yard?
Andrews: Yeah I am. I
Berg: I mean we're talking about what people's impressions are when they drive into this
city. Why are all those junkers out there? '
Hoffman: Close to the Hanus building?
Berg: Yeah. Well, quite a ways from it actually. ,
Hoffman: Yeah, out there on Highway 5 right now. Down farther. It's part of the
arrangement for the construction or reconstruction of that whole district. The HRA made a
deal where they could store those on an interim basis while the... construction. The same
question's been asked at the City Council. '
Berg: Because their numbers are multiplying it seems. '
Hoffman: I'll ask one of the Council members. Last night the City Council reviewed some
sketch plans on what that would look like. It seems that they're warming up to the idea of '
having that as an open space. Walking trail, park like setting. The budget is about
$160,000.00... landscape and walkways and greenery. That type of thing. So the thought
process of whether or not that should be some sort of commercial is pretty much gone by the '
wayside. You'll see it be an extension of that trail overpass as it comes down through there.
Roeser: How about the trail? Is that going to be completed? The one going to Eden Prairie I
and the one going toward Chaska.
Hoffman: I had two points of interest. That has been put on hold by the engineering. Water
Resources department. They would now like to complete a detention pond in the far eastern
reaches of the city of Chanhassen. As they did that street plan, they said we're going to do
the pond and then they said, no. We're not going go do the pond so that pond is out of the ,
program. Now they're saying that we would like the pond so the engineering department is
now going through the DNR permitting process to get permission to dig that pond this winter.
...backing down with a huge backhoe down that trail alignment this winter so if we... '
67 1
r
I Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
' Roeser: What about the one towards Chaska? The Hennepin County park one?
' Lash: Yeah, that was my question too. Did that go to Council?
Hoffman: ...and they've cut the new alignment to go around the Deafenbaugh and they will
' be putting some gravel down on that so it will be a gravel trail but it won't be blacktopped
until next year. The bad news there. As far as the other trail that Chaska ... their City Council
and our City Council budgeting. We drafted a permit agreement with the Hennepin County
' Regional Rail Authority and the City Council approved that last night. It was carried over to
the county's meeting this morning. As far as I know, they approved that and we have a
' formal agreement with the contractor to come in and perform the work prior to September 1.
Roeser: When?
' Hoffman: Prior to September 1. It would be ... you can't get people off of 212 so we're
putting it in there and we're effectively barricading it to upgrade it.
' Roeser: That's fine. What I was worried about was those guys stopping us somewhere along
the line.
' Lash: What about our lack of vote or whatever you want to call it from the last meeting?
Hoffman: On the snowmobile?
Lash: Yes.
' Hoffman: 3 to 3.
' Lash: Has that gone on?
Hoffman: The City of Eden Prairie has positioned themselves that they will not move until
' we move. So they're not going to say yes or no to the snowmobiles to make our job any
easier.
Lash: But if we move, it may make an impact on what they decide.
Hoffman: From what I hear City Council's going to send it right back down to me.
Lash: But they haven't made that decision yet.
' 68
C
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994 1
1
Hoffman: No. That will be on an agenda, City Council agenda for August 22nd so
everybody will make the big preparations and they may just say, 3 to 3 on the Park I
Commission.
Roeser: Oh, they don't know about that yet? I
Hoffman: Well not officially. The Mayor knows about it and he said that from a personal
level... '
Andrews: That's fine. I mean we did what we could do.
Lash: Well we need to have a full commission. '
Andrews: Any other? '
Lash: I heard, and I don't remember where I heard this but I heard it went to Chaska and '
that they said that they would approve it so.
Hoffman: Well it's going to the City Council on the 8th of August. Their Park Commission I
said...
Andrews: I just had one issue that looking at the revenue reports for Lake Ann and the '
number of comments from people who have used the park about the parking pen I just
want to comment that my position is shifting and I'm looking forward to discussing that later
this year because I think again, I think Jan you're kind of shifting too with me. '
Lash: Yeah, but I'm still waffling I guess. I could live with a compromise.
Andrews: I guess one of the concepts I had is when any mailing goes out to the Chanhassen '
residents like the sewer bills or whatever. Whatever every citizen gets, is to send them all a
sticker and say every citizen gets in free. '
Lash: Dave and I kind of kicked that around on the 4th of July...won't get into this but we
were wondering if maybe a solution would be that if you're a resident you get a permit. If '
you're not a resident, you pay a non - resident fee for a permit or you pay a daily parking fee.
