Loading...
1l. Minutes 1 I. L. CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL I REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 1993 I 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 Senn, Councilman Mason and I Councilwoman Dockendorf I COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Wing STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Todd Gerhardt, Charles Folch, Scott Harr, Todd Hoffman, and Paul Krauss I APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the agenda with the following additions under Council Presentations: Councilman Mason 1 wanted to discuss the speeding problem on Lake Lucy Road. All voted in favor and the motion carried. I PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: ACCEPT DONATION FROM THE CHANHASSEN LIONS CLUB. I Mayor Chmiel: I would like to, if I could, have Jim Sloss and Ed Ginsbach come forward here so I can give you a recognition award. The City is accepting the donation that you're making to us and this has been for basically the purchase of new mobile radar unit for our new vehicle. And we I certainly appreciate that because of all the dollars we can have and get to provide some of the services we'd like to have are really far beyond your point as far as a contribution. But it's one way that we don't have to go back and look for this in our budgets and budgets are tough, as you all know, I whether in business or not. And you buy that business something that is really very worthwhile for us to have and provide this kind of additional service for the community. Especially this as Councilman Mason just indicated about some speeding situations. And I'd like to read this plaque, if it doesn't fall I apart before I get done. But from the City of Chanhassen, Department of Public Safety, this is a Recognition Award. The City of Chanhassen hereby recognizes Chanhassen Lion's Club for an outstanding contribution made to Public Safety by our community. And with that I'd like to present I this plaque to you and have you take this back to your members and thank them from the City. Thank you very much. II Jim Sloss: Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Are there any other public announcements? 1 CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Senn: I'd like to pull items c, d, f, g, h and i. I 1 1 1 Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone at this time that are concerned with any of those particular items that were just pulled ?... i Councilman Mason: I believe some people are here for 2(1). Resident: We're only here, not for any objections. Councilman Mason: Right. But you're here for the outcome for that, yeah. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Alright, we will discuss item (h) and I would like to move the balance of the agenda, Consent Agenda to prior to Administrative Presentations of item 11. With that I would then like approval for Consent Agenda items 2(a), 2(b), and (j). Councilman Mason: So moved. 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Second. Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Resolution #93 -91: Receive Feasibility Study for Road Improvements to Tanadoona Drive; Call for Public Hearing, Project 93 -27. b. Approve Special Assessment Agreement with Rottlund Homes for Windmill Run, Project 92 -5. 1 j. City Council Minutes dated September 13, 1993 Planning Commission Minutes dated September 1, 1993 Public Safety Commission Minutes dated September 9, 1993 • All voted in favor and the motion carried. H. MINNEWASHTA MANOR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION RECREATIONAL BEACHLOT INTERIM USE PERMIT, CLARIFICATION OF CONDITION. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Was Kate able to discuss this at all Paul? Paul Krauss: No Mr. Mayor. She's not here tonight. Basically as Kate related to me, this is really a 1 result of an error that staff made in recording through the recommendations of the Planning Commission. The City Council was not aware of the omission. The intent of the Planning Commission, staff had no desire to...omission. The intent of the Planning Commission was that there was the 20 foot dock extension be reduced to 10 feet. Not that it be eliminated. It was recorded as eliminated. The City Council approved it that way and when we caught it, we wanted to correct that omission. Mayor Chmiel: And that is going to be then a 10 foot L extension of dock that's going to be approved? 1 r 2 1 1 I. City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 I Paul Krauss: Yes. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there anything else that you had Mark on your item (h)? I Councilman Senn: This dock is still 40 feet in length then? And it's just adding the 10 foot L in the other direction? Paul Krauss: Yeah. That's my understanding. Councilman Mason: It's not a 40 foot dock, it's a 20 foot dock isn't it? Or it is a 40 foot dock? Okay. Councilman Senn: I was unclear on that. It is 40 foot out? Stew Peterson: Can I speak to that? 1 Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Would you like to come forward and just state your name and your address please? Stew Peterson: Stew Peterson, 2810 Tanagers Lane. The present dock is 40 feet out with a 20 foot L and at the Planning Commission meeting, the L was reduced to 10 feet. So it'd be 40 feet out and a I 10 foot L. And it was not approved that way that the L was to be eliminated the way it came out in the recommend. We just want a 40 feet with a 10 foot L. Councilman Senn: Okay, and the L is just like a standard what, 4 foot wide section of dock? I Stew Peterson: I believe it's 5 feet wide. Councilman Senn: 5 feet wide and going out 10 feet? Okay. And Paul, did we already approve for that 40 foot dock, 5 boats for these 32 houses? Paul Krauss: I understand that, yes... Councilman Senn: 5 boats approved, 40 foot dock, 32 houses. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Okay. With that clarification, is there a motion to accept the item number h? Councilman Senn: So moved. Councilman Mason: Second. 1 Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Minnewashta Manor Homeowners Association Recreational Beachlot Interim Use Permit clarification of condition as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried. 3 1 1 r1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 Mayor Chmiel: There's also an item here that I believe Mr. Whitehill is here on. Item 2(g). Is there anything that you'd like to address on this one Cliff? Cliff Whitehill: Mr. Mayor. I came here for an entirely different reason. I received no notice whatsoever. Purely by accident I saw this... Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Cliff Whitehill: No notice whatsoever. Anyone in Colonial Grove. Mayor Chmiel: You hadn't received anything at all? Cliff Whitehill: Nothing. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. My suggestion would be then we pull item 2(g) and move that to a meeting within 2 weeks. Okay. Can I have a motion to move this from today and move it to October the 11th meeting. Councilman Mason: So moved. 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Second. Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to table approval of the Findings of Facts for Colonial Grove Homeowners Association Recreation Beachlot Use Permit until the October 11, 1993 City Council meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ' Mayor Chmiel: We'll move right along now with the balance of the agenda. We have Visitor Presentations. I'm looking for. Councilman Senn: Don before you do, just a question. In this packet there's a 1(k) but nowhere on the agenda is there a 1(k). Is that a separate item we're going to address or what? Councilwoman Dockendorf: You're absolutely right. I saw that too. Councilman Mason: Contract approval of Senior Linkage Line. Paul Krauss: That was to be on a Consent Agenda. I'm not sure where the number came from. Councilman Senn: Well it wasn't listed on the Consent Agenda but there's an informational packet. Paul Krauss: Yeah. The last item was (j) so it must have been (k) didn't... 1 Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that was for the Senior Linkage and somehow that was left off. 1 4 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 ty g P Councilwoman Dockendorf: Can we put it on? Don Ashworth: I believe that was the intent. 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Without having it part of notification? Published. Mayor Chmiel: Well this is where we're going to be providing local promotion of a program through city newsletter, local papers, flyers, etc. Computer install the information on which is part of the Senior Center. Telephone equipment is also part of the Senior Center. Staff volunteer time. City committed to staffing the phones from 9:00 to 12:00 noon on Monday thru Friday by using volunteers through the Senior Center and office space which is available for the senior center. And there's another commitment by the Council as well for that. 1 Councilman Senn: The main thing I was just wondering, I guess I saw the item in here. There wasn't anything in the newspaper about it. There's nothing in here really saying whether our Senior 1 Commission has seen it, endorsed it. Thinks it's the best thing or not the best thing. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a time? 1 Don Ashworth: We've been operating it as a pilot program. Delaying it for 2. I was going to say, if the Council considers that an item, in all likelihood will not generate public participation. You could waive your rules and pass it. If there's a question as to whether or not the Commission has approved it, we can easily table the item for 2 weeks. Paul Krauss: I can speak to that. Yeah, the Senior Commission was very actively involved with this. 1 This was kind of a ground breaking agreement we had with Carver County where we actually cooperated with a Division of Senior Services together. And in fact the County signed off on this. The Senior Commission's well aware of it and was very supportive of it. I don't know that it's terribly pressing. I mean there's no public hearing specifically that's necessary. We have been operating on a defacto...agreement but if you wanted to wait a couple of weeks, it probably doesn't hurt anything either. Mayor Chmiel: I don't see any real problem with laying this over for 2 weeks. Unless there's some other concerns by Council. Okay. Councilman Senn: I guess I would really like to see something from the Senior Commission as part of the staff report if we could. Mayor Chmiel: Move to October the 11th agenda with some indication by the Senior Commission as acceptance of what is being proposed. Okay. 1 5 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT ANNUAL REPORT, DIANE HARBERTS. Mayor Chmiel: She is not here. Do you have anything on that Paul? Paul Krauss: No. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Was she going to be here, do you know? Paul Krauss: That was my understanding. I'm not sure if anything's come up. Councilman Mason: Maybe we should have our member from Southwest Metro stand up and give us the presentation. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I can speak to some of it but I'm sure that Diane wants to. Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor. Karen and I discussed this item and I asked her to give Diane a choice. We're going to hopefully we'll be having a work session coming up and I thought this kind of an item might be better in that type of a setting but it was going to be back to Diane which she thought would be better. And the other part was just the length of our agendas here. That maybe if we could take a little extra pressure off of them. So maybe she chose the work session, I don't know. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Maybe what we'll do is we'll just pass over this one and if she does show up, we can go back to that particular item. And if it is not, hopefully she will be at our work session on October 4th to present that. We'll move right along to public hearings. ' Cliff Whitehill: Mr. Mayor. Mayor Chmiel: Yes Cliff. I'm sorry. Are there any other Visitor Presentations? Clifford Whitehill: Thank you sir. Mr. Mayor, my name is Clifford Whitehill. I reside at 7001 Dakota Avenue in the Colonial Grove Addition. In my last letter to the Council I pointed out that I was unable to respond fully to the action that was intended because I hadn't received Minutes of the last meeting and no one was here from the Colonial Grove to record what took place at that meeting. Lack of notice seems to be more of a habit than it is an exception. Again tonight no one knew of the Consent item on the agenda. I have a question. Have the Minutes of August 23, 1993 been approved? Mayor Chmiel: I would say yes they were. Councilwoman Dockendorf: At the last meeting. 1 6 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Clifford Whitehill: Thank you. As I told you, I was unable to do anything to respond to because I had no copy of the Minutes. I did receive on September 20th the following letter. Dear Mr. Whitehill. As per your letter of September 8th, enclosed please fmd a copy of the August 23, 1993 City Council Minutes. I got them on September 21. I'm supposed to respond to them. Well I did have them. There was a presentation by a Mr. Court MacFarlane. I'd like to read a little bit from those. A couple of other concerns I have of what occurred 2 weeks ago has to do with the documentation provided by Mr. Whitehill. One is the reference to 9 boats being permitted at the dock. Does anyone know that Colonial Grove requested 9 boats? But these were accepted. They've been approved. They were the basis for action by the Council. This gentleman, of who you took at face value in his word, perhaps you should review his own statement. "Because over the years we added boats when no one was watching." Talk about credibility. When no one was watching out for how many boats were down there. Down in his area. Call it what you like. I know the name for it. You know the name for it. That was accepted. ...I think the affidavits that are identical to one another and prepared by someone else to be somewhat suspicious. No reference to the letter that was presented by the other association signed by 23 people. Identical to one another. That must be terribly suspicious... One last. Councilman Wing. Now these Minutes have been approved mind you. They've been publicized. They've been televised. Well I guess I'm going to, I consider this a dead issue until tonight but after the meeting I received a phone call from a Colonial Grove resident who stated that he had signed an affidavit improperly, under duress and it wasn't accurate. Do you know that getting someone to sign an affidavit under duress for a public purpose is a crime in the State of Minnesota. Everyone knows who got these affidavits. Now if it's not true, it constitutes liable and slander. One question. Who. Who is the resident of Colonial Grove who said that the affidavit was secured under duress? Does anyone know? Mr. Mayor? Do you know? Mayor Chmiel: No. I wasn't looking for any names at that time. Clifford Whitehill: You approved the Minutes. Councilman? Councilwoman? Do you know? Councilwoman Dockendorf: No. Clifford Whitehill: You approved the Minutes. 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Right I approved the Minutes but I don't see what that has to do. We listen to what people have to say. Clifford Whitehill: It says the affidavits were secured under duress. Do you know what that means? Do you know the meaning of the word duress? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes. Clifford Whitehill: Or would you like to get Webster? Councilman Mason? Roger Knutson: Mayor. 1 7 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Clifford Whitehill: Do you know who it is? Roger Knutson: As a point of procedure. ' Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Roger Knutson: Under our procedures, all questions are to be addressed to yourself. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Clifford Whitehill: Councilman Mason, do you know who... Councilman Mason: I believe procedure dictates what you're doing is improper right now Mr. Whitehill. Clifford Whitehill: Councilman Senn, do you know? Councilman Senn: Who the person is? Clifford Whitehill: Yes. Councilman Senn: As I said in the hearing, I doubted there was a person and I wasn't going to. I Clifford Whitehill: I don't...person also. And yet these were accepted. It's not true. I've been liabled and I have been slandered by this Council. This Council's going to answer in Court and there the answers will actually be taken under oath. If it is true that the affidavits were secured by duress, by me, I'm subject to criminal procedures and that's where we're going to go. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Cliff. Roger Knutson: Just a comment about the Minutes, so we're clear on what happens when you approve the Minutes. All you're saying is that's what happened at the meeting. Anyone can stand up in front of you and say anything if they wanted. Your Minutes reflect what happened. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Roger. The next item on our agenda is the public hearing. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Excuse me Mr. Mayor. Diane is here. Mayor Chmiel: Oh! I didn't see you come in. We dam near passed over you. Diane Harberts: Thank you. Sony I'm late but by the skin of my teeth I'm here. It certainly is my pleasure to be here tonight. For the new members on the Council, each year I make a presentation 1 before each of the three member City Councils just to give you a brief update of our activities for the past year. Included in your packet you will find basically a summary sheet as well as some graphs 1 8 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 I 1 that depict the ridership. Also there's a pamphlet. For the first time Southwest Metro has established a mission statement as well as goals and objectives that we strive for and the purpose of sharing that with you is to gather your input and also so you have the opportunity to share it with other residents, other community...leaders. We welcome all input. Let me just briefly draw your attention to the summary comments. It outlines the background. In '85, under a joint powers agreement between the cities of Eden Prairie, Chaska and Chanhassen, Southwest Metro Transit Commission was established regarding the public transit authority who managed to serve these facilities for transit services in these three communities. I've outlined the members of the commission as well as the staff. As I've outlined in the highlights, you can see that we've had a tremendous growth. July of '93 we've had an increase of service, 36% from a year ago. We project for 1993 an overall ridership increase of 30% to 33% for the year over 1992 and we have those same projections for 1994. The reasons for some of those dramatic increases in ridership really has to do with I think two factors. One, we're very customer service oriented. People talk to us. We listen and we try to be flexible in terms of planning and routing our service. I think you probably will agree with me that we certainly play a much bigger role in the community providing service to the seniors that...visited the Shoreview Community Center 1 and they visited different senior centers. Different things like that. We have scheduled in October a little road trip for the Planning Commission to look at some potential land that is being proposed for development. As other community public service agencies, St. Hubert's. We provide a tremendous amount of service for the kids in this area over to Chaska Community Center, especially in the summer. Some of our new services that...are really getting almost National attention at this point is our reverse commute service. With the opening of Target, we worked closely with some of the ' management staff to help them in a sense gain access to a pool of qualified employees. United Mailing. We're working with Jerome Carlson. He's committed significant dollar amounts to really explore the idea of reverse commute as well as taking advantage of the federal bus subsidy that's available. Just the other day I received a call from someone that lives over on Chicago Avenue in Minneapolis. Had an interview on September 30th at United Mailings for the second shift. We can provide bus service basically to cover all, first, second and third shifts. Next week I participate on a 111 panel and there...National Transit Conference highlighting our reverse commute service so as I said, we certainly are I guess as someone once coined, the pioneers of suburban transit and it's really exciting to be part of that as well as working with some of the professional staff. I'd like to just make note that with Don and his staff here at Chanhassen, it certainly is fun and exciting to work with them closely on projects. Some of the new things you can watch for is circulator service between Chaska and Eden Prairie. A lot of demand, especially for seniors and kids out of this area. Express service. Park and Ride improvements. We'll be working with city staff to identify an expanded park and ride lot for development at some time in the near future and our reverse commute service certainly continues to increase. The utilization especially out to the industrial park in this area. Also that in nearby Chaska. I'm just here tonight to let you know everything is A -okay. It certainly is exciting. The only thing that we do ask is that, one really crucial point and we'll talk a little bit more about that when we come up with item number 6. But as development occurs in Chanhassen we ask that the Council, when you look at development plans, you keep in mind, you know what is the role of transit. And not in all cases transit may be a primary focus but with community development developing, with national policy and state policy going towards that, it's certainly going to be in the best interest of the city as well as the residents to keep transit in mind. It's I think very beneficial as an appointment to 1 the Planning Commission, I certainly enjoy it as well as hoping to bring a new education of transit to 9 1 1 1 ,1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 the city staff and to the commission. I don't know if you're aware but I was appointed to the Metro I Government Committee by Governor Ame Carlson. We've met now 6 times. We've got 12 meetings set up to basically direct what the government structure in the State of Minnesota should be. So it certainly is exciting...and certainly thanks has to go to Representative Tom Workman who was very instrumental in that appointment. I'll be meeting with the Southwest Community Corridor on r Wednesday. Paul Krauss enabled me to come before that committee to take their input and I'd be happy to meet with you and other community business leaders to take anything back to the Governor's committee, or to talk transit. That's basically it. I'm here to answer questions but like I said, things I are moving really well and it certainly is to again express my appreciation to the staff here in Chanhassen. It really makes the difference. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Great. Thank you Diane. Is there any questions and before I ask for that, I did look over the mission statement and strategic vision for '93 and I have to commend you on pulling together some good things. Good stewardship for the objectives and how we can accomplish those. And how 1 you have accomplished those. And any other? Councilman Mason: I'd like to play up what you said Don. I think also the fact, it's nice to see a I community like Chanhassen that is growing hooking up with an outfit like Southwest Metro and making things better for everybody all the way around. I would hope that that's both of our jobs and I think it is and I think both of us are doing a pretty good job at it. So I hope we can continue the . I kind of relationship we have with Southwest Metro. Mayor Chmiel: I like the idea of what Chaska is doing. Taking people from Chaska to Eden Prairie. I I'd like to see Eden Prairie bring people back to Chanhassen. Diane Harberts: I'd also like to add that with that mission statement and goals and objectives, I think I it really reflects the philosophy that Chanhassen has. With the representation by Councilwoman Dockendorf as well as Dale Geving. I think in all honesty that the mission statement goals really reflect that same philosophy that city staff certainly had some... 1 Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Diane Harberts: Thank you once again. I PUBLIC HEARING: ASSESSMENT HEARING FOR LONE CEDAR LANE, PROJECT 90 -9. 1 Mayor Chmiel: This is a public hearing and the public hearing is open at this time. Charles. Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. This item should be fairly straight forward. I Basically it's the two properties affected by the project. A petition for the project. They signed assessment waivers. The...was ordered to basically agree upon for them all to be assessed to the properties for benefit and the assessments have been established accordingly with that agreement and 1 the assessment teen has been established at 8 years, 7 1/2% interest rate. The two properties involved 1 10 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 are Lot 4, Block 1 of Cedarcrest and Lot 3, Block 1 of Cedarcrest. Staff recommends approval of the assessment roll. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone wishing to address this at this time? As I mentioned, this is a public hearing. Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Mayor Chmiel: Any discussion regarding this proposal? Colleen? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Charles, the way I'm looking at it, we've got most of it coming from, the payment coming from MnDot and other than that we have special assessments and local funds. What is that? Charles Folch: Local funds is the city. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I figured. How much money are we talking about? 1 Charles Folch: That amounts to about, the total project was about $105,000.00. MnDot's picking up about $91,000.00. There's another $6,000.00 that's being assessed so there's about $8,000.00+ that's 111 being picked up by local share. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. Nothing further. Mayor Chmiel: Michael. Councilman Mason: Nothing. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Mark. Councilman Senn: Colleen already covered mine I guess except, how does that $8,000.00 compare to our normal assessment situation? Charles Folch: Actually this is pretty good. Being that this project was adjacent to and sort of involved with some improvements to the Highway 5, we were able to go through MnDot's cooperative agreement program where I think they picked up 85% of the cost for the project through State funds so that was a great value for the city. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. It was a very unsafe condition for specifically a couple of those people living 1 there. They had their driveways directly onto Highway 5. This eliminated that given problem. So with that. Councilman Senn: I move approval. 11 1 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Second. Resolution #93 -92: Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the special assessments for the Lone Cedar Lane Improvement Project No. 90 -9 to the aforementioned properties for a term of 8 years at a 7 1/2% interest rate. All voted in favor and the motion carried. AWARD OF BIDS: UPPER BLUFF CREEK TRUNK UTILITIES, PHASE II, PROJECT 91- 17B. Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. As I stated in my staff report, the bid opening date was scheduled after the adding could be submitted, or the results could be submitted with the packet. I'm presenting the information to you tonight. Last Thursday's bid results. A total of four bids were received for the project. The low bid was received from Northdale Construction Company at a bid amount of $338,627.55. All the bids were tabulated for accuracy and the low bid was an accurate total calculation. Northdale Construction Company has performed previous projects within the city. In fact they're doing...for the city and so they do have a reference track record with us and l they have worked satisfactorily in the past. The estimate for this project was $370,000.00 so we did receive favorable bids for this project. And according to staff recommends awarding of this contract, Project No. 91 -17B to Northdale Construction Company in the amount of $338,627.55. Mayor Chmiel: Just a little clarification. You indicated it was $370,000.00. 1 Charles Folch: That was the estimate. The Engineer's estimate. Phil Gravel: Charles, it says $370 in there. 1 Mayor Chmiel: It shows $350. Phil Gravel: It was actually $350. Charles Folch: Alright. I guess there must be a typo on this end. Phil Gravel: Yeah there was. The 70's a typo. Mayor Chmiel: Now the other bidders that were on this, what was the spread in the amount of the 1 bids? Charles Folch: Actually it was pretty close. The second low bid, in fact that would be a good idea if you'd put the tabulation on. The number two bid was only less than $300.00 above the low bid and then the subsequent third and fourth bids were in the $350 range. $357 range. Phil Gravel: They were all within like 6 %. 1 12 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 I 1 Charles Folch: It helps when you're...localized in a community on a project... Mayor Chmiel: Good. Is there anyone wishing to address this at this particular time? For this Upper I Bluff Creek Utility Improvement Project. If not, is there any question by Council? Mark. Councilman Senn: I had one question. Charles, in terms of the reference here to only 2 of the 4 1 easements have been secured or agreed to. I mean what risk is to be run by starting a project without all these things complete or? Charles Folch: Actually the two that are important for us to start now have been secured so we're going to stage the project accordingly. And the other ones we will attempt to acquire over the next 60 to 90 days. We hope that in the meantime we can acquire right of entries which certainly don't, once the property owners seek legal advice, they find out they're not waiving any rights by doing that. But if we need to delay the second stage of the project until next year that the specifications have been written accordingly so we can do that. But in going through the condemnation process, we would have all the easements needed within 90 days maximum. Mayor Chmiel: And have the option of exercising a quit claim. 1 Charles Folch: Right. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Can I have a motion please? 1 Councilman Mason: So moved to accept bid for City Project 91 -17B. Upper Bluff Creek Utilities, Phase II. Councilman Senn: I'll second. I Resolution #93 -93: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded awarding this contract, Project No. 91 -17B to Northdale Construction Company in the amount of $338,627.55 for the Upper Bluff Creek Trunk Utilities, Phase II. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CONSIDER APPROVAL TO ENTER INTO A 3 YEAR CONTRACT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES WITH THE CITIES OF VICTORIA, GREENWOOD, TONKA BAY, EXCELSIOR AND SHOREWOOD. Mayor Chmiel: Mr. Harr. I think we've had this here so many times. But it's nice to see you again. 