But does that then even pay to have someone be sitting in the booth checking and that kind
of stuff unless the non - resident fee is adjusted. '
Andrews: But I think we'd probably have somebody in the booth there anyway. At Lake
Ann at least to watch that park. '
69 '
L-1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
' Lash: See I look at the revenues an I ink well it's something you know. But et I don't
d think t g y y ,
' and the other thing is we've eliminated kids ... have a permit. Maybe we need to say if
somebody's rented the shelter and they've already kicked out money for the shelter, if they're
coming in for that, then they're eliminated but you know pretty soon you start elirmnatmg
' enough different groups that it doesn't warrant even continuing at all so.
Andrews: We'll talk about it more but I just, reading those comments just kind of, I'm kind
of shifting from the get all the revenue you can to we've got a nice facility. The people of
Chanhassen deserve to use it and I don't think, I personally don't think the citizens should
have to pay to get in anymore.
' Manders: Typically we're making up the different for non - resident usage by the fees we're
charging for them to use it.
Hoffman: Philosophically something to bounce around. You can go out and use the city's
lakes, park system. This discussion has gone on for years and years and years. The City of
' Minneapolis pays to maintain that thing yet the entire 7 county metropolitan area enjoys it.
So here we're talking in a microcosm of what they're experiencing and they don't think they
can any longer justify the amount of dollars they've put into the city's lake trails system for
' all of us to go to enjoy. If we want to ... non- residents, the City of Minneapolis may...
Lash: Yeah but there are a lot of places that you do have to pay. To get into Hyland, you
' have to pay and that's just basically... fee or whatever.
Hoffman: City parks, except with the exclusion of beaches, it's all regional where you have
' to pay.
' Lash: So what's the...
Andrews: Any other presentations?
' Hoffman: Issues on the trail and that we have some lobbying for. The City Council, they'll
eventually make the decision. The stretch of trail just west of Byerly's along Powers. So
' you go from the new extension of West 78th. Right down the west side of our front street
here and you go up to Saddlebrook, that's where a road should not have been built. It's
bermed up so if we convince them that we needed to put the trail alongside there so they
' extended their fill section to do that and now they're fearful that that is ... so they're effectively
surcharging the old material which was underneath there and it's going to ... putting in a
$60,000.00 retaining wall and $20,000.00 pipe rail, there's about a $10,000.00 bill to do some
tests where it's a 90 day test where they put some pipes down to test how much that is
1 70
C
Lash moved, Berg seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion I
carried. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman '
Park and Recreation Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim I
r
L
71 1
L
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 26, 1994
moving. And so it was decided today at a staff meeting to go ahead and do that because
that's... That trail was to be done absolutely June 15th of this year. And now it will not be
'
done by June 15th of next year. The costs are mounting up to you know $150,000.00-
$170,000.00. Now to do that section of trail down through that area so that's a big buck item
but it's a major thoroughfare. You've got Powers Blvd coming down here into your
downtown.
Lash: And who's having to pay that?
,
Hoffman: That's their project there. The Powers extension and West 78th Street extension.
Powers extension coming up onto Highway 5. So that's a project cost of the roadway but it
'
will become an issue before the City Council if you would like to expend those kinds of
dollars. I said absolutely. You did it to make the road. It involves excavating back down
and putting in a geotextile grid material every ... would even be necessary. So they put this
,
grid material down and they compact it underneath and then need to fill upon that ... It's all
expensive construction but if you put in a road in the middle of swamp, you have to...
There's always pressure. You know this road project, the road. Well absolutely, you have to
build the road. But trails are still put off to the side without... justify $150,000.00 for a 2
block, 3 block, 4 block stretch of trail.
'
Andrews: Well keep us posted on what the whispering in the hallway is on that. Any other
presentations? Any highlights? Or we need to approve the Minutes.
'
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Roeser moved, Megers seconded to approve the Minutes of
the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated June 28, 1994 as presented. All voted in
'
favor and the motion carried.
Lash moved, Berg seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion I
carried. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman '
Park and Recreation Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim I
r
L
71 1
L