1 Scott Harr: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. I have provided you with the information that was requested at the previous Council meeting. That additional financial figures were requested and while there are a number of options, it's the consensus of my staff that deals with animal control that they would like to recommend that we proceed with entering into a 3 year contract with these cities to provide animal control and that we authorize to include in the 1994 budget an 1 13 1 1 1 i City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 111 additional art -time, 30 hour per week community service officer to help cover the additional time that P Pe Y P we're finding is being taken up, taken away from both Chanhassen calls and animal control calls. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Colleen. 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: I guess I don't have any questions about it. You've researched it and you know what you need. That's fine and it's being paid for clearly by all the other communities. Very nice comments. Letters from the other communities showing the appreciation they have that we 1 provide the service to them so, no questions. Councilman Mason: One real quick one and I'm definitely in support of this. You said a CSO of 30 1 hours, right Scott? • Scott Harr: Correct. 1 Councilman Mason: So the other cities get billed for 20 of them and we get pay 10 of them? I Scott Harr: Right now that's how we've been doing it but we've not set the 1994 fee yet. Councilman Mason: To the other cities? 1 Scott Harr: Correct. Councilman Mason: Yeah, I like it. . I . Councilman Senn: As a part of the annual contract then, that fee has been set annually even though it's a 3 year contract? I Scott Harr: Yes. 1 Councilman Senn: No problem. Move approval. Councilman Mason: Second. I Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to authorize the Public Safety Director to mail out animal control contracts to the cities for a three year period and to authorize that the I Public Safety Director include one additional part time Community Service Officer in the 1994 budget, and to arrange the billing of the other cities to ensure that the 20 hours of patrol time, plus support and administrative time, are covered through the fee schedule. All voted in favor I and the motion carried. INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR EXPANSION OF THE GOLF DRIVING RANGE MAXI -MINI 1 PUTT COMPLEX TO INCLUDE EXPANSION OF THE BUILDING AND BATTING CAGE, 1 14 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 NORTHWEST CORNER OF TH 5 AND GALPIN BOULEVARD, SWINGS GOLF, JOHN PRYZMUS. Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, I hope the Council will bear with me here. There's more history on this one item than I have ever seen before and hopefully will never see again. 1 Mayor Chmiel: I can tell. Paul Krauss: There...long standing issues conceming this site. It was originally approved in 1987 under CUP. There is no longer a conditional use pennit for this type of use. When we created the IUP, Interim Use Permit ordinance, which Roger correct me, was about 3 years ago. They were all reclassified. Well, all those that were transitional or temporary were reclassified as interim use permit. There's been a series of issues over the years with this use. There's been periodic non - compliance with approved conditions. There's been periodic expansions beyond what was authorized with stop work orders. There has been legal action considered and I guess initiated once or twice. There's been consideration of revocation...kind of an ongoing type of thing. This particular action goes back to around 1990 when staff attempted to gain compliance with Mr. Pryzmus when he expanded his site by grading the...some driving ranges and what not. We did get some corrections of that but there was... fill in the area around the creek that caused some concerns. Then it became clear that Mr. Pryzmus did want to expand the site. Jo Ann worked with John. Say look it, the only way to legitimately do this is to come in and amend your permit, and it's been kind of a long on -going series of discussions since then. As I indicated earlier, the conditional use permit under which Mr. Pryzmus' operation was originally approved doesn't exist anymore. I mean there is a legally recorded CUP that's still in place but when, you can't really effectively consider the expansion or intensification under a section of the ordinance that no longer exists. If the site's to be expanded in any way, you need to issue a new permit and a new permit's an IUP. The current request involves a number of existing and proposed expansions. Existing...the expanded driving ranges and berming which I believe are already in place. 1 This proposed expansion of a building for video use and I, John corrected us at a meeting. It's my understanding this was not video games per se. It was video machines to be used to photograph and correct golf swings. There is the proposed addition of batting cages. There has been an expansion to the parking area and...paved and provided with curb. And then there's some signage issues. Earlier in the summer staff gave the Planning Commission several alternatives to consider, which included denial of the Interim Use Permit and proposed expansion. Denial of anything until all previous conditions were satisfied. Or approval of the expansion as an interim use permit and one of the key things here is that interim use permits by definition have to have a termination date. Now you could set it at some point far in the future. You could set it and when that date comes due you can look to renewing it. But an item, he does have to have a termination point. The presumption is that they're not permanent uses. That they're interim. They're holding land. Sitting on the land until something else comes along, a more final use. The reason that the Planning Commission continued action on the item, they indicated that they were favorably disposed to working with John on some expansions to the property but they wanted some clarification of issues pertaining to the expansion under the IUP. That was done and on September 1 the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Interim Use Permit in a manner that clarifies what expansion can be allowed and under what conditions it can be allowed. And for that, the best I can do is kind of go through and touch on some of the conditions 15 1 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 recommended by the Planning Commission. The first is that the accessory building were y g ry g that had been proposed, not exceed 800 square feet and be painted earth tones and can only be used for the I golf videos that Mr. Pryzmus described earlier. It's not quite as large as what he had previously sought but the Planning Commission felt that that was a reasonable size. They also decided to prohibit the use of batting cages. Batting cages were viewed as somewhat of a different operation and one which typically is lit at night and lighting was a concern here. Expansion of use. They tend to be fairly large and can be seen from a ways off and they were not comfortable with that. Lighting on this site is only to be for building security. It's not to be lighting the site for night time use. The I Planning Commission also said that existing lighting structures which were put up should be, and those that don't conform to that standard, have to be moved by May 1 of next year. They define the hours of operation from sunrise to sunset. There's a series of other conditions that you can read I through. I don't know. One of the ones that was a little bit of concem to the Planning Commission is they agreed that the parking area should be designed so that they drain properly. The original recommendation from engineering was that they be curved to direct storm water. And we haven't had I a chance to go back to engineering but it's not entirely clear whether that's warranted. In fact part of the parking lot isn't even paved. But there are a series of berms that tend to constrain drainage on the site...so they asked the engineering department to go back out and reassess that condition. However, if I engineering felt that curbing was required to control drainage, that condition's supposed to remain and be enforced. As to the termination date on the IUP, the way that's worded is that there are 3 things that can happen, any of which can make the IUP invalid or terminate. The first is if the MUSA line is . expanded to incorporate the site. When is that going to happen? I guess I honestly don't know. I Many years ago I guess people used to think that everything that was over the rainbow was 20 years down the road and things weren't moving too fast. We may be talking 2 years away. I mean you've I already gotten a letter from Mr. Dolejsi, I think it's in the Administrative Packet, where he's requesting that a portion of that 1995 study area be brought into the MUSA line. My reaction to him was that, that's premature at this point. The Metro Council isn't likely to look at that but in a couple years we can probably make a case that it be brought in on the basis that there's not sufficient land left inside the MUSA line. Secondly, construction of a frontage road across the property. That is Audubon Blvd, or I'm sorry. Arboretum Boulevard on the north frontage road. That's the road that is tied into the Highway 5 corridor program. Any of the altematives for getting the road through there, I east and west, really, I mean none of the alternatives would leave an operable site on Mr. Pryzmus' n.- golf range. Even the ones that pulled it far to the no basically you'll have cars going...golf balls than they are right now. And third is that if the property is rezoned. We weren't planning on 1 initiating a city initiated rezoning but if Mr. Pryzmus sells it to somebody who'd like to rezone it, we really should not be considered for that use any longer. So those are the three conditions that would terminate the IUP. One of the things the Planning Commission was concemed about was the I seemingly never ending story of continued issues being raised. Stop work orders being posted. Consideration of revocation of permits. And da, da, da, da, da. Every step taking 3 or 4 months and the fact that they're ongoing problems. They did want to make it clear, we did this with condition 15 I that if any one of the conditions numbererd 2, 9, 12, and 13, which were considered the more critical ones to respond to, are not complied with. Then the Commission...the city will begin revocation process for the interim use permit. In the past we've basically had to come back to the Planning I Commission and City Council and say, there's a problem out there. What would you like us to do? By the time we got through that step, it was another 3 months. So they'd like to make it clear that 1 16 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 they expect the conditions to be adhered to. With that they are recommending approval of the IUP for the expansion of Swings Golf Center as outlined in the conditions. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Paul. John, do you have anything to address on this? If you'd like to, would you come forward and please state your name and your address. John Pryzmus: I'm John Pryzmus and I live at 642 Santa Vera Drive in Chanhassen. I guess like Paul said that...was a conditional use permit and that's what I do have. It most likely is in your packet with the Minutes of that meeting in '87. Do you have that? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes. John Pryzmus: Okay. I never applied for an interim use pennit. I applied for an amendment to my conditional use pernit. I don't know if you got that. It was kind of mixed up in the, this is my, this is what I'm applying for. This is what I paid the pennit fee for. As far as an interim use permit, 1 when I got this conditional use permit, I had an SBA loan that was approved for 20 years. And it would be obvious if the banker wouldn't approve a 20 year loan if all of a sudden you're going to be out of business in 3, 5, or whatever. So I do owe the grand $25,000.00 a year for the next 14 years and the three conditions that Paul recommended is when the MUSA Iine is expanded, how much of Chanhassen north of Highway 5 is not in the MUSA line right now? Paul Krauss: Basically there's only two areas. One is the 1995 study area, which runs between Galpin and TH 41. South of that marsh where Bluff Creek starts. The other piece is Tanadoona. John Pryzmus: In other words it's only one half a section of land. It's my land straight west. Paul Krauss: No. No. It's quite a bit larger. Well. More than half a section. It's everything south of Bluff Creek. It's Dolejsi's property. It's Sovern's property. It's your property. It's Chuck Gabrielson's property. John Pryzmus: So there's 3 or 4 parcels that are not in the MUSA line at this time? I don't know 1 why they weren't incorporated when you put in all the rest of them. You know people have their ideas but that's only a half a section basically if you go a mile, a quarter mile or whatever. And so that MUSA line could have me out of business next summer. Next spring or whatever. As far as when the city staff decides to rezone it, they could financially ruin me tomorrow. They could just say John we're going to let you build an 800 square foot building. That's what we approved on an interim use permit but no use to build it because we're going to shut you down tomorrow. You know. So you can see where I'm coming from. I can't have an interim use permit. There isn't such a thing as far as financially, I would be totally ruined and I don't think staff is trying to ruin me financially. It's just that that's the way it's turned out. As far as the construction of, the sewer and water I think has asked, as one stipulation earlier. If sewer and water became available to that site, and I think they're going to be coming down my ditch next spring aren't they? 17 1 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Paul Krauss: No. It may be coming near you and we've got the engineer sitting behind me who's worked on the project but we can't allow you to hook up. When you're outside the MUSA line, you can't provide service. ' John Pryzmus: Okay, but I mean, so it wouldn't be available unless it was brought in with the MUSA line. So anyway, as far as me building an 800 square foot building without the batting cages, the building was for the golf pro to use video screens, TV screens to keep people, show them their swing, what have you. There was a big issue at the Planning Commission whether there was games or what have you and there was approval in '87 that I do have 4 games. This new I added a new one. Building up there. So as far as lighting goes, we had many disagreements over that and financially I can't compete, I think when parents come out with their little kids and there's been a problem that I know of. City staff has never contacted me. No one's ever contacted me that my project was ever a problem with anybody in the city of Chanhassen. Not one citizen. I can't think of ever having a complaint out there. This year I did have a complaint because I didn't let people take bags onto the tee area for a while and I changed that. Other than that. City staff is kind of you know when you look at my file and it's all this deep you'd swear that I'd been doing all kinds of murderous things up there. And as far as the expansion, it was approved. The site plan that was shown on the screen there had the berm and the private lesson area. On the original plan, the thing that the City took out of there was the indoor building that it went into so in fact I didn't expand it. I have a miniature golf course and a driving range. I don't have any other businesses there. So for illegal expansion and ' what have you and then there's been a big hassle over the fence. You know and I knew that was approved and they come out and checked it and when I originally did a survey of my property, we put those posts in right away so it was all done then. Staff wanted me to go and have my property all resurveyed again. To make sure I didn't put my fence on the other guy's property. Well I don't, that isn't it. I mean it sounds like it's a major thing that I've done something wrong. My fence isn't on anybody else's property and there's nothing wrong with it. I just haven't put the wire up because I ' kept on adding trees and shrubs and flowers over these years. So what I'm asking for is an expansion of my conditional use permit to include batting cages. I see in the paper that your approving a 20 acre recreational spot right across the street from me. That will most likely have ball diamonds and what ' have you and I think that batting cages would be a real plus. I know everybody out at the ballpark out here would love to see ball diamonds. I think most parents would love to see their kids have a little more chance to take and swing at pitches that are always strikes rather than backing away. And I ' think you know, when you look at me as a private developer, or whatever you want to call me and where I'm spending all my own money to do something that's basically turned out nice so everybody...and I think you should be encouraging what I'm doing rather than trying to blackball me ' and run me out of business and basically financially ruin me. That's all I have to say. Mayor Chmiel: Does Council have any questions of John at this time? Councilman Mason: Not at this time. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thanks John. One of the things, as an interim use permit Paul. As this came through and it shows the request of zoning for the amendment of the conditional use. Clarify that to me a little bit. How was the determination made to the interim use and from the conditional use ' 18 1 Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 Ci ty g P 1 request. And I know that if we went through redoing the conditional use, you'd have to have a public hearing. Re- opening of that to see if you can't have the additional items that John was requesting put in. So maybe if you just make some clarifications. Paul Krauss: I'll try to fill in the project and fill in the holes. Some of it took place while I was out of the country. When this application was initially being processed...it became clear that we couldn't process it as a CUP because there was no CUP anymore to allow this thing to exist. I mean ultimately I think we came to the decision that some sort of expansion that came in compliance with everything else, may in fact be reasonable but the way to do that was to process it as an IUP which was the way it was classified in the ordinance. And I know there were some discussions with the City Attomey that took place in that time frame that Roger, if you can. Roger Knutson: I can shed some light. Yeah...discussed it with Jo Ann. Initially Mr. Pryzmus was allowed this conditional use permit and the Council issued that permit. Subsequent to the issuance of that permit, the zoning ordinance was amended and eliminated this use as a conditional use. When that happens, this use becomes non - conforming in the same way that if you have a permitted use. Say you had a single family home and you rezoned the property to industrial. Upon the happening of that event, even though you were allowed to stay there, you are now non - conforming. In this case, although he's non - conforming under the conditional use permit, you added a provision in the zoning ordinance that allowed this type of use to go ahead as an interim use. So if you want to be a conforming use, you have to have an interim use permit. Under State Statutes, and interim use , permits have not been around very long. I would guess 5, 6 years maybe. Something in that order. There are actually two significant requirements. First, there has to be an ending date. That can be triggered by an event or January 1 or June 1. Name the date. You could use the year 3000. 2010 or any date you felt was appropriate. And second, the applicant has to, by Statute, sign an interim use permit agreeing to the conditions, which is unique. That's not a requirement of the conditional use permits or anything else. So if Mr. Pryzmus does not want an interim use permit, you cannot force it on him obviously. He can walk away from it and not sign the permit and just pretend like, ignore these proceedings in which case he has the right to continue as a non - conforming use that he can't expand. ' Councilman Senn: Fill in a gap for me here. The gap is that, what's really triggering the CUP to the IUP is the fact that a change is occurring on the site? Roger Knutson: If he wants to expand his business. Councilman Senn: So I mean just like any other non - conforming use. As long as it stays there the , way it is. Roger Knutson: Oh yes. Non - conforming uses, as you just well stated. You can stay there forever as long as he just doesn't expand. Councilman Senn: Okay, is the owner in compliance with the conditional use permit? ' 19 1 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Roger Knutson: I think Paul can better answer that. 1 Paul Krauss: You know I'd really have to go back through and do an allocation of what's been there. I know Jo Ann was concerned that there were some outstanding conditions that had not been complied I with. Some of them were in transition though. It was a question of John pumping his sewage instead of having a drainfield. I believe the...while it's not consistent with the conditions, it was probably okay as long as he can...the receipts. But there were some other conditions that had not been I complied with. And then there's expansions of things that had occurred over and above what was allowed. The lighting. The expansion of the driving range. Further expansion of the parking lot. There were some other small things like that. 1 Councilman Senn: Which do or don't put him in compliance with the CUP? Paul Krauss: Jo Ann said, as I recall he is out of compliance in some aspects of the CUP. I'm really ' not prepared to give you exactly which ones that applies with but I know Jo Ann was concerned that he was out of compliance. I Mayor Chmiel: How large of tanks does he have with his existing septic system and by putting the additional things in on the property probably would increase total numbers of people. You said there's not a drainfield but you have an existing septic system. I imagine if that would go to the overflow. I Paul Krauss: I think it's just a collection system. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Okay. And then that's come and pumped in, John? • John Pryzmus: I'd like to maybe verify that the way the tank is, it's a 1,500 gallon tank and when it's I full, it can't get any fuller. So if it's full, you just stop and then you couldn't use the bathrooms anymore and the truck comes and pumps so we always have a gauge on it to make sure because that would cause us great duress as far as our business if we didn't have the bathrooms working. So the I pumping. Mayor Chmiel: I thought you didn't put a lot of trees on site. I John Pryzmus: There is a lot of controversy on that and a lot of the times, we people change, staff has changed, once the city said to go ahead and put a pump tank, which I had never heard of a pump tank. I never, I mean I'm not into the sewer business. They told me to a pump tank in. And after ,, the Inspectors inspected it and said, it's fine. All the permits are taken and then they said I didn't have to keep the other two sites. I mean I never found the documents and I will try to fmd where they sent me a letter stating that or that they just were out at the site... I guess we didn't document, we I never knew that this was going to carry on for years and years. But the septic system does wear and it doesn't pump that much. The batting cages are, we're set up to have 9 pitching machines. I may there again start with 3...and maybe expand to 4 or 5. But I wouldn't be adding on. I mean it would 1 all look like it but they just wouldn't have all the machines. 1 20 1 1. I City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Do you have any? Councilwoman Dockendorf: I have a million questions. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Okay. 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Just let me get rid of the details first before we go onto the larger issues. Are conditions number 4 and 5, are those current problems Paul, do you know? Or is that just a standard thing that you? Paul Krauss: Well, we're not clear. Those were conditions that have been carried forward over the 1 years. There have been problems with that in the past. We had to work with John to pull material out. It's not clear...the site does not...but I know that when you look in there, that condition dates Il back to '87 when it first... Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. Condition number 9, the second phrase is not a sentence. I'm 1 wondering. Paul Krauss: No. The Planning Commission wasn't completely articulate but I know what... I Councilwoman Dockendorf: It just needs to be cleaned up if they're going to pass it. Roger, I believe you answered my question about the IUP. It doesn't need to be a specific date. It can be a trigger of events. 1 Roger Knutson: It can be an event, yes. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. I guess those were actually all the what I considered minor I questions. I don't share the, well do you want to do questions and then comments later? Mayor Chmiel: Well, why don't we yeah ask questions and then come back to Council. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay, I'm done. 111 Mayor Chmiel: Michael. Councilman Mason: I have some comments later. I think this all seems fairly straight forward at this 1 point. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Mark. 1 Councilman Senn: The only question that hasn't already been, the video games that are there were 1 allowed? 21 1 1 1 Ci ty Meeting Council Meetin - September 27, 1993 1 Paul Krauss: There were something on the order of... Councilman Senn: Under? Paul Krauss: Under one of the earlier CUP's. Mayor Chmiel: You have how many games in there John? A total of 4? John Pryzmus: This year I have 4. I think on the original permit we had 10 but I never had room because I had so much equipment in there I usually... Councilman Senn: That's it other than comments. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. John, do you understand what they're talking about this conditional use amending. It is not amending a conditional use and the reason why it has to go through this process as the Attorney had indicated? John Pryzmus: Yes. I understand how it's being said. The thing that I'm going to have to do obviously is if, if there is no way that I can get an expansion, at this point I'm going to have to tear down my little 8 x 10 storage shed and not ask for anything and just keep my conditional use permit ' because financially I'll be ruined if I don't. I mean who's going to pay $25,000.00 a year for this...just like I said you know. So I guess at that point then, when it's brought into the. MUSA line and I would want to come back, I want that facility to be there for 30 years. I want it to be part of the community so at some time I think people have to realize that everybody needs a place to put their equipment out of the rain and I've been leaving all my stuff sit out there and rust for 7 -8 years so I do need a place to store my stuff. I think that would be one of the complaints, if anybody had a ' complaint driving by there that there's trailers sitting around and what have you and I'd love to have them not sitting outside. I'd like to have them somewhere but when you only have an 800 square foot building, you can't put anything really in it. A couple garden tractors and...so I guess at the point ' when sewer and water is available, or when it's brought into the MUSA line, which I obviously pay a sewer and water bill, I would then want it to be brought in as a legitimate use into the city plan. And I want to stay there. I would like staff to maybe do something on a yearly thing but that's not here because we don't have the MUSA line...So that's where we'll have to go. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. ' Councilman Senn: Don, one other question I thought of. Paul, what is the underlying zoning on the property? Paul Krauss: Oh. Roger, can you see it up there? I think it's Rural Residential, RR. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I think it's A2. Paul Krauss: Or A2. 22 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 ty g P 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: It's A2. Councilman Senn: So it's A2, Agricultural. And it's being assessed as that? Paul Krauss: W hat it's being assessed at I honestly don't know but most of the land out there is being assessed on that basis. Now it's not Green Acres obviously because it's not being farmed...I believe there is a provision...golf courses a little differently. I'm not sure if it applies to... Councilman Senn: Well there's some exceptions under Green Acres too depending on other uses of , the...And then CUP was granted as a conditional use permit in relationship to the Agricultural zoning. Paul Krauss: Yeah. Now it was also granted in a time frame that doesn't seem too long ago, 6 years , ago but it was also at a time that, well at the time Timberwood was platted. It was as a time that the common thinking was that it's going to be 20 years before anything happens. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah there's, as I keep looking at this item number 10, I think that's one that John you can either proceed with this interim use permit or say you really don't want it. And the whole entirety of the thing is moot really as far as the application is concerned. But, and depending upon procedures the Council goes through too, they may come up with some other ideas as well. So maybe what I'd like to do at this time, and you have that opportunity at any time to say that you either want to accept it or whether you don't want to accept it and just stay with the existing permit as what you have. So maybe we'll go to some comments now regarding this and Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well, these are going to be mumbled and confused because we're really between a rock and a hard place insofar as I like your business Mr. Pryzmus. I really like it. I use it often but being on the Highway 5 Task Force and knowing how that area's going to develop, I know that your business is going to be compromised somehow. You know how they align Highway 5 when they expand it. What we do with the frontage road. Excuse me, access boulevard. You know reading over, actually I was at the Planning Commission meeting when we last looked at this and I disagreed with the Commission as far as the batting cages. I fmd that a compatible use and I think it dovetails nicely with the school development. But again I'm coming back to how do we get around an IUP. Let the business expand. In fact keep it there for years and years to come and on the other hand knowing what will be happening out there so, I don't have any solutions at this time. You know I don't want to manage your business and say you can't expand but if that land is going to go public in a couple years, we're going to have to pay for it and if you're expanding your use and increasing the value, the City's going to end up with a pretty whopping fee in a condemmation procedure so I don't know. I'd like to hear what the rest of the Council has to say. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael. Councilman Mason: I think your comment about being between a rock and a hard place applies to Council and to Mr. Pryzmus and the whole situation here. I don't have any trouble with the driving range and the mini golf. In fact sometimes you get me mad because everytime I drive by there my 4 1 year old says, when are we going to go minature golfing again. But I think even if we do approve 23 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 this, 5 years down the road, I think the pressures on that corner are going to be monumental and as ' this interim use permit stands with these conditions, I don't have any trouble with it although I'm wondering why we have to wait until May 1 of 1994 to move the lights because I don't believe they were approved in the first place were they? Paul Krauss: No. 1 Councilman Mason: So, this is a tough one. I do want to comment. I don't believe, I really don't think that anyone in the city is trying to black ball anybody. I think this has been a long and checkered history all the way around. So I don't know. I don't know. I certainly am okay with this 1 interim use permit. I question a little bit that Mr. Pryzmus would want it because I just, like I say, I was on the task force also and 5 years, 10 years down the road, there are going to be some monumental pressures on that area. And it kind of looks like a road will be going through somewhere 1 there. I don't know. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Michael. Mark. ' Councilman Senn: On one hand I guess I sympathize with and kind of agree that the IUP is really, oh. I don't know what you'd call it but a real hardship to the landowner because I appreciate his 1 comments. It is impossible to do much with financing or anything else when most lenders nowadays will require all that information up front before they'll ever give you the loan. He's now being caught in a situation where...have been changed on him since he had his loan but that also probably would 1 even potentially...I guess I'm not sure I agree with trying to really go to an IUP to solve the problem because I think the problem it creates may be more monumental. At least for the property owner. If the issue is the CUP, I mean it seems to me he has that. If he wants to retain that, then he should ' keep it. At the same time though I would, before we take any further action on that, I guess I'd like to see more information on that. I mean if there is a CUP, I've seen all kinds of references and innuendoes and everything else here. There seems to be a lot of it being out of compliance or in compliance or whatever. If the CUP is going to remain or if there's going to be any action on our 1 part to do that, I think there could likewise be an action that would deal with cleaning up the old laundry so to speak as it would relate to conformance or non - conformance issues with the CUP. I just overall from a philosophical basis, I have a problem with basically, if you take the IUP and set it ' aside, because I'm not sure it is a fair mechanism but at the same time I have a real hard time...with the issue of the CUP because I just can't, I have a real hard time looking at going forward and saying that we should either expand the non - conforming use or allow it to extend it's life so to speak beyond 1 what current conditions that were clearly with the ordinance right now. If we're going to do something else and I think we need to look at changing the ordinances. Not deal with the situation specifically. That's about it I guess. ' Councilwoman Dockendorf: Excuse me. I have a question about, what was the rationale behind changing conditional use not to include minature golf? Do you recall? I don't know if you were here 1 at that time. 1 24 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 I 1 Paul Krauss: I guess not specifically. When Roger and I went through the ordinance we looked at those that seemed to be non permanent or transitional and made a recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council for a variety of those. Roger Knutson: I can respond. Not specifically to the minature golf concern but to the philosophy in general, because I don't recall minature golf. But the philosophy was that certain uses in the rural area are quite acceptable as long as the area stays rural. Or undeveloped around you. Contractors yards was one that kind of came back. I mean it's fine to have a...yards out in the middle of 200 I acres and no one knows it there. All of a sudden it's down to 15,000 or 11,000 square foot lots and if you're surrounded, then the complaints never stop. These uses were generally considered to be interim uses. Uses that did not require necessarily a lot of investment. If someone came in, they could amoritize their use, their investment over a period of time and get out. Or if things didn't change, they could come in and get it renewed. That's the philosophy. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Thanks. 1 Councilman Senn: Would it be a fair statement to say that the effectively a property owner set a business up there and undertook a business based on the CUP in the first place and as long as the 111 rules of that CUP are maintained, I mean there is no, I mean nobody's affecting business from one standpoint or the other. I mean what you ask for is what you got and what you got is what you got. Roger Knutson: I agree with that 100 %. If he has a, Mr. Pryzmus has a CUP or his use was authorized by a conditional use permit and to the extent that he lives within the terms of that permit that was issued back in '87, he can continue in business forever. What's triggering an ending date, it would be the question of expansion. Councilman Senn: How can we move it to an IUP without the consent, I mean without his consent? I Roger Knutson: You can't. Councilman Senn: Okay. That's really what it comes down to. 1 Roger Knutson: If he doesn't want it, he doesn't get it. I Councilman Senn: What I've heard the applicant get up and say tonight is he doesn't want it. Roger Knutson: That's what I heard. 1 Councilman Senn: Okay. I Mayor Chmiel: And that's what I was saying earlier. Councilman Senn: So what are we doing? 1 25 1 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Mayor Chmiel: Well, we don't know where John is coming from. Whether he's going to accept it or ' whether he isn't going to accept it. Roger Knutson: If Mr. Pryzmus would just make a statement for the record, he doesn't want an IUP and ask you not to consider this further, that would be the end of it. John Pryzmus: I guess maybe to clarify my position. An IUP wouldn't defmtely be out for me depending on if I could set the date. I mean I'm looking at you know maybe in cash I have a half a million dollars into the project. Okay, timewise God only knows because I work there day and night. How much it would cost if I took an IUP and took Paul's idea. How much would it take to rebuild that over in Chaska. It would maybe take 3/4 of a million to a million dollars. People don't understand I guess because there isn't a great big brick and block building, how much money went into that place. I originally had $300,000.00 SBA loan secured for it. But if we want to talk, I'm 45 years old. If we want to talk about a 30 year IUP ending when I'm 75, I think my kids should be finished with college hopefully by then. Anyway, something in that order. But like I'm trying to explain to Paul, and I don't think a lot of people believe me. They think, and I bought that property in 1980 so I've owned it for 14 years. It isn't something, I don't jump. I'm not a developer. I don't jump in and buy something and see how fast I can turn a buck and get out. That's basically my life out there. That's what I want to retire on. I want to keep it for 30 years. I don't, I would like to see Paul and staff incorporate it into a beautiful comer. I mentioned at the Planning Commission. How many thousands and thousands of dollars the City of Chanhassen pays to make this town look beautiful and here we've got a comer that's going to be a major comer in Chanhassen forever and it's going to be green and trees and flowers and shrubs but 30 years. I mean geez, how much would you ' pay to have that? You may be paying a million dollars to build it you know and yet that's why I don't see why we shouldn't be able to come to something where it can stay there. I mean like I say,. if you change the zoning and I come in and incorporate that into the new zoning where we just let this die for now and when we get new zoning, then we'll try to get it incorporated to where it will fit and ' maybe, if you're worried about not getting enough taxes, I don't know. I never applied for Green Acres. My taxes on it are just about $6,000.00 a year so I don't think that's Green Acres. When I don't have a building per se. You know an 800 square foot building that's not heated and there's nothing in it so I am paying something to be paying something to someone. I don't know what it is. But that would be an option. If you want to take an IUP and have it at a date further down the road, but you know when you're talking about when a road goes through there, you people that are on the road group. Right now you take 2 acres of my property and I've got a piece on this side and a piece on this side, I couldn't, I'd lose money. I'd lose a couple hundred thousand dollars just by having that happen to me. I paid $3,800.00 an acre 14 years ago. If I would have never done nothing to it and ' just let it stay natural for 14 years, and I could get $30,000.00 an acre, that would be a pretty good return. But being that I put in all these hundreds of thousands of dollars, I'm going to have to keep it for 15 years just to make money on the sale of the property. Mayor Chmiel: Mark. Councilman Senn: I think you've heard everything. If I could maybe make a suggestion that we simply not take any action on this item until we have an IUP that the applicant is forwarding to us. In 1 26 i 1 I/ City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 the meantime I'd like to request that the staff come back and give Council an analysis of the existing 1 CUP and what's in conformance and what's not in conformance so we know what the issues are relating to that. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I know that there was an awful lot of reading that I went through back from 1991 and there was discussions in here on the conditional use permit in itself and some explanations as is shown on page 21. But there are some other things here too that I can understand where John is but I also have to look at it from a city standpoint as to what's going to transpire there within the next 2 years. 5 years. MnDot too of course, their expansion of Highway 5 is going to take some of that as well. And with the service road, and I'm not sure as to how much they'd take or what side they're even going to take. But I would most imagine that some of that would probably be taken through that particular area as well. And I can understand that you've got an investment there. You've got 14 more years to pay on it and it's really, you're right between a rock and a hard place. If you accept this IUP, you have the conditions that you have to live with with item number 10. And if that frontage road occurs and everything else is done as well. If I were in your position, and I like the idea of the batting cages. I really do. I think that's something that is good. Good for the community and probably better for the CCV School District. Probably getting to a point where we could win a few championships with a little more practice with those kinds of machines laying around and giving them that availability. But I don't know, this thing is really not the easiest thing to move ahead with and I think as to where it's at and as Mark has just indicated, he's looking for some additional information from that. And I looked at it from the same standpoint seeing that it was a conditional use, why couldn't that be re- opened for that conditional use pennit and public hearing held again to granting of these other things. But then of course Roger has explained the fact that there was a, was I there also a zoning amendment? There was not? Okay. But under the CU, with non - conforming uses, use that means that's the expansion for this. I don't know. I get a little caught up in some of John's problems but I also get caught up in some of the things that we're going to have to pay in the long run as well. And even with MnDot, and of course John's entitled to whatever he puts into that 1 plus and it is taking 14 more years. Roger, in compensation for things like that, when they go through that process and coming up with the commissioners, do they take that in consideration as to the balance of what a loan is on a business and the number of years that are left there as well? 1 Roger Knutson: The commissioners, no. They don't consider that. Mayor Chmiel: They don't? Okay. ' Roger Knutson: They consider the value of the property. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Yep. Okay. Well, what's Council's thought? Councilman Senn: I already said what mine was. 1 Councilman Mason: Well, I'm certainly not speaking for Mr. Pryzmus here. If I was in his position, I I certainly would not want an interim use permit with these conditions. 27 1 I 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Mayor Chmiel: You're right. I wouldn't either. 1 Councilman Mason: And I guess, but that's not for me to decide. So it seems to me we either act, what are our choices here? We act on the interim use permit or hold off until we see if anything can be done with the conditional use permit. Is that right or not? Paul Krauss: Basically...oh I'm sorry. John threw on the table 35 years. Whether or not you find that realistic or not, you can set different termination dates for an IUP. The fact is, what's probably going to tenninate the operation, as near as we can tell, is the construction of the roadway improving of Highway 5 which is slated to happen before the end of the decade. But we've heard that before ' too. Councilman Senn: Well with the MUSA, it could happen before that. Paul Krauss: The MUSA could happen well before that, yeah. Roger Knutson: Mr. Mayor? Could I answer Mr. Mason's question? Mayor Chmiel: Sure. ' Roger Knutson: Normally you could so call revise the CUP would be to go back and amend the zoning ordinance to make this use, conditional use... ' Councilman Mason: Okay. What happens if we refuse to act on this? If we choose not to act on this application for an interim use permit? Councilman Senn: We can't. Am I understanding that right? We can't act on this unless the applicant is agreeing to it. Mayor Chmiel: No, no. We can act on it. He can deny it. Councilman Mason: What I'm saying is, if we choose to not recommend approval of this interim use ' permit. Roger Knutson: Then I'd prefer Findings explaining why. And that's your discretion to say no to the interim use permit. Councilman Mason: Of course we could just as easily let Mr. Pryzmus do that too I suppose. 1 Councilman Senn: Roger, I don't understand. Why are we considering an IUP when we don't have anyone requesting it other than staff? 1 Roger Knutson: If he's not requesting it, if that's the status of it, then you're right. 1 28 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 tY g P r Councilman Senn: I haven't heard anyone else request this IUP approval tonight. Roger Knutson: I guess as I understand, staff is interpreting his request as a request for an interim 1 use permit. If that interpretation is wrong, then this matter should not be on your agenda. John Pryzmus: Yeah, I stated at the Planning Commission meeting that an interim use permit was not an option for me. I couldn't have one. I told them that at the Planning Commission meeting. Councilman Senn: It's in the Minutes. 1 John Pryzmus: And now the only thing I did say is I would accept one if we put a year on it. A date. I mean I'm saying 30 years. That's 75. Maybe 65. Maybe 20 years from now. But I can't, and everyone understand that I can't have it end next year or the year after. See that's the thing. So if we want to work on a year thing, but let's table it tonight and maybe Roger or Paul and I can get together or whatever and sit down and see. But if your general idea is that you want to have me out of business before you put the road through so it don't cost you nothing to put the road through, now that's a different story and that's kind of the way this is leading. You know if I take an interim use permit, and it's no good once the road goes through it, or it gets up you know. Okay, we want to put a road through so now you're not in business no more. Roger Knutson: Let's make something real clear so everyone understands. You cannot turn down or approve the interim use permit on the basis of trying to drive down a condemnation price. That would be highly improper and we can't do that... You can't use zonings to surpress market prices. That would be wrong. Worst than that. John Pryzmus: So then it wouldn't even be an advantage for staff then to have it in as soon as possible if basically the citizens of Chanhassen got together and said, this is a project that we want to have here for 20 years. Maybe that would be a way to get it done. See what the citizens wants. I don't know. I don't know. I mean I'm not going to get into the legal aspects. Roger Knutson: Mayor, could I make a suggestion? 1 Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, go ahead. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes, please do. Roger Knutson: I'm thoroughly confused. Maybe I could suggest that we table this and Paul and I , meet with John and... He said in one breath he's not applying for it but in the second breath he said he'd like it if the terms can be worked out so that's my confusion. Which is it the left hand or the right hand? Councilman Mason: I think you're not the only one sharing the confusion. 29 1 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Councilman Senn: I'm just real uncomfortable even saying anything more because it seems to me everybody's jockeying over lawsuits. We're not considering... Councilman Mason: Well, I don't know that anyone's jockeying for lawsuits. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, no. No, that's a misquote Mark. I don't think so. Councilman Mason: I really disagree with that. I'll move to table this until the time that Mr. 1 Pryzmus, staff and if need be, City Attorney can get together and try and work something out here. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'll second that. ' Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to table action on the Interim Use Permit for expansion of the golf driving range, maxi -mini putt complex for Swings Golf so that staff and the applicant can meet. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ' Councilman Senn: I'd also like to see a staff analysis if we could on the CUP. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that's not any problem. Okay. A lot of talk. No action. That's the way it goes. 1 NEW SPECIAL EVENT PROPOSAL, "FEBRUARY FESTIVAL ". Todd Hoffman: A break from the norm. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Good. We need it. ' Todd Hoffman: Just coming off of the brand new Septemberfest celebration, I'd like to present here to City Council members this evening, a concept for a February Festival. A winter special events. Something the city has not fully sponsored in past seasons. Again the idea comes out of essentially that we have 4 to 5 months of winter and we cram all of our special events into the other remaining 6 ' months so we have 4 or 5 of them going on throughout that season. I think we should have one going on in the winter as well because we do have so much to celebrate here in the winter in Chanhassen. Essentially we targeted dates of Saturday, February 19, 1994 and reasons for that are stated there. ' There's other festivals in other communities that are surrounding Chanhassen which take up the other dates so we picked that one. The location, we're looking out at Lake Susan and Lake Susan Community Park. Essentially is a change of venue from Lake Ann. We do a lot of activities at Lake Ann. We'd like to utilize Lake Susan and the facility we have there. Availability to the shelter, access to numerous parking lots. We have Rosemount, Empak, and parking on the site...Potential attractions which we've talked about is an outdoor concert. Snow sculptures, or potentially even an ice sculpture. Sleigh rides, fishing contest, winter fireworks, bonfire, all that goes along with these festivals, s'mores, hot chocolate, etc, etc. We'd like to hear your ideas about the festival. You've talked about the funding. Essentially coming before the Council this evening is kind of a preliminary 1 approval of a budget item. This would be a 1994 budget item at a cost of about $5,000.00 to fund... recreation programs. We're targeting that $5,000.00 with a matching amount of $5,000.00 in 30 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 contributions from what I'll call the title sponsors in that February Festival. It does have a certain title...have all been very proactive in the past... The update from the Park and Recreation Commission, their last meeting, September 22nd. They unanimously supported the creation of the February Festival of Chanhassen. They added cross country skiing. Again, that endless supply of hot chocolage. We'd like to hear your ideas and again this program or a special event does carry a price tag of $5,000.00 out of the general fund. I think about special events in terms of the cost of entertainment hour. We have a 4 hour special event. You have 1,000 people out. That's 4,000 hours worth of enjoyment and if it's going to cost us $10,000.00, that's about $2.50 an hour. That's a pretty good benefit when you think about what the people coming out to your special event are gaining and what the community is gaining from that special event as well. So with that, I'd like to hear your comments and get you involved in this newly proposed special events. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Todd. One of the things that I always like about it, coming up with some new ideas on this. Is the fact that this in itself does bring community together, number one. I would like to see this done at a time when also our business people could gain from this as well. Maybe working with them, even special hours for opening of stores on that particular day. And I don't think we would have it on a Sunday by any means but I'm thinking possibly Friday night or a Saturday night. And of course a lot of the stores are open in the evening but not all and participation I think is something that we really want to have. Some of the other things that I looked at, at some of the potential attractions that you have. Maybe even snowmobile races that I can see. I think that fishing • contest is a good idea. Sleigh rides. Even snow sculptures. Outdoor concert, depending upon , temperatures. The instruments may freeze to lips but. Councilman Mason: No brass. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Could cause some lip problems. But I think the overall potential of coming up with something for community is good and I'd like to also entail this as a family kind of gathering. Kids and parents and the things that we try to pattern within the community. Colleen? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well then we can continue the illeration with February Family Festival. 1 Mayor Chmiel: There you go. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Which was one of my concerns actually because it does imply Festival 1 Foods. If we get them as a sponsor, wonderful. Otherwise, they're getting free publicity in my mind so anyway. Todd Hoffman: They're one of our best sponsors to date. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Great. Okay. If we could somehow coordinate with, I have no idea 1 when spring break is and I don't know if you want to avoid spring break or have it at that time. Todd Hoffman: We talked about that at the Park Commission. We would like to avoid spring break. 1 31 1 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah. And do we plow Lake Susan a little bit for ice skating? Maybe 1 we could add that as open skating or something. Other than that, great idea. Councilman Mason: I think it's about time winter is finally getting it's due. Thank you Todd. Seriously. It's about time. That is, is that Presidents Day weekend? I don't know if that's. ' Todd Hoffman: That sounds about right. 1 Councilman Mason: Okay, Monday is a holiday then. For a lot of people. I don't know how that would figure in. Mayor Chmiel: Just for a few lucky people. Councilman Mason: One of the few breaks we get. I think it's great. I really get, if Park and Rec hadn't added the cross country skiing, I would and you know, if there were to be some kind of race or something, that might even be something that could be hooked up with the Arboretum. They do have trails out there which I think could be a nice connection. I'm thinking in terms of any kind of race ' around Lake Susan would probably be, well you certainly wouldn't get anyone too serious about it but maybe you could have a fun race and a serious race or something. Yeah, I think it's a great idea. I will certainly, if I'm in town, I'll be there. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Mark. ' Councilman Senn: Don, I think the festival's a great idea. I guess I'd really like to see it go. I guess I'd like to see it a little more defined I guess in terms of the activities. I guess some of them . don't raise any red flags but I've heard a couple mentioned 1 think do raise some red flags, because I think if we did something like snowmobile races with a lot of noise, everybody within 2 miles would be wanting to kill us. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, only for an hour. ' Councilman Senn: I don't know many that last for an hour but. 1 Mayor Chmiel: We could move that on Lotus. Councilman Senn: They could all kill you then. Bring the same group back from the last meeting. 1 From Council's perspective, at the same time coming off of a joint meeting last week with the Parks and Rec where all I heard was, there's 10,000 things to do and funding for 10 of them. At the same time and I really feel more comfortable if we kind of plugged this into and considered it in ' relationship to '94 budget priorities rather than just kind of taking the independent action here that we're creating a new program before we even get into budget considerations for '94. Mayor Chmiel: I think it's something for them to start looking at and budgeting for '94. 1 32 1 1 I City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Councilman Senn: Yeah, and bring into the budget process. I wouldn't be prepared to approve it tonight. Mayor Chmiel; Okay. Any other discussion? I Diane Harberts: Excuse me Mayor? If they run into parking problems, there may be an opportunity for Southwest Metro Park and Ride. Mayor Chmiel: I was thinking that and I'm glad you. 1 Diane Harberts: You know park and ride... I Mayor Chmiel: Do you have any sleighs? Diane Harberts: Well you'd be surprised what we can do. So give us a call. We can work with staff. I Mayor Chmiel: I think really, I don't know if we're looking for full approval but I think we're I looking for Council acceptance of this proposal for 1994. I think we should at least take that particular position and move on this particular item I think at this time. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'll move approval of the concept. 1 Councilman Mason: Second. I Mayor Chmiel: Moved and seconded. Any other discussion? Councilman Senn: Does the concept approval include the allocation of the funds? 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: No. Councilman Senn: Okay. I Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded that the City Council approves I the concept for the February Festival to be organized by Park and Recreation Department. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Councilman Mason: When would we be looking for approval of those funds? I Mayor Chmiel: Well Ithink we'll be seeing that when it comes with the budget for 1994. Councilman Mason: Yeah, which I think is in the next month or so. Mayor Chmiel: Pretty dog gone close, if not by starting October 4th. 1 33 1 I 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Todd Hoffman: We won't sign any contracts for expenditures but we will be going forward with the. Mayor Chmiel: With the idea and the concept...Good. ' ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR SITE PLAN REVIEWS. Paul Krauss: Thanks Mr. Mayor. This has been a while in coming to you. This started last year with the approval of Target. As you know, Target came back through a number of times in a very short time period. I think we approved it in about 5 months. But there was a great deal of effort placed upon the landscaping for the Target site. Coming out of that there was something that we keep 1 referring to as the Target standard. It was a new and improved requirement for landscaping and the City Council directed staff to put together an ordinance. First they directed us to figure out exactly what happened on Target. What set it apart? What made it different and making it better than what we used to do. And then codify it so that it become uniformily on all developments. Throughout staff maintained the position that once we looked into it, our landscaping ordinance is not a bad one. It didn't achieve the Target standard but it wasn't a bad one so in all probability we were looking at a modest tinkering with the existing code to make that Target standard the norm. Kate looked into it and tried to disect what we had done on Target. We found a couple of things we had done. We found out that the Target standard related mostly to the amount of landscape area in a parking lot, • which was slightly more than what the ordinance used to require. It was the use of overstory trees in the parking lot instead of decorative trees or bushes. It was a couple of things of that nature. It was the scattering around of landscape areas so that it was spread through the site. There was also the fact that no one landscaped area was so big that it took up all the requirements. So there were a number of things we found out. We went back in and worked out what again I refer to as tinkering with the existing code. I'll just tough on the highlights here. Just by the way it was approved after several meetings with the Planning Commission, a meeting with the Tree Board, which asked to take a look at it, and then back to the Planning Commission for public hearing. The first thing we did is correct the value of landscape materials. The formula implies the value. Making sure that it only applies to plant ' material and does not include seed or sod. Now, in reality we've only rarely had to use this formula. In fact I've never had to use it in Chanhassen. This is one of the things I'll tell you honestly I lifted from Minnetonka. Even Minnetonka wasn't original. In Minnetonka we lifted it from the Oakdale ' zoning ordinance where it was originally developed by, I guess I'm a little relunctant to say it but a BRW staff person way back when. But it seemed to work and it really defines the minimum type of landscaping. There was a formula that was introduced for calculating the value of significant trees, which was done to preserve tree cover. Apparently that's a standard type of formula that's fairly well accepted. In Section 20 -1181, on page 3, we made it clear that we were looking for overstory trees from the approved tree species list, and there was a list that was developed. And that is accompanying this ordinance. In fact the tree species list was developed with in -house staff supported by the ' Arboretum and some input we had from outside sources. In the future, it's proposed that all these planting areas have an irrigation system. It's commonly been done in the past but not always... The amount of the percentage of landscaped area, parking lot was increased from 5% to 8 %. 3% ' difference doesn't sound like a lot but it really is. I mean it does make a pretty significant difference. The minimum landscaped area permitted was 200 square feet which was considered the minimum ' 34 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 I 1 that's needed to maintain a tree. Sometimes you get these things that are so small that cars pull up on either side and smash what's ever in the middle. Or the snow gets thrown up and kills whats ever in the middle. And there's a dimension provided for the tree itself from the curb line so that... Some III little things that sound little but ensuring that there be proper soil preparations. There's many examples where soil preparation is just wherever busted up blacktop is going...build the parking lot I after you wind up in a tree planter and you've got a tree in there that hopefully will live for a year... There is the approved tree list. It is attached. One of the things that came up at the Planning Commission meeting was that there was not a comparable approved list of ground covers and... Kevin Norby, who is a landscape architect and lives in Chanhassen, was I guess monitoring the process for Brad Johnson, representing...Development but Kevin volunteered to come up with a list which has been included in your ordinance. Kevin wanted it known that it's not necessarily all inclusive. He knows that there's other material to be approved by city staff. We think it's a good shot at the initial run. Before this comes back on second reading, we'll run it in front of the Arboretum to try and get a fine tuning type comment. With that we are recommending that this ordinance be considered and I approved. We think it will achieve that higher standard of landscaping. Uniformily on projects under your site plan review, which in Chanhassen is virtually everything except single family...Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Paul. Well as I understand what we're going to be doing with this this 1 evening is to basically review it and go through first reading on this. And that would be on our next October 11th agenda. Paul Krauss: For the final reading? I Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Paul Krauss: Ah yes. Whenever you prefer. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Okay. Have we had a lot more input from any of the business people within I the community regarding this? Paul Krauss: No. We sent out some copies of it. Well actually we did have some, come to think of it. We had John Uban at one of our meetings. We did send out notices to the Opus folks. To Ryan Development. And a couple of others who escape me right now but that's why Brad Johnson came in I as well. To the extent that it is a standard we've already employed, we have some confidence that it seems to work. And it is not a major departure. We're not throwing out a whole landscaping ordinance. In fact, we've been operating under it for the last 4 years so we feel comfortable with that. It's a matter of building on that. We did have some comment received from Southwest Metro with the subject, pertaining to their particular situation. I believe they have somebody here tonight who's going to give you a little bit of discussion on their point of view. We did try to include as much I comment as we got and then like I said, it was heard twice by the Planning Commission. Once by the Tree Board and then a public hearing on it. 1 35 1 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Mayor Chmiel: Okay. So with that, maybe we'd best listen to hear some of the comments regarding this proposed parking lot landscaping ordinance. Is there anyone wishing to address this at this time? It took a long time, but you finally got here right. Harold Shelbostad: Thank you. Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. My name is Harold ' Shelbostad. I'm a landscape architect with...based in Minneapolis. We are in the southwest...We are also consultants to Minnesota Valley Transit Authority and the MTC. Comments tonight regarding the landscape ordinance revolve around safety issues. Our goal tonight, with respect to those comments, is to talk about some kind of flexibility within the ordinance. There are lots of shalls and musts. What I would like to present tonight is perhaps a need for some kind of document flexibility in terms of the site plan review process. In our capacity as consultants to Southwest Metro and to other transit companies in the metropolitan area, we've had the opportunity to review a great many park and ride facilities. We've had the opportunity to review a great deal of parking situations with respect to landscape ordinances. With respect to criminal activities that take place in these facilities. Case in ' point, a couple of paik and ride lots in the city of Eagan. Criminal activity has taken place there and it's increasing as those particular facilities mature. Specifically as plant material, landscaping and specifically screening matures with these various park and ride lots. Case in point on I -35E in Eagan. As these two lots, and they're beautiful lots. They were developed by MnDot on an access right -of- way for Minnesota Valley Transit Authority, done according to the City of Eagan landscape ordinance. So the screening, the buffering, is all in place according to the ordinance. Those lots are now 7 -8 ' years old. As the material grows around the perimeter, the interior of the lot becomes invisible. Therefore inviting criminal activity. What we are asking for here is a review perhaps on a use basis. Perhaps on a specific use basis but a review at a site plan level in terms of allowing some flexibility ' based upon the use of a particular lot or a particular parcel or a particular development for some kind of leniency perhaps. In terms of safety issues that are being documented now and I -394 is perhaps the next corridor which is going to experience these increased levels of criminal activities based upon landscape ordinances. Unusual, yes. I'm a landscape architect. I plant lots of trees. They do have consequences. With respect to, it was brought out at the Planning Commission level perhaps single use, large use, kinds of parking lots. It is an issue. It is an issue for paik and ride lots. Park and ride lots are, a great deal of activity early in the morning. A great deal of activity late in the afternoon. But midday, there is no activity. These lots become targets. When you talk about mixed use kind of development. When you talk about a Target store, you have traffic coming and going all the time. When you talk about perhaps corporate headquarters, that's private property. Although the coming and going of traffic is not as great, there is somewhat of a sense of security. Again, our goal tonight is to make you aware of what's happening in the metropolitan area based upon landscape ordinances. Our goal is to somehow work into the ordinance some kind of document flexibility. The Planning Commission passed on the ordinance to you with comments that took place at the meeting stating, yes. We are well aware of what can and does happen in these kinds of parking facilities and we as a Planning Commission will keep that in mind as we review park and ride lots. And Southwest Metro will be proposing a park and ride lots within the city of Chanhassen. Planning Commission also made the comment that we are sticking this, it's not ready. Planning Commission members change. We'll be the foresight and the education of what's happening in these facilities go with the changing ' Planning Commission. Likewise with the Council. Will knowledge about increased criminal activity, based upon a landscape ordinance, evolve with the Council as they change members. That's again the 1 36 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 reason for perhaps requesting some kind of document flexibility in the site plan review process. Those are our comments. 1 Councilman Mason: Is now the time to ask a question? Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I was just sort of sitting here and really thinking about this. These criminal 1 activities which is something that we don't really normally even consider but yeah, go ahead. Councilman Mason: My question would be with, and I believe that Paul addressed it or it was 1 addressed in the Minutes somewhere here. At issue, and I'm curious to have your input on this. I know those park and rides at Eagan are just for that use only, right? Harold Shelbostad: Correct. Councilman Mason: So what's the feeling when we have park and rides that we're proposing that will be shared use by 3 or 4 different businesses. Legion. Perhaps a motel or what not where there would be a lot more traffic during the day. I mean has that issue been studied? Harold Shelbostad: Yes it has. In terms of contacting police departments throughout the metropolitan area and documenting what kinds of park and ride facilities are available within those communities. Eagan is a special case, as you mentioned. You're aware of those two lots. They are single use. They are isolated. They are islands. Other park and ride facilities within the metropolitan area share the use at Rosedale with Rosedale shoppers. So there is traffic moving around. Yes, the park and ride facility at Rosedale is isolated. It's off to one side but just because there is movement around the Rosedale area, the Rosedale police department could not...or would not...that in fact the park and ride was an attractive nuisance in terms of everything from heavy vandalism to auto theft. I had mentioned I -394. I -394 now has a string of single use, heavily landscaped park and ride lots. The landscape is new enough that you can still see into the lot. 5 years from now you won't be able to see... The Minnetonka police, St. Louis Park, Golden Valley police, are aware of those situations and they are sharing information with groups like Eagan, and anticipating situations like that. Anticipating it to such a point where they are now introducing surveillence cameras that monitor traffic. Introducing those to have the ability to monitor what's happening in the park and ride lots. So yes. In terms of mixing use with Southwest Metro and other uses in the area, that's a great example of how to discourage by use. I think the landscape ordinance still enters into the issue if during that very slow period of let's say 10:00 in the moring until 2:00 in the afternoon. There's not a great deal of activity going on in the lot. And the perimeter is heavily screened according to the landscape ordinance. It's still... Councilman Mason: Maybe at some point our Public Safety Commission needs to look into that too with this particular instance. I don't know. I'm throwing it out anyways. Scott Harr: Well we call that environmental crime prevention. I think the speaker very nicely articulated. What we're telling residents to do, keep in mind what's going to happen with those nice bushes and trees around the house that creates a barrier for the patrol officers or neighbors to see. 37 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 There are consequences to think about. One of the things we're trying to get involved in more and 1 more with residential and commercial plans is crime prevention from the site plan stage on because environmental crime prevention can prevent so many problems. Frankly it's one of the problems with some of the strip malls. We simply can't see the area from the areas that we patrol. Either because of how the building is located, or because as time goes on, the ability that trees and shrubs have to totally impair the officer's vision of the building so I for one am very pleased to hear environmental crime prevention being talked about. I think it's' something worth considering and it's kind of tough for us at this point in the community that's rather young to be thinking about but having worked in communities where a number of crimes were perpetrated because the criminal could not be seen, I think it's a great thing to be thinking about. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I think this is such a select issue that we're talking about, and although we do have in mind where the park and ride lots will be and that the optimal would be to have them shared uses. We have to provide for potentially a park and ride lot where it will be an island so I ' guess I don't have a problem putting in an exception. Saying that for park and ride lots specifically we'll look at those individually and potentially waive the ordinance. Harold Shelbostad: One suggestion that that might be is that it's perhaps not just park and ride lots but it's perhaps large single use parking facilities might be more generic. Because things like corporate headquarters, even though they are on private property and perhaps they have an aura of security built into them, there is documentation in conversations with police departments that other large single use parking facilities are equal to our's. Park and ride facilities are a new phenomenom and they are extremely attractive to criminals just because they know about the activities. Has it ' spread into the corporate headquarters size parking lot? Perhaps not as much because the park and rides are such easy targets. But again, just to perhaps another way of saying it rather than just park and ride. Large single use. And again, I think what we're searching for here is some kind of flexibility in the site plan review process. As I mentioned, there's lots of musts and shalis and so forth in the ordinance. I think...and staff, Planning Commission and Council are aware of environmental issues. If that can somehow be documented, that might be an option. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well, there are a lot of shalis and musts but I also see a lot of room for moving things around to avoid that and I would think that that would be looked at in the planning ' staff. Harold Shelbostad: It's just another layer of complexity that in our modem society we're having to take a look at. Councilwoman Dockendorf: But you also have a good point in that, I mean we may be looking at, I'm thinking of Opus and other sites where we're going to have large, isolated parking lots. It may be better to word that. Mayor Chmiel: I think you're hitting a very good point on that. And as it was eluded to before, ' when you're talking about for instance Target and with the kinds of things we have there. There is activity. There's constant going but still, you're still having some problems as far as criminal 1 38 1 n - September 27, 1993 I City Council Meeting p , 1 activities come on. Even in those parking lots. They work fast. They move fast and away they go. But yet it's more likely to happen in more isolated areas and one I'm thinking of specifically is, was I either Victory Envelope, and I know Scott just left. Or one of the other Carlson areas where they have had substantial amount of break -in's and there is some screening...but yet there's probably enough there that causes that to happen. And it's something you don't really think about that much I but I think it's something that really has to be looked at and using just say with a large single use. I don't want to take out too many of the may's. I like to keep it sort of tight only because it's much easier for us to work with. But I think with some of the other things to put a specific use in there, I think it's something that we can look at but yet still come up with a decent recommendation. Mike, did you have something? Councilman Mason: No. II Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Mark? Councilman Senn: Well I like Colleen's idea in terms of the, at least allowing for the potential exception of the park and ride's. At least on the surface, the broad interpretation of single use facility bothers me. That's too broad. That's it pertaining to this issue I guess. I have some other questions I wanted to ask Paul but they didn't have anything to do with this issue. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you. 1 Councilman Mason: Wouldn't this be something that a variance could be applied for then? If that was an issue. 1 Councilman Senn: That's one of the things I was going to ask Paul. Mayor Chmiel: Well, that's probably something. Yeah you can look at but, Paul. 1 Paul Krauss: The concern that I have is real personal and it's the same concern that you raised Mark. III About single user parking lots. Most every lot is a single use parking lot. And the fact is, the main exphasize on Target's parking lot was not to create a forest around the periphery so you can't see that there's a Target there but to green up in the interior by using overstory trees that you can see under. I So maybe we're not talking about completely different ends of the spectrum with that because it's the lower scrubby stuff, or shnibbery stuff that really does hinder the views. I'm real familiar with the parking lots in Eagan. I drive past them a couple times a day. Also that situation was somewhat I unique too because some of these park, one of the park and ride lots is across the street from single family homes and clearly if something had to give, I mean put yourselves in the City Council of Eagan. If something had to give, then it's probably that parking lot needs better patrolling because it's not fair to let the homes have to look at it You know I guess when this came up at the Planning Commission,the Commission was saying well. How many park and ride lots are we going to have. Two more. And we're looking at least one, the one down at Highway 212 stands to be, is currently designed kind of similar to the Eagan one where it's maybe off by itself. It may also be incorporated 1 into a neighborhood shopping facility. The one we're looking at for the Legion site, I think is ideal. 39 1 1 I City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 It meets James Jacob's ideal for continuous view because you have people coming in and out all the time, which is I think what this is trying to do. But it is kind of a one off situation. There are going I to be situations, I mean you may have a, you certainly have a Rosemount which is, you can see a lot of their parking lot but they're off by themselves and they have parking for nearly 500 cars. They also have intemal security. So I don't know what the, where the happen medium is. I think yes, the I commission indicated that they would be happy to consider special allowances for park and ride lots and yes, we could call that out as a specical case but I don't know what else would be a special case. I Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I think I sort of agree with that as well. I do. Okay. With that. Councilman Senn: Could I ask some general questions? I Mayor Chmiel: Sure. I Councilman Senn: Not relating to this. Or not relating to the security issue. Paul, in terms of the Target example. I mean I like the Target example, like you say, because of the overstory trees versus the peripheral types of things because I believe that if you put a commercial area there, there's a I commercial area there and the people ought to be seen as business people. You shouldn't try to hide your businesses per se. And looking through here, I understand what you're trying to do but I haven't really seen it turn around and eliminate the other. I mean on most businesses, most small businesses, . I especially for example we make a very deliberate attempt to berm and heavily plant the area between the highway and them and I understand the change here which creates a situation to Target, and maybe I'm missing it but I didn't see the situation which kind of undid that on the other end of the I spectrum. The other issue there is, I don't want to totally undo it because there's useage you want to hide, which gets back to some of the discussions we've had over, you know. I mean some of the uses you know whether you put it in the agreements or not, there's going to be outside storage or vehicles parked overnight and stuff like that. So I mean it's just a reality of life so to speak. And those types I of things you may want to screen more. But in how, you know I'm looking for some direction. Paul Krauss: Well we can look at clarifying that. It has to do more with the language but if you want I to go someplace in the ordinance where, maybe we should be more specific in terms of, you can have interior parking lot landscaping, you have building landscaping and you have perimeter parking lot landscaping. But the perimeter is designed to buffer a direct use of cars parked immediately adjacent I to...boulevard. It's not designed to obscure the entirety of the building or the structure or the uses beyond. I think if you look around the city, the city's done a fairly good job of that... I mean when you look at the hotel parking lot and Town Square where there is landscaping around the parking lot. 1 It's not high berms designed to eliminate views of the building. There's another example in Eagan, and not to belabor it but there's a shopping center in Eagan on...Road that...and it's the dumbest thing you've ever seen. I mean they've maintained this huge berm with one oak tree on it and you could I drive past it for 2 years not knowing there's a shopping center on the other side. And it's totally empty and they eventually had to come back in and cut down the berm...We can clarify that I think. I Councilman Senn: I'd just like to see it clarified because I like the berming like you say to block cars and stuff but I also look at some of the vegetation we put on those berms and granted right now they 1 40 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 aren't hiding the businesses but when that vegetation matures, it's gonna. And again, I'd much rather see it go interior and second story the vegetation and stuff if we could. Paul Krauss: We can sure add some language in there. Councilman Senn: The only other comment I wanted to make was, whatever we accomplish by 1 additional trees and stuff in Target and stuff, I think we undid by the candy red light posts. Paul Krauss: Yeah, that was a Target creation. There's kind of a story behind that but. 1 Mayor Chmiel: It's supposed to have white stripes on it as well. Councilman Senn: That'd make it even better. Paul Krauss: ...but they didn't go in where they supposed to... 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah, I thought we were going to make them change it. Paul Krauss: Well, Kate was negotiating with them. I've got to get up there but they came in and said it's going to cost us an arm and a leg to move these things. Can we give you additional landscaping in areas around the Highway 5. 111 Councilman Senn: How about painting them in earth tone, like most of them are. Paul Krauss: I guess I can update you on that at the next Council meeting. 1 Councilman Mason: Yeah would you please. I mean I don't care how much it costs them if they put them in the wrong place. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. If hearing no other discussion. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I just have one question. Paul, how much did we get from that seminar that the Arboretum held last February or March? Paul Krauss: ...I was not personally there. I think what we got was some information on tree selection. I now Councilman Wing was there and he came back all gung ho about urban heat islands and the kinds of situations that it presents. On the other hand the lecturer was from California, if I 1 remember right. Councilman Senn: Where they have heat. 1 Paul Krauss: Yeah...And it wasn't totally clear how pertinent all the details were. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh okay. I was just curious. 41 1 1 I City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 Paul Krauss: Well but I think, I think that was concurrent with the Target issue...and then you fly over a parking lot in Illinois. Well, they did it there, why can't we do it. I Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Can I have a recommendation for the first reading and incorporate the other part of which Colleen has mentioned with the park and ride lots. 1 Councilman Senn: Yeah. I'll move approval of first reading with the exception that language be added to allow for the possible exception of park and ride facilities, or special treatment of them I through the site plan review process. And then also a clarification on the issue of the perimeter. Okay. 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the first reading of I Zoning Ordinance Amendment to the landscaping requirements for site plan reviews amended to include language to allow for the possible exception of park and ride facilities, or special treatment of them through the site plan review process. And also a clarification on the issue of 1 the perimeter landscaping. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO SECTION 20 -575 THROUGH 20 -595 I REGARDING LOT SIZES. Paul Krauss: This again is...A couple years ago the Metro Council changed their policies on rural I developments to promote clustering. The Planning Commission...minimum lot size. They recommended to go down smaller than that in the rural area but you can't exceed the gross density so in most viral areas you're still stuck with the 1 per 10 acres density. Anyway, when we discussed this item we had put in that stuff that was platted prior to 1987, were the only ones that were supposed to I be excluded. Somehow in the codification of the ordinance that got dropped out and they were trying to figuring out where and when. I mean we had problems when people in Lake Lucy Highlands and... came in and said, well I'm not sitting on this 5 acre lot and you're now...half acre, 15,000 square feet 1 can I subdivide. And the intent was never that we rocked the cart for existing subdivisions because clearly those things were fairly recent vintage and it was not, that was not intended to be the case. Anyway, Kate prepared an amendment that would correct that. That basically said Al and A2 I residential districts located outside of the Metro Council's MUSA line shall be created with conformance to Article 10 and 11, which is the 1 per 10 stuff. Basically what it does is it has the effect of prohibiting anything smaller than a 2 1/2 acre lot in those rural divisions we have inside of 1 the MUSA line, which is consistent with...the ordinance of these things were created under. So we... Councilman Senn: This is the way it's always been? I Paul Krauss: Theoretically yeah... 1 Councilman Senn: But we undid it and now we need to redo it again? 1 42 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 tY g P 1 Paul Krauss: We undid it by accident and we've got to put it right. Councilman Senn: So moved. 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Under Article 10 -7, we have minimum driveways for collectors and arterials. Where does the cul -de -sac fit in there? Or is it just omitted purposely? Saying that there isn't a minimum. Mayor Chmiel: Article 10 -82, number 7. 1 Paul Krauss: I don't think there's one down. Mayor Chmiel: That's under A2, Agricultural Estate District. And it probably should have it. Paul Krauss: We can come back and give you that on... 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: I thought essentially it was omitted on purpose. Roger Knutson: Driveway separation on major roadways. g Y se P Paul Krauss: Yeah, it's the major reason for it. I guess unless there's some other purpose. I mean on cul -de -sacs. Roger Knutson: On multiple streets you wouldn't have... 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: So it's purposely not, then no minimum? Roger Knutson: I would think that's correct. 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. Councilman Senn: And again, something to compare these to is the big problem where you combine then, that's where you come in with the easements or whatever. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other questions? If not, we have a motion? Is there a second? Councilman Mason: Second. 1 Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Section 20-575 through 20 -595 regarding lot sizes as presented by staff. All voted in favor and the motion carried. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: 1 43 1, 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 Mayor Chmiel: We'll go to Michael's for speeding, Lake Luc Road. Y g Lucy ' Councilman Mason: First of all I apologize for making Mr. Harr stay here this late. I have been getting a certain amount of flack about speeds on Lake Lucy Road and I also understand that Public Safety Commission is looking into it. I guess I'd just kind of like an update so when people continue ' to call me, I can say well doggone it, I know what's going on. Scott Harr: ...two of them in the same car but we were both out there. Actually it's kind of good I ' have to be here at this hour anyway... The Public Safety staff has been meeting internally since last year to try and develop customer service concepts to help make the process easier because people utilizing our services and one of the things we started this summer was staying open on Thursday nights for primarily residents as opposed to builders that need consultation help or need permits and just can't get in here during business hours. So we stay open late on Thursday evenings. We have a secretary, mechanical and building inspector available until 7:00 or so and people are utilizing it more and more. They really appreciate that time because it's more convenient. Especially...At the last Public Safety Commission, Mike is right that a number of residents from the Lake Lucy Road area, west of Powers come in and express their concerns about traffic safety. I think I can sum it up by ' stating that their concems revolved around the increased traffic levels that are resulting from the detour, speed and the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists along the pathway. On the road side. They recommended a number of ideas to the Commission including lowering the speed limit to a constant ' 30 mph. Right now it's 35 and then lowers to 30 at the S curve further west there and widening the road. Raising the grade of the bicycle path. Bicycle lane so it's definitively different than the grade of the road. And increasing traffic enforcement. Now I'll start with the last first. Traffic enforcement has been aggressive along that road all the time but there is no other road getting more traffice enforcement. And Bob and I were out there tonight. Wrote a number of tickets. There's a County squad assigned 7 hours a day to just traffic right now and I'd say half of that is being done on Lake Lucy. There simply is no other stretch of road getting more, and there are people speeding. I don't 1 know that it's a whole lot more than other areas and certainly there is more traffic right now with the detour but there are tickets being written and they're being written for significantly beyond the speed limit. 15 to 20 mph over when they get them or people are being talked to. So that's being done. As ' far as the speed limit, the widening of the road and raising the level...has been put into a memo and sent to Charles and his staff for review. Again the policy frankly that was brought to the attention of the group is that most of these people are relatively new residents and Mr. Berhnjelm, who I'll remind you is the Police Chief in Edina and a long standing resident of Chanhassen, told us that he was one of the people at the meeting with the neighborhood and the road as it now exists was what the neighbors at that time wanted. And so there's, I'm not sure what's going to happen with that. When you have what the neighbors wanted and now the new neighbors want something that is considerably pricier. I talked to the City Manager about it a number of times. I know Don's concerned. I believe that the answer lies in educating the users of that roadway. That they have to stick with the speed ' limit. We spent a number of weeks issuing warnings. Now we're issuing tickets. I think we'll be able to control the speed that way. Then as far as the increase volume, I just don't know what to say about that. It's going to be there for a while. We're starting to see what appears to be a slowing of ' traffic. I think people are getting the idea. Todd can vouch for it. He lives right there. He's seen us 1 I City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 out there. So we're taking the concerns seriously and doing a lot. Like I said, there's no other stretch of road in the city that gets more attention. 1 Councilman Mason: Good enough. Thanks. Mayor Chmiel: And I think too, as Todd has indicated, or as Scott has indicated, that awareness is I some of the thing that's going to be done as well and we've had discussions regarding having the digital speed show. What they're really driving to educate them on the speeds within the community I and that's going to be going out maybe in just. Scott Harr: And it has, but the Mayor's right. I mean it's educating the full...drivers but on Friday I there was a squad car working Lake Lucy for 4 hours and after 3 hours a complaint came in about excessive speeds by trucks. And the deputy said well, I'm there right now. I'll spend another hour and we'll clock...and he just told her. He said, these are big trucks. I realize they look like they're ' speeding but I've been sitting here for 4 hours and they're not...so we're working on it. Councilman Mason: Good. Thank you sir. I Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Let's go to the auto related uses zoning. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: 1 AUTO RELATED USE ZONING, PLANNING DIRECTOR. Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, I think we're all aware that...of this site last, last whenever. Late last winter 1 and going into spring. We asked for some clarification in what should be included. We took it to the Planning Commission. They raised a lot of issues that weren't, I would say totally before...where this 111 was going and...Anyway, I sat down and I composed a memo to Roger saying here's what I think the Council is asking for in terms of what I was...come up with an ordinance for it. We had gotten the ordinance back. I apologize because of my need to be out of the country over the summer, being able I to get back to it. But basically we have the ordinance in place now. We're prepared to take it back to the Planning Commission for public hearing but we really wanted to get your feedback on it if we could. For a couple of reasons. First of all we're still not sure exactly where it's going and what it I accomplishes. Secondly I'll guarantee you, it's going to raise, I mean you saw John Pryzmus' issues tonight and he doesn't even have a building. Think about all the auto related uses that do have buildings that will become non - conforming. I mean we're willing to stand up and push it if you want I us to but I want to know if you want us to do it. And the second thing was, or the third thing was that, I guess we always tried to be up front. We thought there were other ways of achieving a lot of what you were trying to achieve. We put our efforts on completing the Highway 5 plan, which is not ' before the Planning Commission. And that does not eliminate auto related uses but it raises the development standards for them. We also talked about the fact that in the PUD District you can still have an auto related use. Of course PUD is a rezoning action on the part of the City Council and you I do have some additional latitude there... Also, we've been going through the ordinanances about 20 minutes ago, parking lot landscaping... None of these things are going to eliminate them or give you 45 1 I 1 II City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 the ability to say yea or nay on a particular site, which I think was one of the goals that you had. And I maybe Roger wants to comment but I'm pretty, I'm somewhat leery about an ordinance that verges on allowing people to...to some extent by saying whether or not this is a good site, bad site without exactly knowing why. Sooner or later people are going to be treated in a different manner. It leaves I it open for Planning Commission, City Council has one interpretation. A neighborhood group might have a completely different interpretation. There are a lot of questions with it. So again I wanted to bring this back to you. Get your direction and... 1 Mayor Chmiel: Okay, good. Discussion. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Me? I Mayor Chmiel: Yes. I Councilwoman Dockendorf: I really appreciate the work that staff put into it because it clarifies in my mind where our problem parcels are and what we can do to mitigate potential problems because it continues to be a concem but I don't think by creating new zoning, I don't think that's the solution. I I think we have enough measures in place to accomplish what we want to accomplish or not allow what we don't want to allow. So I really appreciate the work but I concur with the City Manager's recommendations. Junk it. . I Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Michael. I Councilman Mason: Well I'm yeah, I guess with all the work that's gone on here, I'm comfortable with the fact that there are few enough parcels that they can be dealt with without creating, boy talk about layering of complexities. I certainly see that's what this would be doing. I concur with I Councilwoman Dockendorf and the Manager's recommendation. Mayor Chmiel: I do too but I'd like to make one clarification in the conclusion. There's a name of I Mason there. Councilman Mason: No relation. 1 Mayor Chmiel: That has nothing to do with Michael. Councilman Mason: It is no relation. Thank you. Thank you so much. I Mayor Chmiel: Mark. 1 Councilman Senn: Paul in terms of existing parcels, okay I understand what you've done is broken it down here and said we've basically got 3 or 4. Okay, what about all the existing parcels which there are now auto related uses on but which also would allow redevelopment under auto related uses? 1 1 46 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 I 1 Paul Krauss: Well, let's take your first question first, because that's a little easier. There was a map that we prepared that did show some additional parcels. Last week was kind of nuts. This week is kind of nuts. Don and I didn't get a chance to go through the list. There were some other properties that were identified as potential sites. Well, you know that there's a third property at Abra/Goodyear. What Don's talking about is there's a remnent piece on the comer that we've always been...anyway, I directly across from McDonald's where the mad jogs right down. There is a site next to the motel... Again I think it's rather marginal although we did have Russ Pauly for a while looking at a car wash on that... Those were...keep in mind the Target PUD does have two auto related uses approved as a I part of the, oh the Burdick piece is another one. They're...then Charlie James which Don mentioned. Target does have two auto related uses approved under the PUD but there's a lot of strings attached in terms of what they look like...and that sort of thing. Likewise, the Market Square PUD could allow some to occur, in fact there's one being looked at right now. I think it was shown to the HRA. 1 • Councilman Mason: It wasn't auto related. Paul Krauss: Well there's an office building and I think a Wendy's...Now I couldn't lay my hands on I that map. I'm not sure if...It may be in my office. But that was about the size of it. I mean anything else that comes in, you have a lot of latitude. First of all things are going to be in the Highway 5 corridor. Secondly, if things are in, the thing that sets Abra/Goodyear apart was that it was in the TIF district and you couldn't...and say, well the ordinance doesn't say you can do this. You actually get the money so it... 1 Councilman Senn: But if they don't ask you for money, you've got no hooks. Paul Krauss: Right. But so far nobody's been able...And the other parcel is subject to zoning actions 1 on the part of the City Council. There's some strings...Charlie James' parcel. In fact he's coming here I think...and it's not clear at this point whether the auto related uses is part of it or not but we're I talking to him about... Councilman Senn: But it's an allowable use on his property? I Paul Krauss: Well right now, yes. And there's an outstanding issue with Charlie and the fact that he has approval for a gas...and he's always maintained that that approval transfers...I don't know if it's , ultimately going to be a question that's resolved by a condemnation proceeding or what not, but the site that he has approval to build a convenience store on doesn't exist anymore. It's now part of the 78th Street and part of Target's parking lot so whether that...I can't tell you it's never going to happen. I mean I tried to get that point across. There is still the potential for one popping up that 1 will raise some issues. I guess the concern that, the biggest concern that I have though is...on the potential of something happening versus under the way this ordinance is structured right now, you are significantly impacting a number of existing businesses, rightly or wrongly, this is an offshoot of how I we approach it. I have concern with how such an ordinance would be administered down the pike. Anytime something is open to subjective interpretation. We try to put some guidance in there. That's why we wrote the intent section for that ordinance the way it is. But it's still somewhat subjective. Is II it a good site or isn't it a good site? Well, staff initially said it was okay. The Planning Commission 47 1 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 said it was okay but a lot of people came in and said it wasn't at a public hearing so is it okay now? ' I don't know. That's not a good basis for a City Council to have to make a decision. Councilman Senn: Well it seemed to me that, and I'm going by memory now but I thought I counted up about almost a dozen parcels where we could in effect end up with auto related uses. Now you ' could take a few out of there... To me I don't...because auto related uses are real easy developments without TIF assistance. You know in terms of, they don't need TIF. Sure, it'd be nice to ask for it but if that's the difference between getting an auto facility in there or not, it seems to me they're not going to ask for TIF. Paul Krauss: I have to bring up that last one. There can be a... We know the third Abra/Goodyear ' site...The Ward property is potentially, which it'd have to have a rezoning action but the parcel next to the motel... The parcel next to the bank, the HRA owns. ' Councilman Senn: Yeah, and the new TH 101 parcel. That new, I thought there was going to be a parcel right by TH 101 and there was a small parcel that will be created by the realignment. Wasn't there a parcel there? Councilwoman Dockendorf: On which comer? Paul Krauss: On the south comer? ' Councilman Senn: No, on the north. On the north side. Paul Krauss: No, there isn't one. There's a comer that we own what is kind of a low area. Councilman Senn: But I thought there was already some proposal flying around about expanding the uses over from the Hanus building or something towards the, into where the Red -E -Mix property was, or what's left over after the realignment. Paul Krauss: Oh no. What happened there is, in all likelihood we're going to, we already own the ' Hanus property. Ultimately it's supposed to be sold back to a private owner after the site's improved. But the city's in condemnation to own everything from Hanus out to the old Taco. And what we had, and I put it in your packet for I think the last meeting. I was approached by the owner of AVR on, ' they did a very expensive model on how to redevelop this site and it really was... I showed it to a number of people and I said you can go to the City Council and the HRA but if you really want to see this, we'll have a presentation done but it's not... ' Councilman Senn: Well if you keep counting, we've got the Market Square one. You've got the Charlie James one. You've got, I don't know. Again, without the map I'm a little handicapped but I thought it ended up being about a dozen parcels and that really still concerns me. And like I say, the TIF you know, when it comes to auto related, I really don't, I mean TIF is a big...I've seen a lot of automotive developed in TIF districts just by simply not utilizing TIF. And stuff. Minnetonka's ' worked. I mean why did you guys, I thought you were in Minnetonka for a time. They did the same 1 48 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 thing. Minnetonka's ordinance separates out the auto uses. It made non - conforming uses out of a number of them. That's worked fine over the years. 1 Paul Krauss: Mark, that wasn't done while I was there. We did treat auto related uses. Councilman Senn: As a separate district. I Paul Krauss: ...conditional uses. But they were allowed. There was a conditional use...and they weren't easy to put in but they were done. Mayor Chmiel: Paul, wasn't there some of the real concem with some of the ones that we had was in , and adjacent to residential development. Paul Krauss: With that one particular was I think TH 7 and TH 41 was very controversial. One of I the auto related use aspects that was further away from the neighborhood than the shopping center was. Councilman Senn: Well there was some concern expressed over the potential or proposed one on the I south side of TH 5 and TH 41 by the residents back in there. Paul Krauss: Yes and that's it. It comes under PUD and you have, again you have quite a bit of 1 latitutde to say yes or no. I mean it's not a site that's zoned commercial. The only way commercial uses can come in there is if it's an ancillary part of an overall PUD...and if you say that in your 1 wisdom that's an okay site for something like that to go. So you have the ability to make that decision. You're not obligated to make it. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess I too am in agreement and I'm not going to go into a long dissertation. 1 It's getting past 10:30 and I thought we'd be out of here. I'd like to, I don't think we have to, we don't need a motion for this. I think basically what's here, what is said is at least the main feeling of 3 of us, and I'm not sure where Mark's coming from. If he feels comfortable with it or not. More or I less just drop it because there's not that much of real concern with what's left within the city. So with that, I don't have to have a motion on that do I Roger? Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor? I Mayor Chmiel: Yes Don. 1 Don Ashworth: I want to make sure that my recommendation is clear. Although I think that the ordinance as drafted is overkill, I am not saying that we should walk away from those parcels that I potentially are problems. I'm saying, let's go back in and fix those. I mean the Mason parcel, not part of your relationship. There's a potential solution for that. The Ward property and really right on down the line. Some of them, like Paul mentioned the piece next to the motel. I agree that the zoning exists but it's a swamp. I mean I don't see how anybody could use it for anything but I guess 49 1 • 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 we'd have to look further at the site but I mean it's a swamp. Anyway, I'm saying don't walk away from those pieces. Councilman Senn: Don, I understand that and that's exactly my concern because auto related uses are the only use that I know of today that can support $10.00 a square foot land cost and you can fix a ' swamp for $10.00 a square foot in land cost. You can't put anything else there but you can put auto there and that's what happens countless tithe and time again. In other locations. Don Ashworth: But I firmly believe that that lot would be classified under our wetland protection and you could not. ' Councilman Senn: Well if that's a different fix, then I'd love to see the fixes but I haven't seen the fixes on this almost dozen parcels that I'm really concerned about. Don Ashworth: And I agree with you. I say let's do the fixes. Paul Krauss: Well, what we can do is come back to you...and try to give you an explanation on each. Mayor Chmiel: I think that'd be a good idea. Okay. Consent agenda. I guess you've got a few more here Mark. You've got all of them. Go ahead. 1 C. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER TO TH 101 SOUTH LEG PROJECT 90 -20, AND D. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER TO TH 101 NORTH LEG PROJECT 88 -22C. 1 Councilman Senn: Charles. On 2(c), the current contract amount was $489 but what was the original contract amount? ' Charles Folch: I believe it was... Mayor Chmiel: I think you're right because...I called him and asked him the same question and what he's saying is basically right. Because I thought there was a different price as well. Councilman Senn: Okay, and so the $489 is now with the other increase? Charles Folch: That's correct, yes. Councilman Senn: Okay. On 2(d), who's paying. Mayor Chmiel: Before we move that one, would you move approval of c? ' Councilman Senn: Well one more question then as it relates to both. I don't know whether it's (c) or it's (d). One way or another but I heard the trail design, which was previously to the north part of ' South Lotus is now no longer to the north part of South Lotus. I mean I heard that it's now the south part of South Lotus. South entrance versus north entrance. 1 50 1 1 Council Meeting - September tember 27, 1993 P 1 Charles Folch: I was not aware of any change here. The plans that were approved with the project had the trail going up to the south entrance at this point in time. It's not extending to the north entrance. Don Ashworth: If I may. I had relayed to Mark, because we had to the south leg, you're absolutely correct. And then in looking at it, saying well does this make any sense. Let's carry it up to that north leg and the initial meetings with BRW were under that premise. What occurred then is BRW found some factual basis for why it would be difficult to do that and then it left out of the final I documents. And I guess what I'm hearing Mark, Councilman Senn say is, what were the qualified, what were the things that knocked out that potential. Charles Folch: One that comes to mind rather quickly is that townhome building that's immediately 1 north of the south entrance. They have a berm that they have some screening and some shrubbery on. Basically that berm would have been sliced and the trees or shrubbery would have come off the berm I and it would have been sliced in half. You would have had to put a retaining wall to even maintain that berm at that height to maintain the screening and I know the Mayor received a few calls on this also from a few people in that building that were concerned about maintaining the screening and such from Highway 5. Some of the other constraints going to the north. We would have probably had to add some additional storm sewer because we've got a culvert crossing that feeds down through that park area there. And we felt that basically, by the time the decisions were made to stop the trail at the south entrance because of these constraints, there really wasn't any discussions at that point in time I about looking at the broader scope of the trail along TH 101. And so I think if the project goes forward in constructing a trail, that's certainly an element that would be incorporated into that overall project. But the decision was made at the time we...that it's just too difficult to do at this point in I time and yet meet the concems of the residents. Councilman Senn: So that was taken out of the contract documents prior to? I Charles Folch: Well, it was in preliminary design but it did not ever make it to final design. Councilman Senn: Because I remember it in preliminary but I mean, when it was taken out in final, 1 then it wasn't included in the contract right? Okay. Alright. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, can we move on (c) and (d)? 1 Councilman Senn: Move on (c). I have a question on (d), if you want to do them separately. I Mayor Chmiel: If you want to move them both, I can just ask the question. Who's paying for all the costs associated with the MnDot request? Is MnDot paying for it or are we? , Charles Folch: No we are. Basically that's, we're doing the entire project. It's something that the requirement came out of the single design review that we received from MnDot. Actually shortly after 111 the bids were awarded, they awarded the bids contingent, I received...but no, that's a city cost just like the signal and everything else. 51 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Councilman Senn: And as far as the approximate $12,000.00 or whatever on 2(c) and now with 7 ' before on this. I mean that's what, we have additional TIF funds in that district still to pay that or whatever? ' Charles Folch: On 2(c), it's actually only additional, well the change order at this time is the $3,000.00 change order for 2(c). ' Councilman Senn: But the previous one included two. I think between the two. Charles Folch: Right. And that's a separate district that we use to cover the South Leg project as opposed to the North Leg project. Yeah, the amount should not be omitted. It's not going to affect ' the amount of the district. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, can we move on (c) and (d)? Councilwoman Dockendorf: He moved on (c). 1 Councilman Senn: No I haven't. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh I'm sorry... • Councilman Senn: So moved. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? Councilman Mason: Second. 1 Resolution #93 -94: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Change Order No. 2 to the Trunk Highway 101 Realignment (South Leg) Project No. 90-20. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Resolution #93 -95: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Contract Amendment No. 1 for the Trunk Highway 101 Realignment (North Leg) Railroad Improvement project as attached adding $7,451.00 to the total contact amount for the traffic signal preemption control equipment. All voted in favor and the motion carried. 1 F. SET DATE FOR SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION, OCTOBER 4. Councilman Senn: I didn't know if anybody else had a problem with that night. When we talked ' about it last week, we said we were going to get together for a quick 15 minute meeting or whatever. I have a problem beyond that. I didn't know if anybody else did or not. Obviously not. Mayor Chmiel: No, I don't. 52 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 I 1 Councilman Senn: Okay. Councilwoman Dockendorf: But you aren't able to make it Mark? 1 Councilman Senn: No. I will not be there then. Unless something drastic changes but I don't always control that. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Can we move on 2(0. I Councilman Mason: So moved. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? 1 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Second. Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to set the date for the special City Council meeting for October 4, 1993. All voted in favor and the motion carried. 1 H. MINNEWASHTA MANOR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION RECREATION BEACHLOT INTERIM USE PERMIT, CLARIFICATION OF CONDITION. 1 Councilman Senn: (h) we already did too didn't we? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah. We pulled it. Mayor Chmiel: Clarification of condition. Not on that one to my knowledge. I Councilwoman Dockendorf: We dealt with it though. I have it crossed off. Councilman Mason: Yes we did. On Minnewashta we dealt with it already. The gentlemen, we 1 talked about 2(h). Mayor Chmiel: Oh yeah, you're right. 1 Councilman Senn: Yeah (g) we moved to the next meeting and (h) we approved. I Mayor Chmiel: But I did not put that for an approval. So can I have an approval at this time? Councilwoman Dockendorf: I think we did. 1 Councilman Senn: We approved it. Mayor Chmiel: Did we? I 53 1 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Councilman Senn: Yeah. 1 Mayor Chmiel: I got it checked here for being pulled. ' Councilman Mason: Well we'd better do it again. Mayor Chmiel: Let's do it just to be on the safe side. 1 Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the clarficiation of conditions for Minnewashta Manor Homeowners Association Recreation Beachlot Interim Use Permit. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ' I. APPROVAL OF ACCOUNTS. ' Councilman Senn: A question for Roger. On your memorandum. If I'm understanding your memorandum right, basically it's okay for the City to approve the HRA expenditures? 1 Roger Knutson: Right. Councilman Senn: Doesn't the HRA have to do some sort of approval of those same expenditures? Roger Knutson: No, they authorized you to do it, which I have. ' Mayor Chmiel: Because so many things are intertwined within the city and if I remember correctly, our Deloitte and Touche, our auditor's also recommended that we go through that same. ' Roger Knutson: I had a rather lengthy discussion with the auditors on the subject. They were more than comfortable that they recommended this process. You don't have to do it of course. Councilman Senn: Okay then how, I mean I guess in effect how do we know that all the approvals ' are there for a project before you approve the expenditure or a contract or whatever when we neither approve the contract or the project? I don't understand that. ' Roger Knutson: On many...projects you're involved in approving the TIF funds. I mean how do you know a particular bill is justified? Councilman Senn: Yeah. Or is it a contract there and that it meets the contract terms? Roger Knutson: Essentially the same way you do frankly on any other item on your accounts payable. 1 That's something that's going to have to be reviewed. If you have a question, you can call. You can pick off any item on here and there's always, you can ask a question as to whether it's been authorized. 1 ' 54 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 1 Councilman Senn: Don, intemally on staff procedure, I mean if there's something that exceeds a contract amount or an approved contract amount, does that come back in automatically then? For I increasing the size of the contract. I mean I haven't seen that always happen. I didn't think it was automatic. Don Ashworth: The first whack at it is, the HRA cannot do any projects unless they include that 1 project as a part of their TIF plan. So each year they submit to you the proposed TIF plan and it shows under their community center, x number of dollars. Senior housing, or senior center and there's I an amount set for that. Then the next step in the process is the actual letting of a contract. So in the case of, I'm trying to think of some. Councilman Senn: Well like in the case of the entertainment complex there was an HRA approval of 1 first phase study or design but it was not to exceed I think $25,000.00 or something, and we exceeded that amount a long time ago. I mean we're way over that. We're probably double that now. I mean I you're saying Council approves it but I have never seen any contract modifications come in and say that that's changed, nor have I seen an HRA action do that. Todd Gerhardt: The $25,000.00 was for the economic development district. I think there was. 1 Councilman Senn: No, this was the entertainment, I mean this was the community center complex 1 back behind where we're talking about the bowling alley. I mean the bills keep rolling in. Todd Gerhardt: We went through a extensive review of architects and they outlined what their cost I would be associated with the preliminary studies. I can't remember if there was a $25,000.00 not to exceed for that. Don Ashworth: It was a percent of the contract was the basic payment. That any work done in 111 advance of actually coming up with the particular design was being paid on an hourly basis. Councilman Senn: But it had a cap on it in the HRA action...the cap. Don Ashworth: I don't recall that. I Councilman Senn: Well, I'll dig it out and get it to you later then and we'll just deal with it that way. Last question is, as far as these accounts then go. Are you saying when we approve HRA accounts 1 we are approving payment of HRA expenditures out of HRA accounts, not city accounts? Roger Knutson: Of course. I Mayor Chmiel: Yes. It'd better be. 1 55 1 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Councilman Senn: So none of these items in here under HRA or like the Hanus building or any of ' that, none of that money is being spent out of any city funds? It's all purely HRA funds? Is that true Don? Don Ashworth: That's correct. Roger Knutson: If I could. I don't want to belabor this but it's like a change order. I mean mistakes could theoretically happen. If you approve a construction contract for $100,000.00 and you spend, a fixed fee and it goes more than that and they have to come in for a change order. The same would be true on an HRA contract or anything else. The contract needs to be amended. 1 Councilman Senn: Okay. Can you tell me what a condemnation commission is? I've never heard of it before. 1 Roger Knutson: Condemnation commission? Councilman Senn: Yeah. We're paying somebody commission to. Roger Knutson: To the Condemnation Commissioners. You don't pay a commission. ' Councilman Senn: So this is a mis. Well, there's condemnation commissioner in here too. But there's also in here it says condemnation commission. ' Roger Knutson: I'm not sure. • Councilman Senn: On page 4. It just says condemnation commission for Eckankar and I mean back here further it says condemnation commissioner. Roger Knutson: They don't work on commissions. 1 Councilman Senn: No, I didn't think so. I was just curious. Because on page 6 it says condemnation commissioner. Roger Knutson: They get per diem. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. We have a motion to accept that amount. ' Councilman Senn: It has to be somebody else. I'm still uncomfortable. 1 Mayor Chmiel: I'll move it. Councilman Mason: Second. 1 1 56 1 1 III City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the accounts payable as 1 presented. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 1. Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adjoum the meeting. All voted in 1 favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. Submitted by Don Ashworth 1 City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 57 1 1 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 15, 1993 1 Vice Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Joe Scott, Ladd Conrad, Nancy Mancino, Jeff Farmakes, Diane Harberts and Matt Ledvina • MEMBERS ABSENT: Brian Batzli STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Senior Planner PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE REGARDING TEMPORARY SALES. Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. Vice Chair Conrad called the public 1 hearing to order. ' Conrad: I'm just going to open it up for, I'm not going to go round robin. Ledvina: Is this a public hearing? 1 Conrad: It is a public hearing. We'll note that there is nobody from the public here but I • don't. Aanenson: I think when we get a regular ordinances...we did talk with people from Target today who did request pumpkin sales in front of the Target for their grand opening and the Council felt that, was uncomfortable with that. They felt that the pumpkins should be inside the store and not outside. • Scott: Say what? Aanenson: I think we need to differentiate because we had this request often times...where they want to have a sidewalk sales and that sort of thing...and maybe that's the time that we can tie in with...or maybe they're in the Arts Festival or something like that when there...that that would be the appropriate time to have sidewalk sales. Mancino: But wouldn't that almost be used as an interim use? Only because they could plan ahead and do that. You know every year we were going to have a 4th of July outdoor sidewalk sale. 1 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 Aanenson: You could except I think you'd have to, you know get...I'm just looking at if you 1 want to see that, if you establish a criteria and you feel comfortable with that, then I think we could go through that permit. If it's something you don't feel comfortable with or they don't agree to the criteria you've established, then I think you do want to look at it. Mancino: Well the only thing I'm not clear about, what is, would be under temporary sales. ' What's going to be under interim use and what's going to be under conditional use? I'm not clear. Aanenson: I think the only one staff is a little uncomfortable with at this time is more on a produce kind of line where it's grown or maybe flowers, pumpkins, Christmas trees. Those sort of things. They're not looking at bringing in merchandise. 1 Mancino: So that's seasonal? 1 Aanenson Right. Mancino: Because if they have to be grown. Aanenson: Right. Mancino: So does that mean that our definition of temporary sales is temporary seasonal sales? 1 Aanenson. Yeah, that's how the staff feels comfortable doing it. Scott: You could maybe call it seasonal agricultural products and then we don't have Elvis 1 paintings, I know darn anyway. Farmakes: My worry about that is, what if you, what if you get a bad load of shrimp up here or something? Scott: Well I don't know if you could, that's not agricultural though. Harberts: It is. 1 Scott: No it's. Harberts: It's regulated under the Department of Agriculture. 1 2 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 Scott: Plant material. Farmakes: For temporary use, what we're saying is...I think they've got seasonal shrimp. They have the Christmas tree lot and they have the...or something showing up with a bar -be- que and they sell hotdogs. And on occasion, it seems quite often on occasion, they have truckloads of pop coming in for sale and I don't know if that's non - profit or if that's part of the supermarket that got a good buy on pop. They have teaser type sales stuff where there will run an ad at a very low price to get people to come in and do their shopping. So the limitations of doing that type of stuff, does that become. Aanenson: You can see the depth of the problem trying to define. That's one of the other 1 things Target had requested too. Is to put a greenhouse...and you'll notice a lot of grocery stores they try to do that. In the summer there may be overflow parking. In the winter, unless they clear all the snow off, if you want Christmas trees down there, that could be a real problem. So they can really proliferate. That's why we need to be careful about what we allow and how many we allow on the site. 1 Farmakes Do we limit, you limit a site location but do you limit, let's say for Market Square. You have how many stores there. Do you allow each store to do a promotion? Or do you limit the numbers or do you just limit it to that site itself? Aanenson: I think we would be saying...because that's part of an PUD, that whole center. I would say if you say they can have a grand opening or let's say they tie the 4th of July celebration. That would be the sidewalk sales. Whatever promotion they want to do then. Because with the sign ordinance, we want to allow them 3 times a year to have special 1 signage and I think that's kind of what we would like to see...and then the seasonal thing...fall or summer and winter. Harberts: How would you categorize, I noticed when Festival does a brat wagon. Aanenson: That would fall under, that was kind of a summer festival kind of thing. A grand 1 opening. We do allow one grand opening. I think that's what Target was going to do. Harberts: I think I counted it more than once though. 1 Aanenson: They also have requests for Girl Scouts who want to sell cookies out front. It's a never ending thing. I think there's certain things we sort of want to control but do we want to be out there if someone's selling... 1 3 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 Scott: No, because I think that, I mean I personally don't like to get hassled. It's a hassle enough to out and buy something at retail and it's especially bad I think when you have the Nestea Clown out there trying to get you to take a drink of something. So I mean I think if we're talking about, it's going to be we have the different zoning areas. I think also too when you talk about property owners doing something on their own behalf versus someone getting permission from a property owner, I think we need to be a little bit more restrictive in that sense. I think we should give a fair amount of leeway to non - profits. But the thing I don't want to see is. Harberts: Community based non - profit. Scott: Yeah, there you go. Yeah, community based non - profit. The thing I don't want to see is, I don't want to see people from who knows where getting permission from somebody and who knows what the heck they're going to sell. Farmakes. Can you target use to industry? I mean you're saying agriculture. Can you do that? Aanenson: Well I did speak to Roger about that issue and there is, you have to...I did call some other cities and ask what they do. Sometimes they restrict...but then they choose on the other hand, just to ignore the corn huts and that sort of thing. Farmakes: The only thing that worries me obviously, it's almost that corn or something have a built in protection. There are some perishable type foods. Who's responsible if that's not up to par, and I'm not familiar enough with that industry to know how they touch that or who's legally responsible if someone gets ill. Are those people gone in 2 weeks and back down to Florida? Mancino: I feel I take my chance when I stop at the hot meat man or the hot shrimp man or woman, and buy something and I don't know but that's kind of my responsibility. Are they going to be there the next day? I doubt it. Scott: Well that's why I think if we talk about local groups and obviously Christmas trees aren't grown locally but I mean we think about who sells Christmas trees. We're talking about the Lions. Well that's what I mean. I think if we're looking at the local non - profits and limiting it to, as we can legally, but I think we've got some leeway. I like what you're doing with, if you owned the property or you're something like Market Square. You have 3 of these a year and that's great. I'd actually like to see 4 of them a year so they can do something quarterly but you know, be that as it may. But I think we have to be really 4 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 or local, a festival sponsored by local organizations. Maybe that's another little bucket but I think if we can separate these things out and then be able to deal with them individually, perhaps that's because I can see this thing being a huge octopus with all sorts of. Conrad: Well it shouldn't be complicated you know and I think there's also a trigger if there's, I think the rules will never be Tight. They'll always be, so the rules have to take care of a certain amount of things and if it doesn't, then they kick it into, then it comes to the Planning Commission and we take a look at it. Yeah, and that may take some time and that will discourage some people but that's the way it will have to be. This could be really a fiasco. You can out guess all the things we're talking about here and I'd rather not see a huge ordinance. I think the logic for what we're doing and not have it come through the Planning Commission. If we can come up with the standards that are simple, that are real clear that we know that we're controlling them, then it should be administrative approval. For those things we can't figure out because there are too many variables, they've got to come in to see us. Farmakes: Then I think you should clarify the intent of what we don't want up front. Maybe that's the... Conrad: The only other thing Kate, I think you've got to keep in the back of you mind, you know what other shopping centers and other retailers are doing. I don't think we're trying to be, well you see what they're doing. The sidewalk sales are very typical. Sometimes there are truckload sales, and I think some of those are fun things. I guess I .don't feel that we need to discourage those. I think we're trying to prevent some of this other stuff from happening: That's the bulk of this ordinance. Not to keep Target from having pumpkins out in the front of their store. Scott: Isn't it what we don't want transient for profit merchandising going on in town, unless it's controlled very tightly. Conrad. Yeah, right. Scott: Is that kind of what we're doing? Aanenson: ...temporary sales currently being outdoor storage. Conrad: Right. Scott: That's like the first two sentences. This ordinance is designed to discourage the following, you know two sentences. 7 • 1 __ -- Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 Farmakes: It would be helpful though if we do get a farmers market type situation, that ' would be helpful to, so you don't have these kind of location signs all over the city and cardboard. You know, I'm not sure though, can you do an ordinance? I can see that we've done profit and non - profit for things like in signage. But can you designate that it has to be local non - profit? I've never heard of that. Scott: That's the intent but I mean I think. Mancino: Legally, I doubt it. Harberts: No because then you're discriminating. Farmakes: Particularly if you're targeting industries. I'm not sure if the signage I know that if it had to be fairly unrestrictive of industry that was applied across the board. A temporary sign for a house. A temporary sign for a building. Scott: Or do we grandfather in certain things that we. Farmakes: I noticed that...said it was illegal in the zoning to target, when we were talking ' about Highway 5, it was illegal to target a specific industry. That would make it more restrictive for hotels. 1 Scott: Or auto related uses? ' Harberts: I'm guessing Kate that you've talked with other cities or continue to talk with other cities. You know I think that with an ordinance you could, what you don't want to do is get into a checklist situation and I think you have to look at what is your overall goal in terms of ' what you're trying to, I guess control. Because of whatever reason. If it's public safety related or whatever. I think that really has to be the basis. In terms of the overall goal that you're trying to achieve with the ordinance otherwise you start getting into a checklist and it's almost like you're creating a, I don't know, maybe to some extent a glass, a bubble around Chanhassen in terms of we'll allow you in or we won't allow you to do this and I don't think that's really what the role of government is all about. Farmakes: There's one other thing too that we're not, right now we do Oktoberfest and a couple other, two seasonal holidays. Excelsior does a lot more. They draw a lot of people ' in. Currently we don't really have a location for that unless we use the parking lot or baseball field. If the city does, say finish that park up in front, they may have, or the farmers market there may be an opportunity to have like a citywide type situation for that can be 8 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 r 1 conditions made for flea markets and that type of thing throughout the city. Again, that'd be on a limited basis. 1 Harberts: Is there an opportunity to keep the ordinance to some flexibility? You know as maybe Chanhassen matures towards this type of issue, I think there's a lot of what ifs and I 1 think we need to keep that ordinance, or potential ordinance somewhat flexible so we can maybe address those things as things develop here. But I think again the overall goal is to, what are we really striving to do. I don't think we want to make things burdensome for ' anyone but you know there's clearly reasons to regulate different sales. Temporary sales or whatever. Aanenson: In the past we haven't had any large anchors downtown before. So now...and we're not sure if we approve those uses...we want all this stuff outside. And so some of it does...with the community. I guess what we're looking for is... Scott: And if it's a tenant or a landowner, that's one thing and we can say you can do 4 of those a year. And then if it's somebody who's temporarily leasing, I think that's a whole other, different use and different type of merchandising and then throw in the non - profit piece so I think those three things, that keeps something fairly simple and you can always amend an ordinance you know. Conrad: Well, do you have enough input? I think that's pretty good. And I think the intent of this is real important. I think you've heard some good comments from the people here. Ledvina: I have some specifics. I don't know if you wanted to hear. , Conrad: Go ahead. Now's the time. Ledvina: Well, I'll just start out and say that just kind of following up on Ladd's idea to provide some guidance on what constitutes an application that would necessitate it coming before the Planning Commission. I think maybe all these things that we've talked about go in an intent statement and then kind of a little blueprint for an applicant that serves as, if you're going beyond or cannot meet the requirements that are laid out here and you always have the right to go to the Planning Commission to discuss your proposal. So I think that would be 1 appropriate. On page 4, standards for temporary sales on the bottom of the page. I have a real problem with that language. Just save the clause, including any additional conditions as may be established by the Planning Department. I think Diane would say, well enables you ' to have the flexibility but I don't know. That's kind of carte blanche and I don't kind of like that. So take a close look at that. If there's a way of saying it a little bit differently, I would prefer that. ' 9 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 Aanenson: It's hard to hit all things. Sometimes... Ledvina: I understand the difficulty but at the same time, you don't want a situation where the applicant feels that you have the power or you can point to this thing in the ordinance and say, well we can make you confine your operation to 10 x 30 rectangle or something like that. And that's our condition. I don't know. Maybe that's obtuse but. Aanenson: I can think of a couple ways we can handle that. Why don't we just say, any other proof that would deemed necessary and then we could put a clause that would say, if staff feels that the information that's been provided is insufficient, then we would request that ' you come here. It'd be like what you're giving them... Ledvina: That's fine. If we could just take another look at that because. Conrad: And that triggers a thought for things going through here. Is the City Council ' always the end? It doesn't have to be. Planning Commission could be the grantor of the permit. A lot of responsibility folks. ' Mancino: My shoulders are heavy. Conrad: That is an alternative to shortening the process. I think you can make us. They won't is my guess but. Scott: We're usurping their. Conrad: It is a way to shorten it. ' Aanenson: To shorten the process and that's the part... Farmakes: Granting a permit, you don't waive the rest of the city ordinance? Say for temporary signs. There's a size limitation for temporary signs. They have to conform to that.... 1 Aanenson: ...limiting walls signs and we did... Ledvina: That's another thing. That was my exact next point. If you've got the Boy Scouts, they don't even have a warming shack. I mean if they don't have, if they're limited to wall signs, then they don't have any signs. Farmakes: Temporary signs don't necessarily have to be wall signs though. 1 10 1 an— Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 Ledvina: But it says right here. Farmakes: What is it, it's 4 x 8? I Mancino: I thought they always had a warming shack. 1 Ledvina: Okay, whatever. But I mean, a trash barrel or something. And then if you're saying they have to conform to the ordinance, which is, I think it's 15% of the wall space in 1 the frontage or something like that. If they got this little bitty trailer, or whatever, they're not going to be happy with a 15% as a sign this big or something. I don't know. I Farmakes: That formula gives them a minimum they can make. I think that's 4 x 8 on a temporary sign. And they could build that. That formula comes into play when you have massive Targets. Ledvina: I don't know. I guess I would just like you to revisit that item there. Conrad. Can they have banners? They can, can't they? Ledvina. Yeah, I don't know. I don't care. Streamers, banners. 1 Conrad: Banners would typically be the way to do it. Ledvina: Little kids with sandwich signs walking around. Scott: Also too, if there are things like, I get concerned about the temporary food sales. And 1 as part of the permitting process should be anything that's licensed by the Department of Agriculture or the State. The Board of Health or you know, whatever. I don't know who I these authorities are. They should be made to produce a copy of their certificate or whatever that happens to be. I think we should take advantage of work that other governmental bodies have done to regulate stuff and piggy back on that as much as possible. 1 Conrad: What else do you have Matt? Ledvina: And then I'd just like to go on record as saying that I think Target should have I their 4 x 4 bin of pumpkins. Scott: That's all it is? I Ledvina: It's 4 x 12, I'm sorry. 1 11 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 Mancino: 4 feet by 12 feet. ' Ledvina: Yeah. 4 feet by 12 feet. I think they should be able to have their bin of pumpkins. Scott: Yeah. I'd go on record as saying they should have their pumpkins too. Conrad: You know if you want to see an affect, Cub effectively merchandises the front of their store in a very presentable way so it's not tacky. We're trying to get rid of tacky but it's fun to walk into their store. Sometimes it's cut case stuff. Sometimes it spells out, you know merchandise that spells out things. Or it's pumpkins. Nice merchandising. Makes it a little friendlier. It doesn't last forever. Gee I'd hate to see us discourage them and become this clinical looking town. Antiseptic type of thing. I don't think we want that. Mancino: How long do you think of as temporary? Two months? ' Aanenson: Well, I think...each tYP a of use. Now you have a produce stand, it may be 6 to 8 weeks. That's something we're going to have to try to establish with each different type. If ' it's the Christmas tree sales, probably Thanksgiving until the day after Christmas. So I think the one...seasonal. That they're leasing the space and try to give a time line for those. The ' owner occupied, the guy that owns the...pot sales, things like that, I think we limit those to maybe a week, 3 times a year or whatever we decide... ' Scott: You're heading in the right direction. I like that. Aanenson: Because if they do want to sell brats out there once a year... 1 Ledvina: Other than that, I guess I support, generally I support the ordinance and I think it's reasonable. Reasonably good effort. Conrad: Unless there's anything else, Kate I don't think we need a motion. Just go and do it and then we will, it will be a public hearing when it comes back. Okay. ' Farmakes: We should be aware too that there's, the Highway 5 situation, the sign ordinance is coming up. The architectural ordinance is in there. They're all sort of merged together. I ' think it wasn't necessarily planned that way but we have to be aware I think that there may be a perception to the Chamber that we are being anti business on some of these issues. And we should be aware of that potential and try and deal with that through communication. I know ' the last meeting we had, Brad stood up and said that for instance the parking ordinance was anti business. And you were talking about the signage package and saying, when in fact...It was half of the committee were members of the Chamber but they weren't part of Market 12 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 Square. Well, I mean I think we need to be up front with that and let people know and tal k about that. Address that every time it's brought up and try to be educational about that. Especially on the intent statements of what these things you're accomplishing, rather than arguing. No matter how you do it, it's going to affect somebody's business in some particular way and I think that the perception is that the people who are sitting on the Commission don't know anything about me trying to make a living in the business world and you're arbitrarily making restrictions on me when I'm t 'tying to make a living and pay a couple of people and pay my bills and pay the taxes and so on and I don't need that type of bureaucracy thrown at me. In a way that's easy to come up and say and the opposite direction is kind of hard for us to come up with these ordinances to make a community that we want to live in. Scott: It's an interesting circumstance because I know that on the sign ordinance, even 1 before, I mean when, before things got serious, I got a call from Paul saying Joe, we're going to do this sign ordinance. Can you give me some names of some people on the Chamber of Commerce who'd be interested and that's how Kevin McShane got on there and all those sorts of things. And I quite frankly don't have any sympathy for business people in town who don't get involved in the Chamber of Commerce because Kate sits on our Board. She's at every Board meeting and there are a large number of people who get involved in this kind of • input, but I have no sympathy for business owners who don't get involved in the process and make this is a very, this is a commercial for the Chamber membership obviously. But if they want to get involved and they're members of the Chamber, they'll know what's going on and they will have the opportunity to have input. If they don't, c'est la vie. • Farmakes: We're oin to have to know that it's in someone somewhere's advantage to put g g up a 40 foot pylon signs down the main drag of downtown so that they can be seen from Highway 5. It's to someone's advantage and someone's going to want to do that. Who and 1 when we feel we don't think it's right, you're dealing more ascerteric things. You don't think it's going to look good or I think that every time that comes up, particularly from the developer's standpoint, it's going to make them far more easier to sell a lease if they have that 40 foot sign. Scott: Then you can't, then another thing too is, you can kind of, I take a look at the Target ' situation is that within probably 2 to 3 months, the way Target markets, within 2 to 3 months of the time they have their grand opening, everybody who could potentially buy stuff there in their market area will know where it is. So a 40 foot pylon sign, you know. And I can see from a developer's standpoint, you know for rents, for leasing and that sort of thing, they have the opportunity to say well we're going to, this is the signage and signage and parking are the two hot things when you're trying to lease property. But then we also have to take it with a grain of salt because obviously they want the world so they can give part of that world to their lessee's. So when I hear business people talk about things, some of them are very, very 1 13 1 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 good at explaining, you know this is what I really need. Very straight forward versus the embellishment and I think as a Planning Commission, we have to see through the embellishment and kind of cut down to what do these people really need. Conrad: You have to give them reasonable exposure. That's a fundamental thing. That's part of the business. It's just where is, what is reasonable and whether it be, I can empathize. I work for a lot of people that depend on signage and Jeff, you know a lot about signage. 1 Farmakes: But we don't seem to argue the intent. It's just, you know Brad was up here and he's...he wasn't arguing the intent. And that's what really seems that we should be ' communicating on. What the intent of what we're trying to do. The thing...come back on something that would fit in to how they're doing something, fine. Come forward and say what they are. Conrad: But it is, boy these are tough issues. Signage for services. Signage and strip type- malls. Compare what's on the Frontier building. That doesn't light up but is relatively ugly. We don't find fault. At least I haven't heard a lot of fault with those signs but they're not attractive. They just don't light up. But we find a lot of fault with the ones that light up. And we find a lot of fault by putting more than 6 per running feet on 100 or 200 foot 1 building. We find a lot of fault there if they're more than 14 inches. But go out and take a look. The signs on the Frontier building are not a piece of art. They're pretty ugly and again, it's tough to come to these conclusions. Or come to, not to a conclusion but come to what's ' the style for Chanhassen. I don't claim to know it. I just know that reasonable works and if you give them some reasonable exposure, nobody's going to complain and then the standards really make sense beyond that. To aesthetically keep Chanhassen a good looking community. Farmakes I said the same thin ...we're looking for a reasonable a structures with g g type ' reasonable type of quality. Scott: High quality. ' Conrad: See that's where, I think the high quality is such an important deal. Farmakes: But we still deal with minimums. I mean we're selling high quality. Our ordinances deal with minimum requirements. Conrad: You're right. Mancino: Well I just want to add one thing, a little bit about the Tree Board. We are doing 1 some new ordinances with landscaping and how much developer's can remove from the lots, 1 14 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1, 1 etc and we invited them to our meeting last Monday night and not one showed up so we are going to hold a second meeting on the 27th of this month hoping that developers will show I up because they have a concern about what we're doing for tree preservation. So we're hoping that before we get it into the Planning Commission that we have reviewed it with them and we've listened to them and made some revisions or whatever. So we're very definitely on the Tree Board trying to bring the developers into the process and making sure that we communicate with them before coming here. Conrad: That's good that you're doing that. That's the way the process should work. They shouldn't come to the meeting of the public hearing and raise issues at that point in time. Okay. 1 CONTINUE DISCUSSION OF BOULEVARD ALTERNATIVES NORTH OF HIGHWAY 5. Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. I Conrad: Any comments? 1 Ledvina: So we have to have, I saw three public meetings. Aanenson: We thought maybe just two meetings specifically on the plans and then one ' g Y just g P Y P public hearing but if we need 3 meetings before we can hold a public hearing to go through the whole document. I Ledvina: But how many public hearings do we need? I Aanenson: One. Ledvina: One. 1 Aanenson: Specifically we don't need a public hearing on the preferred alignment because 111 that just needs to be an information meeting. We do need a public hearing on the Comp Plan amendment. Ledvina: How about the Environmental Assessment? 1 Aanenson: The Environmental Assessment's...We don't need a public hearing specifically. I We just need information which we have held but I think in fairness because of looking at the land use. 1 15 1 11 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 Farmakes: Yeah, I would think that would be a good idea...with the property owners. Mancino: We had a lot of property owners. Farmakes: Give them an opportunity to come and verbalize. I would like to see an objective presentation bearing in mind that there was disagreement among the group as to some of those issues. Conrad: And who would, Jeff who would present that? 1 Mancino: Barry? Farmakes. Well I'm assuming that Barry and. ' Aanenson: Barton - Aschman. 1 Farmakes: Yeah but there were three...choices. There was. Scott: You mean Deb Porter? Farmakes: Deb Porter, yeah. It was primarily those three. 1 Aanenson: Deb did a specific function. Environmental Assessment document. First of all we were trying to go with the hurdle that we felt uncomfortable with on the land use and Barry specifically...more than the study itself... Farmakes: There are some issues that are not clear. In other words they were washy. Aesthetically, monetarily and others are very clear as to where the direction would be from cost factor. From environmental factor. So I think the majority of what we disagreed with were issues where they were 6 to 1, half a dozen of the other. We need to go one way up or down and essentially it costs the same amount of money. The EPA is...same and it was more or less issues of long term use. ' Conrad: How about the issues Jeff, and the ones that sort of got me going a little bit were when the developers, and it could have been Brad, stood up and said that when the one alternative that's further away from TH 5, that is restrictive. That is this. That is that. That 1 doesn't help. It's going to hard to sell that property. I need, I personally need some perspective on. 1 1 16 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 Farmakes: It's long term use. Whether you're medium or high density or, right now the plan it's residential so I mean it's. Mancino: But they certainly didn't want their land divided. They didn't want it divided up so what we needed to see when the northern route was put before us, was how much acreage is going to be here between the northern route and Highway 5. I mean is it a substantial amount? Is it 16 acres? Are we talking about 10 acres? How many acres are we talking about? Because every one of them stood up and said, we do not want our land divided. And , of course we know a street, a road is going to have to go in there regardless because you're going to have to get access. But they want to make the decision of where the land is divided. Aanenson: Just to add what Nancy is saying. We did do, in the study it does show the two Y Y alternatives and how the roadway, what size parcels would you have left so. Conrad: And I haven't gone through that yet but what I don't understand is what they said was, that's not. It is a function of how much acreage but it's also they're saying, hey. We may not be able to sell that. Nobody, there may not be any buyers that believe in this. Farmakes: You talk about market also. He was talking about marketing for a particular type of house versus another type that the market's out there for. So this is really a microcosm of just about everything that we've doing here and dealing with the growth issues. Development of retail issues that are coming up on TH 5 and TH 41. With the Mill's property. Small • scale commercial. Residential. High density. It gets into the industrial areas. Just everything. It's just sort of everything. It's a complicated long term, lot of information to digest and to look at. And like I said, some things are really clear. And other things are not so clear. Aanenson: As we see it there's really three major components. One is the land use. There were some areas that we thought was inappropriate land use and we recommended a change when you do the Comp Plan. And you kind of tie into that is the setting component. Where should the northern alignment be. And a third point is, we've adopted, we're looking at really beefed up design standards and...but I think the critical part, as far as the time track that we thought we were on, was trying to get the land use and the road down first but now we've got the extra time. I think it's going to make sense to go through this in detail and get more public input and not have so much pressure and making good decisions. Scott: You know what would help too I think is a field trip. One of the things I had a , conversation with Diane and she just said that Southwest Metro would be more than happy to come with a couple of vehicles. 17 ' 1 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 Aanenson: We'd have to do that with the second meeting in October. The first one in 1 October. Scott: It's like get on the bus and go to this thing and drive up the hill and get out and walk ' around and say, well it's going to. And then make sure that someone can say, well the northern route is going to be coming through here. Not around here but something more specific because based upon our. ' Mancino: I think I brought that up that that's something that I did. I walked. 1 Scott: I've already been there but it was in the winter on a snowmobile you know. Mancino: ...part of it to see what it feels like. How close to the road you're going to be on 1 the southern route. How much noise you hear. Just everything. Aanenson: I thought it'd be good just to go over the major goals that we're looking at and try to preserve as much topography and just to get the feel of it. Scott: That would take half a day probably. It took me, a friend of mine gave me a ' snowmobile ride up there during the winter and I could only kind of approximate but I was out there for 2 hours. 1 Aanenson: Maybe we could start a little earlier than that. Scott: Guided tour you know. That would be really helpful because I think we could all stand there and see and look around and envision what's going on. ' Conrad: Tagging onto that idea, it's totally different but Brian wanted us to go out to the Arboretum and I think we really should take a look at. That issue's going to resurface and the concern about buffering the Arboretum. Ledvina: For cakes and tea. ' Conrad: Yeah, we could do that. But I think whether it's the same thing, maybe that's too much Kate in one day but I thought that was such a good idea of Brian's that we go out there and know as we're putting industrial or whatever it was around their perimeter, what we're doing. And I think it'd be a chance to let Peter Olin lobby us too, which in this particular case I wouldn't mind. I'd like to hear rationale for buffering a buffer, which is always. 1 1 18 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 1 Farmakes: One of the most controversial things that we probably did was the Mill's property issue. Or recommending that that... 1 Mancino: But that was pretty much 100 %. Farmakes: But what I'm saying is, that particular issue, essentially the City has been avoiding in making a firm decision on and it's sort of converged where that decision then had to be made. Even on the Comp Plan it was a study area and even when the U was looking at, how could you put a large scale commercial there and so on. They're certainly trying to do everything to envision as to how that would work if it did and I think 2 or 3 meetings ago we had the Mill's representative here and going over and went through some story about how we 1 were in cahoots with local business owners to keep competition out or something. I never got that impression at any of those meetings. In fact the lawyers were there...as far as I know taking notes and I don't recall one instance where we, we said don't you have anything to 1 say? Don't you have anything to tell us about when we stood up and said, Fleet Farm is. This is what they are and basically he said, this is what they are and I conveyed that, this is what we will be. And apparently he spent a year listening to us and either he wasn't 1 informed about that or he just knew that it just wasn't going to happen and he was just putting in his time. Conrad: Okay. • Mancino: Are these going to be separate work sessions or are these going to be part of our ' 1 planning. Aanenson: ...field trip idea came up. That might be a good way to kick it off and do a separate meeting. If you want to do it on a Saturday morning or something and spend some time. Or if you want to take a regular Planning Commission... Scott: We can't do it at night. Aanenson: Well, we'd have to start earlier where we had enough light. We'd have to start at 1 5:00 to 7:30. Scott: Sure, or earlier. Mancino: What time does it get dark now? 1 Aanenson: Or a Saturday morning. 9:00 to noon or something. 19 1 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 Conrad: It's almost got to be a Saturday morning. 1 Scott: Early. Farmakes: On the issues...development too, we should probably be kept updated. Scott: Which one? Farmakes: Well, there's a whole slew of them during the year meetings. There's been a whole slew of people who have threatened lawsuits and we should probably be aware of how we should state our opinions or we might need some advice as to how do you respond to that? Or how the city wishes to pursue that...saying things on the record. What positions we should take and shouldn't take. Mancino: Actually they the calmed down as the meetings went on but the first few meetings it was like, we're going to court if you put a road through my property. I ...make a decision based on Findings of Fact. Aanenson: g 1 Farmakes: For instance, as I said with Mill's situation. There was some story there that... Nothing in any of the meetings I was at that they were conveyed at... Conrad. So we have one general meeting first Kate and then go out and take a look. ' Aanenson: Or maybe go out and look first and then kind of do an introduction of what they...goals and then we can sit down and actually go through the document. I think... maybe that takes 2 meetings and then maybe 1 or 2 meetings on the architectural standards and what 1 we're recommending for additions for design. Farmakes: One thing I'd recommend before we start having...on the presentation go over carefully what the intent. Aanenson: That's why I'm saying. I think we can do that on the field trip and end up at the 1 Arboretum. I think that'd be perfect. Farmakes: Because our meetings got so long and dragged on for so long, I think some of 1 that got a little cloudy after a while. Aanenson: ...well we wrote our own intent statement for the master plan. 1 1 20 1 1 Plannin g Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 Farmakes: Yeah, but we even changed it though. When we started out we kind of went back to that afterwards because it is such a complicated, multi faceted thing. Mancino: I did find an error in the land use. The color rendering of the land uses. Aanenson: So I'll t to set something up for that in October, If you have a certain date that try g P Y doesn't work, just let me know. Harberts: First week of October I'm out of town for the entire week. Scott: Is anybody duck hunting ?... 1 Ledvina: October 9th? I can't make it. 16th is fine. Aanenson: 16th? Mancino: 16th sounds fine. Harberts: What's our time? Aanenson: In the morning and we're going to be riding on your buses. Harberts: Is that a request or a demand? 1 Mancino: Can't we do horses? Conrad: Do you have an all terrain vehicle? Ledvina: I just scratched the surface of this document but I'm finding it to be excellent in terms of it's format and the readability and everything. I'm really, I think this is great. Aanenson: A lot of work done by the Task Force. They will be invited to the meetings too. Ledvina: Well I think they should definitely be commended. Hard to say it in just a couple 1 of sentences but it appears to be excellent and complete. Mancino: Both of us, both Jeff and I were on the whole task force and we were both also on the design, architectural design specifications. 1 21 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 Farmakes: ...signage that deal with other problems that we've been dealing with for years ' so... Harberts: Is there a need for the, with all the development going on in the city, that the Council considered accepting this as a preliminary concept? I don't know if that will help enable to guide that type of development? 1 Aanenson: Well, as a matter of fact, we do have one of the first projects...coming in on the corridor and I gave these documents to them and will be referencing architectural standards as we review that project so even though it hasn't been adopted, we're using that. ' Harberts: And we can do that? Okay. Y 1 Aanenson: Ifs going to be a PUD. ' Harberts: Okay. You're lucky. Mancino: What about being more far reaching on that? I'm thinking about Highway 101 ' where we're looking at the Mission Hills PUD with the commercial abutting TH 101? Aanenson: Why not ?... 1 Ledvina: A question... Aanenson: That would be natural habitat in the future. Ledvina: Okay. But I was just wondering what it is. It doesn't identify. ' Conrad: It's 8:30. Anything else on this issue. Anything under New Business? NEW BUSINESS: Mancino: I would like the staff to look at redoing or amending the ordinance for subdivisions 1 about setbacks between, what is in Galpin Boulevard where we have the new Rottlund subdivision. That first house is so close to the road and I've talked about this with Kate a little bit. That if we go ahead and expand Galpin Boulevard to 4 lanes, which we would 1 probably do in 10 to 15 years at least. I've kind of been told that and I live on Galpin. That that will be so close to the house that there will be tremendous noise and all sorts of stuff going on around there. Is there a way to get more setback between the corner lot on the ' subdivision and our roads? 1 22 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 Aanenson: Dave Hempel and myself did look at this issue and I think what we would recommend is that when we do have a lot...collectors, we do require larger setback... By the 1 time you get the berm in there, it's going to be taking up a lot of that...front and having a narrow lot, we would...lot width on those. Scott: Somethin g necessarily else too is kind of not necessaril new business but I had a chance to talk with our forestry intern and I think that person would be a great addition to any Planning Commission meetings where there's any sort of, well actually he should be at almost all of them. It was very educational and I think too, from talking to him and also going about town and looking at developments that are in process, there are few developers that are not taking this tree preservation stuff very seriously and unfortunately I've been contacted personally by people who have purchased homes and I think we all got some letters in one of our packets where, perhaps it's not the developer but maybe it's the builder or someone is, the snow fencing isn't going up. Stuffs getting compacted. They're filling things in and I would even go so far as to consider a fee per lot based upon, we're doing tree inventories now. A fee per lot with some sort of a tree evaluation and then some sort of a window where the developer, a responsibility party is financially liable for those trees. Aanenson: That's the ordinance that the Tree Board, Nancy and they're working on right now. That is part of Jeffs duties. Our forester is to go out and go through that subdivision. It's his job to make sure that the fencing gets out in the right place... Scott: And it's great because it's a little something. It's nice to talk and do all this wonderful stuff but if we don't have somebody knowledgeable going out, so I was very, very happy to see that. , Aanenson: As far as the other issues, that's part of what the Tree Board is looking at. Significant tree preservation and what we do... ' Farmakes: There's primarily two things that keep on coming up over and over again. One is the trees plant or somebody moves in here and the tree dies back after they've moved in. The other is lake access. You might want to suggest those for the newsletter that the city sends out. An explanation of what lake access really means. And what the city is, you know we get these letters of mediation. What is the fact of...issue between the builder and the person who's buying the home. They should know what the city is responsible for and what we're trying to do and what in fact the builder is not doing. We hear these things over and over again. I don't know how to, they're the same things. The same type of things. Truth in Housing type thing where if these people were educated before they buy, and I don't know if that's the government responsibility really. It would be good not to ask the salesman. 23 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 Scott: It's a shame to see well educated individuals start a sentence, but the realtor said or but the developer said and you just kind of go, shake your head but then you realize. On the other hand, there are people who are, who's information and expertise are being relied upon by those who haven't made themselves educated on those things. Mancino: And it's happening from some of our best developers. That's what bothers me. PP g P ' Farmakes: 90% of people who buy houses, I can guarantee you believe that the Building Inspector that comes out from the City is guaranteeing that the work is done correctly and that's, that's not what it is. And I don't know where people get that information, unless it's taking somebody to Court which is always the most expensive but good information that you can get. But it sure would be helpful I think if we had a primer or something. • I don't know how we'd get it to get people to come. You don't get a newsletter unless you've moved here. But it sure would be helpful if people knew that. In particular if they purchased lake property or property where they have a beachlot available or whatever. We really need to make these people aware of what they have and what they really don't have. Conrad: It's a good thought. Mancino: I was going to say... 1 • Conrad: Yeah, it's how you do it. Farmakes: Yeah, that's it. ' Conrad: You know you feel, they're real naive. We're all naive. Farmakes: And should the government be doing that? I hate to see these people come in and they're hurt, both financially and they're kind of defenseless when they're in here and they really expect us to do something about it. Conrad: They wouldn't, Jeff they wouldn't even if we gave it to them. You only get concern when it's negative. When it's happening. You don't take the precautions. Okay. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 1 Conrad: Any additions, deletions? Ledvina: I have a correction to make. On page 17. This is regarding the Pryzmus application. We talked about condition number 15 and Nancy had made a friendly 24 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting - September 15, 1993 1 n really in here. And the condition should read, to that condition and it didn't real y get , if any of these conditions, number 2, 9, 12 and 13, etc, etc. The any of these conditions did not get in there so if we can make that change. Conrad: That's pretty good Matt. I'm impressed. Any other additions? Deletions, corrections. Minutes are noted. CITY COUNCIL UPDATE. I Aanenson: Monday night City Council did approve Tower Heights subdivision subject to resolution of Nez Perce and the Shamrock development which is on Audubon, just to the I west... Harberts: And what about Colonial? Or was that a discussion point afterwards? 1 Aanenson: ...3 instead of the 8. Conrad: I was real impressed with the City Council. They reconsidered the issue and a 4 to I 1 vote they went back. Back to what we recommended, 3. They had gone up to the 8 the • first time through. 1 Aanenson: And at the next City Council they'll be adopting Findings of Fact for reasons... • Conrad: And this will be in Court when? No, I'm real impressed with the City Council. I They did a very nice job of revisiting the issue. Harberts: Did Pryzmus Interim Permit go to City Council? I rY g ri Aanenson: No. That will be on the next City Council. I Scott: Has he called or anything? I Aanenson: No. That will be on the next City Council, on the 27th. Conrad: Okay, anything else? 1 Scott moved, Mancino seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carded. The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Submitted by Paul Krauss, Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 1 25 i 1 CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 24, 1993 1 Chairman Schroers called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Fred Berg, Jim Manders, Ron Roeser, Jim Andrews, Larry Schroers, 1 Jane Meger, and Jan Lash STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Coordinator; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation 1 Supervisor; and Dawn Lemme, Program Specialist 1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Lash: I just have a couple things that I found. On page 20. My comments at the bottom. I think I said the first lines and after that point in time, I think it was the applicant speaking because it sounds like something the applicant would talk about that night. Not something I ' was saying. And I think it starts right about with the well. And then another one on page 48. My comments in the first paragraph down. I probably said I've always but what I meant was, I've never. I've never been a proponent of that. And then I'm a cheapskate. Not a cheapscape I don't know what the difference is but I know I'm a cheapskate. I don't know what the other one is. That's it for me. 1 Schroers: Anything else? If not, may I have a motion to approve? Andrews moved, Meger seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated My 27, 1993 as amended by Jan Lash. All voted in favor and the motion canied. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None. SONG PROPERTY, LUNDGREN BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION. ' Public Present: Name Address Terry Forbord, Lundgren Bros 935 East Wayzata Blvd, Wayzata Jay Dolejsi 6961 Chaparral Lane Bret Davidson 7291 Galpin Blvd. David Stockdale 7210 Galpin Blvd. • 1 1 1 1 Hoffman: The Commission should be aware the approval of the Minutes only covers the July 27th. The August 10th... The Song property proposal, as the Commissioners are aware, was reviewed on July 27th. The discussion that evening including the tabling of this issue. ' Expectations from the Commission in doing so were two fold. That the applicant desired more time to review internally and progress with staff ideas to enhance the park and recreation components of this application. Secondly, that the Commission desired additional information in regard to land holdings south of the Song's...Dolejsi -Turner property. I had the opportunity to meet with Mr. Terry Forbord to discuss the new idea which he referenced at the committee meeting. The applicant's preliminary offer was to identify a trail easement along the southern border of the Johnson - Dolejsi -Turner property which abuts the Song property and to construct that trail. You have a diagram in your packet...in this regard. The Johnson - Dolejsi -Turner proposal and the Song proposal are adjacent to one another. They're both...and are owned, or would be owned by Lundgren Bros Construction. The area of the trail would start about in this location at Highway 41 and wind it's way down to the southern half of the Johnson - Dolejsi -Turner property. So you've got the plat which you approved, or passed your recommendations onto the Council sometime last year and the Song property in this location. This is a large wooded wetland area which you have I believe an aerial photo ' of...I'm not a wetlands expert but it's certainly primarily what they refer to as canary reed grass and we'll have some pictures of that, those slides... Mr. Forbord and I toured this area- on foot the morning of August 9th. A Monday morning. Very wet morning. We...very 1 desirable for a recreational trail and would offer an experience which is not attainable with the trails along street alignment such as the on street alignment which would run parallel with the thru street which will access TH 41 and Galpin... This proposed corridor parallels a large wetland. We talked about the homes that would be constructed in the area. The trail in most cases would be located at the edge of the wetland, sandwiched between the wetland and the home's backyards. The alignment of most area followed the toe of the wooded slope which 1 acts as a natural buffer. One area in particular does not allow that and you'll see a slide of it approximately right in this location which is an open alfalfa field which then dead ends...off into the wetland. Several sets of photographs were taken. We'll look at those here momentarily. I also prepared the blue line copy of the aerial photo. I apologize...but you can certainly get the idea without having any additional feet on there. Upon concluding our site visit that day it was agreed that the applicant would map this potential trail alignment, which 1 • is down here...attached in the packet. Providing copies of that map for the commission to review. A follow -up conversation on August 17th with Mr. Forbord and during that conversation Terry informed me that they had determined that it was not feasible for them to construct a trail at their expense. At least probably without receiving some sort of compensation from the city for that...The second issue which I would like to touch on is the ' issue of the land holdings in the area...get an idea of what this wetland looks like. You drive by it, I drive by it every day, a couple times a day. I certainly knew it was there but I didn't know to what extent this area was, the extent of the area which it covers so I think it will ' give you a real good idea of what the area actually looks like. Schroers: A couple quick questions Todd. What is the length of the trail and is the trail of any significance regarding the overall master trail plan of the city? 2 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 Hoffman: As proposed the length of the trail is about 2/3 of a mile in the Lundgren development. It would then continue and probably conclude at Galpin and be much closer to a mile in length from TH 41 to Galpin. In regard to the overall comprehensive trail plan, it's not an identified segment but it certainly is a very desirable segment. The comprehensive trail plan typically identifies trails which are traveled, or not solely for recreation but you know line up with major corridors and major neighborhood corridors and that type of thing. So I think it is a desirable link, even though it's not identified on the comp plan. If you can follow through in your head as I walk through these. I don't have the luxury of pushing back and forth between the overhead and the slides. This is a photo just east of Highway 41. About at the location where the trail would begin on TH 41 right up in this corner. Right up here and as you travel across the slide to the left, that tree line there would be the separation 1 point to the wetland so that's one reason you really don't see it. This is the view when you cross over that tree line. The view which greets you there. Part of the wetland. As you can see, it's not a cattail type marsh. It's not wooded. It was wet there obviously this year 1 because of the weather we've been experiencing but I would think in drought years it was probably completely dry, except for maybe in a small creek which winds through the center of it. The wooded property you see there in the background would be the southern half of the Dolejsi property, which is severed from the northern half. So it makes it real impossible to develop those as a consecutive piece of property. That's where I pan to the left, as I'm standing there and it shows the wooded edge of the property to the north which would be the start of the houses that would come down to the edge of the wetland there. The trail would meander inbetween the houses and the wetland. Lash: So are you proposing the trail construction to be along the wood line? The tree line. Hoffman: Right along the wood line, correct. It could not be constructed out in the wetland 1 itself. It certainly has to be up on suitable ground. Schroers: Is that tree line going to be altered by the construction? 1 Hoffman Assuredly yes. To what extent I would have to have the applicant to address that question. These begin to get out of order. This would take you all the way to the opposite end of the trail to the terminus. As it comes out at the very left hand corner of the slide would be Swings golf course. And the trees that you see to the right would be the edge of a cul -de -sac, if you can look on your packet, that knoll which is very heavily wooded... That knoll however does have a, it's kind of a funny little area. It has an opening actually which fits very nicely for a street which is the fortunate thing from tree loss. This would be if you round the corner and look back towards Galpin Blvd. So as you walk around the corner from the other side and then face, this is facing east. Due east right down towards City Hall. This would be probably very close to the alignment of the trail as it came around the toe of the 1 3 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 .1 I slope. And then penetrated to the east to match up with, along with future developments somewhere out to Galpin Blvd and then eventually down to the trail underpass which goes 1 under Highway 5. This slides looks directly north towards the Song property. From about that same corner. If you can picture, you're probably standing on the trail here heading to my right towards Galpin. Heading to my left towards TH 41 and then you're looking north and II towards the Song property. This approximately delineates the separation between the Song property on the right and the Johnson - Dolejsi- Turner on the left. Another photo of the alignment as it comes along the toe of the slope again in that general vicinity. This is an area I which I mentioned earlier where the field, the agricultural field actually comes right down to the edge of the wetland. These would be...standing either at the rear housepad or somewhere `= in the rear yard and then looking out over the wetland in this area. So the trail would run approximately right in line with that wetland edge. That's coming up much higher on the hill. The last slide was down way to your right. This is standing up on the hill somewhere I potentially where the street would be or maybe a front yard looking back over the vista of that wetland area. And again the trail, if there was a proposed trail, would be down in the foreground...There's another shot of that same vicinity. Again, down lower. The wooded 1 knoll that you see there, that's the knoll that the other series of slides centered around on the opposite side of it. This trail would then come along vegetation edge. Follow the toe of that wooded slope around and head on over towards Swings golf course or Galpin Blvd or I potentially to the north at that time, depending on what alignment was eventually chosen and that wooded knoll there would contain houses in a cul- de- sac...One area of particular concern to the commission was the issue of this private park concept was approved, what potential I exists for the city to acquire public parkland in the area immediately south of the Song, Johnson - Dolejsi -Turner property. So I put together a map which I think approximately indicates the existing land holdings in that area. Again, 3 weeks was not sufficient time to I bring you a complete evaluation of what's available. What potentially would not be available and all the other questions you would have in regard to the land purchase. But I did have the opportunity to discuss the topic with some of the landowners in the area. ...realtor and Mr. I Forbord who represents Lundgren Bros Construction in their land acquisition inquiries throughout Chanhassen. I do understand as an agent of the city I can only take these inquiries to such a degree. Make the recommendations to the Park Commission and then 1 ultimately approval by City Council. However, I believe it is fair to state that there are no properties in this area which have been actively marketed. That statement made, I may alter that statement to some degree tonight as we talk about the Stockdale property in more detail I later on. Again, I mentioned that there appears to be one owner who is considering subdivision of their property and that being Mr. David Stockdale. I believe it is also accurate to state that the remainder of the landowners have either been contacted by perspective buyers I or considered selling their property at some time and...some property owners that are just happy with what they have going on and probably would not consider selling at any time in I the future. So again the Stockdale property is about 19 acres. You have an additional 4 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1. 1 handout with you this evening which I will reference and that looks something like this. So this is the 19 acres Stockdale piece of property. The Song's...to the north. Their house lies somewhere up in this corner of this potential road which would come down through here. The Stockdale's currently reside in this location. It would be at least a consideration of the Stockdale's to sell the city this section of land in this area for a potential future neighborhood park. That's approximately 5 acres in size, or potentially a little less. The Park Commission would have to decide what they feel would be an appropriate total acreage for that park site, if you would care to pursue it. Mr. Stockdale is in conversation with Lundgren Bros on the potential acquisition of that remaining property with development of that property coming down through this road extension and probably meet in a cul -de -sac somewhere in that location. So this is certainly something the commission can consider. It's not the only piece of property in the area which could be acquired for park. As we go further on in the discussion about the land holdings in the area, you'll see that. However, I believe the Stockdale's are in a position to at least come to the bargaining table at present and see if 1 something could not be worked out. So if that's your desire, I will take direction in that regard. Moving further south with some of the other properties. It would be my belief that the Bentz and Turcott properties would not be available for acquisition by the city. Each one of these 5 acre parcels have a residence constructed on them somewhere centrally located on that lot. The southern property has some wetland impacts on the rear of the property and then in addition, the Highway 5 frontage road, or access boulevard, will come and probably 1 make this southern corner to some degree in that location. You're all familiar with Swings Golf and then you move across Galpin to the southeast corner of Highway 5 and Galpin and there's a piece of property, the VanDeVeire property. These two locations would not be desirable for any park obviously because of their location. Coming around the bottom side and you have a 50 acre parcel owned by Mr. Conway. Mr. Conway has been in conversation with Mike Gorra and a potential joint development of those two properties so there at least has been conversation. These represent some substantial land holdings in the area which will probably see some development of some type in the future. To the north you have Windmill Run and Royal Oaks, which the commission is aware. Are currently being developed for single family homes. Then north of that you have the Prince Nelson property which is hard to venture a guess as to what the future of that property is but it certainly may see some development at some point in the future. The other one to consider would be potentially the other half of the other segment of the Dolejsi property, which is separated from the northeast by that wetland that comes in through here. There are some additional issues which the commission needs to discuss this evening. Those centering around city sponsored recreation programs. These potential subdivisions create 234 lots between them. A portion of the Park and Recreation Department sponsored programs currently take place directly in neighborhood parks. Those being such programs as Summer Discovery Playground and tennis lessons. What would the city's commission, Park and Recreation Commission's policy be if you were approached by the neighborhood to provide public recreation services within those private or 1 5 1 • 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 association ark? I think that's something we should discuss here this evening. And then P g g 1 ultimately your decision, whatever it is, would have some impacts on future commissions in that regard. Second issue is the trail easement along Galpin Blvd. The applicant's letter of August 18th references 17 feet of right -of -way along Galpin Blvd and the grading for a trail alignment within that 17 feet. This position is in direct conflict with staff's recommendation that a 20 foot easement for trail purposes be dedicated adjacent to the new right -of -way. That recommendation is consistent with the action by the Commission and the Council all the way up and down Galpin Blvd, starting on the southern reaches across Highway 5 with Stone Creek, the Hans Hagen development where the right -of -way was taken and then an additional 20 feet of trail easement and now they're constructing that trail within that easement. Moving north to the Windmill Run and the Klingelhutz development and then Bret Davidson and his development there. So that has been a consistent recommendation and consistent action by the Council. The applicant will be presenting his diagrams this evening showing potentially how the trail construction could take place within a right -of -way. I will respond to that '. presentation at that time. I did have a chance to have a conversation with the City Engineer and the Assistant City Engineer in that regard today so I'll have some additional information for the...at that time. The depiction of passive play areas on the attachment to the letter dated August 18th. As the commission will recall, one concern about the potential association or private park in the Song property was that at some point in the future it could revert back to ' the city ownership and city operation of maintenance. And one thing the commission and the city typically want to see in those neighborhood parks is an open playfield so it was a . direction to the applicant to identify that. An attempt was made to do so on this diagram 1 which identifies two areas that's shaded and labeled then as passive recreation. I would agree that they probably could be used for passive recreation but they have steep slopes in those areas and they're very small, or relatively small so a game of pick -up baseball or something of that nature would not be appropriate there. The minimum size of 250 x 250 would reach the, just by having the thought process. So neighborhood children can pick up a game of baseball or softball, how much distance would you allow between home plate and the first ' window of some garage or the house adjoining the park. And 250 feet is about the minimum amount you could safely. I think you could reduce that down to somewhat...over 200 feet. Conclusions that were made. I think the applicant has attempted to satisfy the desires of the commission in regards to park and trail amenities but is falling slightly short of the city's mark. Specifically in regard to the private park amenities and the whole issue of the private park but again that is something that the commission has to wrestle with as well. I've talked about the open playfield area and the failure to identify one of those. The question of whether or not land in the area are available for development as public park space remains unanswered. I think...new information today. That information was gathered and agreed to about 3:45 p.m. meeting this afternoon so you can see it's...has not been developed. But it is certainly a possibility. There's always future events which kind of cartwheel upon one another as to what is going to occur with the land holdings in the vicinity. However, it can l 6 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 I 1 certainly always be said that if it's your wish to acquire some parkland, you can probably make that happen but again that statement is also applicable to the subject property. In regard to the 20 foot trail easement, as I mentioned, we will talk about that more during the applicant's comments. The offer to incorporate the trail alignment along the large wetland is commendable. These types of trails are desirable in our society. They allow an opportunity to come in close contact with our natural surroundings. However it is staffs position that this trail should be constructed in conjunction with the initial public improvements in the area. As the commission is aware, it is very difficult to go back once the homes have been developed, even if you have a trail alignment identified and even if somebody else is going to pay for it. At that time it becomes much more difficult to get that trail constructed so it would be staffs recommendation to see that construction take place with the adjoining improvements, or the adjacent improvements in the area. Recommendation. It is recommended that the preliminary plat to subdivide 112 acres from Rural Residential to Planned Unit Development into 115 single family lots, referenced as the Song property, be approved by the Park and Recreation Commission contingent upon the following conditions of approval being met. There's two each in regard to parks and trails. In regard to parks. That the private association park be approved only if the additional amenity of an open field with a minimum size of 200 feet , square with a maximum of 4% slope be added to the park layout. This open field is to be in addition and not in lieu of existing proposed amenities. And then second, that full park fees shall be paid at the rate in force upon building permit application. In regards to trails, we 1 have two issues there. A 20 foot trail easement shall be granted along the entire easterly property line. Furthermore, that this easement shall be included in the grading plan for the project with a suitable trail bed being prepared. That trail bed may meander within this • 1 easement alignment at the discretion of the applicant, but the eventual alignment must be conducive to future trail construction and is subject to approval as part of the grading plan review. Then again, planting of trees shall be restricted to areas west of that trail bench or outside the trail. Secondly, that the applicant shall dedicate lands to accommodate trail construction along the southern boundary of the Johnson - Dolejsi -Turner preliminary plat as , depicted on the attachment in your packet. The applicant shall map and construct a trail paralleling that wetland. This construction is to be completed per city specifications at the time of adjoining street construction. Final alignment of this trail shall be staked by the developer and approved by the Park and Recreation Director and the City Engineer. In recognition for this dedication of this trail corridor and the construction of that trail, it is recommended that the applicant receive a full trail fee credits at the time of building permit application for both the Song property and the Johnson - Dolejsi -Turner applications. That will require amendments to the conditions of approval associated with the preliminary plat for the Johnson - Dolejsi -Turner properties. This trail shall include a connectionto the street plan as indicated between Lots 16 and 17, Block 2, or a suitable similar location in that vicinity. I believe that last item is also an issue which the applicant would like to discuss with the commission tonight. With that, I'll turn it over to you Chairman Schroers. 1 7 r 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 Schroers: Okay. I think at this time it would be appropriate to hear what the applicant has to say. Terry Forbord: Members of the Park Commission, my name is Terry Forbord. Fm with Lundgren Bros, 935 East Wayzata Blvd and Mr. Hoffman did a good job in summarizing all the issues related to this proposal...related to his staff report to the Park and Rec Commission. He's right, on August 9th we went out and walked the wetlands where the public trail is being proposed. As you recall at the last meeting I asked that this item be tabled because as I was sitting and listening to the Parks Commission it became clear to me that you liked our proposal but the part that you didn't like about it was the fact that we had an association park versus a public park. At least that's...some smaller issues. For us we think it is very, very important for the success of this neighborhood to have something that is within the community that the city will not be able to provide. And we've gone, taken the extra effort and tried to explain those items to you and why we think it's important and...As I was sitting here listening to the comments of the commission, I thought that maybe there's an • opportunity, and I wasn't sure at the time but maybe there's an opportunity to provide a public ' experience that would benefit everybody who lives in the city that would connect to city public trails that presently are planned for Highway 41 and Galpin Blvd. Now for those of you who have ever walked trails, whether they be municipal or county or otherwise, there are different types of trail experiences. Certainly the type of trail experience that we would enjoy on Highway 41 is one of pretty much utilitarian needs. Trying to get from one Point A to Point B ..by traffic. You might have some enjoyable experience, you're out exercising, etc but ' it's not going to be the type of trail experience that you'd probably want to go for relaxation. So as I was contemplating that, thought that I should maybe think about that. Maybe I have an opportunity to provide the city with something that would connect those two public trails that are utilitarian in nature and provide an experience that would be different. So Parks Director Hoffman and I walked that property and it was a nicer experience than I anticipated it would be. I think primarily because of the topography of the area. The area in question around the wetland is quite a bit lower than all the other upland areas that surrounds it. Some of the pictures of slides that he showed represent that but it's hard to describe what you'd be able to see if you were there in person. While we were walking right in this area right here, 1 excuse me. We were walking right here, we saw a buck come out of the woods and run across here and he came across here. We startled another buck in the larger grass. We saw hawks and the thing that was probably more unique to it than anything, was the quiet that was down there. Probably because of the depression to the rest of the land around it and all the upland. When you're up in this area you can hear Highway 41 and Highway 5. I don't recall hearing any highway noise at all when I was down here so it was very quiet. I quickly realized what I had hoped to realize and that it was a unique experience that might be of interest to the city. Now normally we would not be proposing to the city a public trail corridor in the back yards of homes because our home buyers would tell us normally that they 8 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 1 would be very, very opposed to that. And these issues have been fought in battles in every city in the metropolitan area. Most people would prefer not to have a trail in their back yard. If it was directly there to see it. The unique thing about this site, and the sites around it, is most of it, not all of it but most of it is wooded. And like I said, where the trail would be is at the toe of the slope and the homesites are up higher. So I weighed that and like I said, normally we wouldn't be proposing that because it's something that we fear. The last thing you want to do is do something to a homesite that would make it so nobody would want to buy it. And in talking to Park Director Hoffman, he kind of...on us a little bit. He did and 1 I did and there's a trade off. There might be some people that would look at it as a benefit. I mean from my experience I can tell you that most people, if they can see it. If it's right out their back door and they're sitting on their deck, the last thing...talking to their spouse, most people would not want to see people walking in their backyard. The unique thing of this, is that all those lots in those areas are very deep lots. Most of them are very wooded and most of them are very high. There's only a section of lots right through here, I think there's 1 probably 5, maybe 6 at the very most, that you had...where you could actually, if you were on your deck, you'd be able to look down and see a trail. The unique part about that is that when you're up high and looking beyond the trail, there's a vista that probably goes for maybe 1 a couple miles. As far as the view that you can see. So there's going to be some trade offs . there. So the way I look at it, after a lot of thought, is there's 5 or 6 lots here that may be impacted by that trail. And if there's some people don't like that, well we have other lots 1 that are available to them that they don't have to buy the lot on the trail either. Now if I had 20 or 30 lots in here affected by that trail, I would not even consider proposing it. I think because of that, I had 5 lots, there might be somebody who's a rollerblader in that family who would want to..get on that trail and rollerblade around. There's probably 5 people out there that might be willing to do that. So normally we wouldn't be proposing this. I think the situation is a little unique. I think it offers an experience that, I'm real familiar with Chanhassen trails and...but I think this would be certainly fair to say that this is a little different experience than some of the other trails that are provided in the city. And it does link two trails that will be common routes for school children going through to school that will be at Galpin and Highway 5. The land...down by Swings or across the street from Swings, there will be a...or some type of tunnel system that goes under Highway 5 to the school and community park area that will be there as part of the school grounds. So this kind of ties it all together. I wish I could tell you that I thought of this in the beginning and it was a well conceived master plan...so I think that it's really something unique that is a benefit to the city. The other item that I would like to address, and there was some public comment at the last meeting about the availability of other properties for sale in the area. As Parks Director Hoffman has explained to you this evening, you have a willing seller who would like to have a public park right in his front yard and that is Mr. Stockdale. Mr.Stockdale asked to meet with me last week, unless he's changed his mind since then. He's very, very encouraged by the idea of having a park in his front yard. As long as he can meet a satisfactory 1 9 1 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 agreement with the city and that was none of my business so I didn't get into that with him . But he met with me and asked me if I would be willing...acquiring the remainder of his 1 property... So we have a unique situation where we now have somebody who's willing to provide the city with the parkland that the city has indicated is desired from them. At the same time, Lundgren Bros right next door is willing to build two association parks at our cost 1 providing amenities that the city cannot provide it's residents and we also are going to continue to agree, to pay park dedication fees...so it seems to me that all of the things that were of concern to the parks commission at our last meeting, have the potential for being addressed well beyond, exceeding the limits of, or the expectations that normally would be available to the city in a given area. If you add up all the amenities in that area, if that public parkland is acquired, and with the trail system that's there that was never part of the ' Comp Plan, you have a park and trail experience in an area that most cities would be very pleased... The other unique thing about the Stockdale property is that there's been a lot of discussion about obtaining the right type of property for the right type of use. The Stockdale property is relatively flat. It has easy access to Galpin Boulevard. It offers the type of topography that is conducive to that type of use. You will not find that type of land on the Song property. In discussing. Schroers: Can I ask a question? Would Lundgren Bros be interested in doing preliminary grading on that site were we to find that accessible? Terry Forbord: Which site sir? 1 Schroers: What you're speaking about on the Stockdale property. I mean I realize that this is all hypothetical that it would happen but is that something that Lundgren Bros would 1 consider? Terry Forbord: If Lundgren Bros has equipment on site at the time that the city would like to have that park developed and graded, we'd be willing to talk to the city to try to facilitate the most inexpensive way of development. The timing would probably be the key. 1 Berg: Could I ask a couple questions about the trail before you move too far away from that. My recollection from the last meeting was that one of the concerns with having a city park within that association, within that development, was the concern of the neighbors to the type of people that would be coming in to use the city park outside of the neighborhood. I'm wondering if you've given thought to the fact that this trail is also going to introduce people into that neighborhood, into that development. Ter ry Forbord: That was an item that we did not raise. That was an item that somebody else raised. I never, ever said that we were concerned about the type of people that would be 10 1 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 comin g neighborhood. our nei hborhood. I never stated that. Berg: So for you that's not a factor at all? ' Terry Forbord: I think the question, at least that I recall, if I remember my response, it is a concern of our's and people, and this is not unlike if this was a townhome development or if this was an apartment complex. People are paying for a facility that happens to be there with their money. They are maintaining it. I think that it's fair that those people would have a concern about the use of people from outside the area coming to use it. It is not a concern of our's with any of the type of people that live in Chanhassen...So as far as the experience with the trail, as I said, I probably don't have words that are creative enough to describe it. I was very pleasantly surprised and I had been down there like 4 years ago but when you're looking at land for the first time and you're trying to make some buying decisions, it's different than when you're out trying to imagine an experience of a trail... Berg: One other question regarding the trail as well. My concern would be that because this is a private association park, that this trail might also be construed as a private trail. Would you have any, I would assume that you probably wouldn't have any trouble with identifying it as a city trail so that everyone in the city would know that it was accessible to them. Terry Forbord: We would have absolutely no problem with that. In fact it connects with two planned city public trails now along Highway 41 and Galpin. I'm not sure if the city has a sign system that designates the trail but if they don't, we would not have any problem whatsoever designating that. Lash: I have a question too in regards to that. From the looks of the plan, it doesn't actually connect TH 41 to Gaipin. Is that correct? At this point it doesn't. Hoffman: Correct. 1 Lash: Okay, so what is the potential. Say we were to acquire the Stockdale property. How did that, knowing that I'm not always really good at reading these maps but can you show 1 me, would the park property abut this wetland so that we could continue the trail from the wetland right into the park property? r could go ahead and show that. ...potentially you could loop I think Mr. Forbord co g p y y p the trail up around the cul-de-sac and bring it into the Stockdale property. Lash: I guess for future, if this all comes together, that would be maybe one of my hopes would be that we could ultimately have that trail connect into the public park and then on out 11 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 to Galpin. And then ultimately if the Dolejsi, the southern segment were to come in for development, that we would have earmarked, at this time I would like to have it earmarked that we would want also to have an easement to continue around that development also so we could end actually with a whole circled area in there with a trail. 1 Terry Forbord: Let me comment on a couple things. Todd and I were out walking in this area. There's kind of an existing farm road that presently kind of crosses right here. There was a slide of that. It's kind of hard to decipher unless you would have known that that's 1 what it was. We were trying to decide would it make more sense to go up this way and come down here. And at that time the Stockdale proposal was not a discussion so we had contemplated primarily how would we get over here to make it connect with the trail that 1 went over to the school. So I would imagine that there's very probably some sense in trying to connect that to that...and probably would happen during the platting process of the Stockdale property. As far as continuation of the trail around the entire wetland. Lundgren 1 Bros does not control this portion of the Dolejsi property. That would have to be something that would be handled a differently... 1 Lash: That was directed to staff that as those come in for development, I would want that to be looked at. So the Stockdale property, is that the right hand corner...? 1 Terry Forbord: Actually it goes down and probably right there... Lash: The Stockdale property? • Terry Forbord: That's correct. His property is right in here. And whether that is the best 1 place for the trail to come in, I couldn't answer that. There may be some wisdom to that if there's a public park... 1 Lash: Okay, thank you. Terry Forbord: Chairman Schroers, you had asked about trees...related to that proposed trail and I think it's fair to say that the toe of the slope. Schroers: May I clarify that. I wasn't referring only to the trail but to the entire development. 1 How much impact is the development going to have on the trees there was my question. Not specifically the trail. 1 Terry Forbord: On the Song property or the Johnson - Dolejsi -Turner property? Schroers: Yes. On the entire development is where I have an interest actually. 12 1 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 Terry Forbord: You know I'd have to, I can't remember what all the specifications of the preliminary plat on the Johnson - Dolejsi -Turner property...On the Song property...somewhere around 30 %. Maybe Less than that. That includes right -of -way and... Schroers: Okay, and that came about before the development of the Tree Board so that won't apply to your development but that is pretty consistent with what is happening now. There's 1 pretty much a 30 %. Terry Forbord: And we're trying to follow that and I know the public hearing was cancelled 1 and I certainly will be present at that public hearing because there's a lot of issues that I think need to be discussed on that but I'll wait until that public hearing before I do. A couple more items. Just to answer the question about the trail. Most of the trees that are down by the wetland are box elders. Parks Director Hoffman identified those for me because I'm not an arborist or anything and some of them are dead too. And I think it's fair to say that near the toe of the slope, that's where the trees are terminating. And for a trail to be there, to have that type of experience where you're right next to the wetland and right next to the woods, there will be some vegetation, some brush, possibly a few scrub trees type things that would be...part of that trail construction. But I believe the trails are presently 8 feet? So I really think it will be extremely minimal given the circumstances. About the item in the association park about...flat area to have a little more active recreation. First of all there won't be any homes anywhere near the association park, or certainly not close enough to where anybody could cause damage to one of those homes by swinging. And secondly, the idea of those association parks is not to have pick -up games and that's, they're designed so those type of • things aren't going to be available. Now we do think it was an excellent idea that the staff had of trying to expand some flat area there so...play frisbee or if you wanted to play catch or throw a football a little bit, we think that's a good idea. But we do not want to make 250 x 250 feet. That's 3/4 of the length of a football field and that's an awfully large area flatten, especially in light of the fact that if the city is successful in it's attempts to acquire public property in there, that's really the type of area that would be conducive for those types of activities. Let me just talk a little bit about the trail along Galpin Blvd. If I may, I'll just go to the overhead. On the overhead presently it shows the existing condition of Galpin Blvd. To my knowledge, the Galpin Blvd currently has a 66 foot right -of -way and there's 1 approximately 13 feet of pavement in each direction for a combined pavement of 26 feet. So there's 20 feet of right -of -way on each side of the pavement. From the pavement edge to the edge of the right -of -way. Now what the city is proposing for the future of Galpin Blvd would be that it would be a 100 foot wide right -of -way and the pavement would be, if it ever were expanded to 4 lanes, would be 26 feet in each direction so you have two lanes heading south and two lanes heading north. The city desires, and it is so noted on the comprehensive plan to have a trail, a north /south trail along Galpin Blvd. And I'm not sure if it states it should be on both sides or not but I know it's important for the city to have some trail connection there. 13 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 And this is not an uncommon request. I think in any city in the metropolitan area that you would go to, on a key north /south street like this, it would be reasonable to say that any municipality and parks commission would hope to have some type of trail there and we think that's a good idea. We have absolutely no problem with that idea. Especially because it's going to be a key route for children going to the new school. What we do have some difficulty with, and this is also, ...consistent around the metropolitan area but oftentimes there are rights -of -way or easements asked for by either the engineering department or sometimes a parks department for additional amount of taking of private property for use that really goes beyond what the need is to accomplish the same task. And in this particular case, we think that it's creating an unnecessary burden on, not only the land developer but the land owner ' and we think it readily can be accomplished the objective without such a taking. As you'll see on the upper left here, there's a diagram in your packet. You have your center line of the road, 100 foot right -of -way, two lanes are going north and two lanes are heading south. It's very important for the city to have a utility corridor and I'm sure there will be a response to things I'm going to tell you but the utility corridor gives the city the ability to run utilities, • whatever they may be, private or public, in this area. And there also is on the other side you have to remember there's 24 feet that right now isn't being used at all. There's also a utility I corridor opportunity there. I'm not sure if the city presently has planned another trail on that side. I'm not sure if it would make sense to have a trail on both sides but you do have 24 • ' feet on the other side of the road. On this side, what we're showing here within the existing, or excuse me. Within the proposed right -of -way, we're showing an 8 foot wide. trail. That's... been asked for and was connected to the Comp Plan and it can easily be constructed in that 1 right -of -way. And then there shows an additional, and this is for illustrative purposes only. It's showing an additional 6 feet between the edge of the trail and what would be the toe of a berm that would screen future homes along Galpin Blvd from this traffic that will be occurring over time. Now the utility corridor also provides a buffer from the edge of the curb to the people that are walking. This is what we believe to be totally compatible with what the desires of the city are. We believe that all the utility corridors and utility items necessary can 1 go in that corridor. There's plenty of room for it there. If additional right -of -way is asked for, then you're expanding into the private property area of the back yards of those future homeowners and it's not really needed. As an example I'll show you, this is an exhibit that 1 was put together by one of the city's consultants for a different city in Woodbury. Bonestroo was the consultant here. And this is a minor arterial street in Woodbury, and I'm just showing this for an example of what other cities in situations like this. It can be done and ' I'm showing you that it can be done. That it's not uncommon. This is an 85 foot right -of -way which is 15 feet narrower than the proposed and shows again 4 lanes of traffic. Two heading for illustrative purposes, I'll say two heading north and two heading south. It shows the 10 foot corridor for the trail and has a 9 foot space...with the slope. This is the design right out of the spec book and the trail that is being constructed in Woodbury. And so these kinds of things are being done and there are opportunities for utility corridors in here on this side, on 14 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 this side and so the only thing that were stating to you is that we are not at all at difficulty with the concept. We think the concept is a great concept but we think that more right -of- way is being required than is necessary to accomplish the task and we would like you to consider amending the request to lessen the amount of right -of -way that's required on the trail because it really becomes land... Lash: Mr. Forbord, just to clear me up. The bottom picture. Is that what you're proposing or is that what we're proposing? Terry Forbord: This is what we would be proposing. Lash: Is that with the 17 foot trail easement as opposed to the 20 foot? 1 Terry Forbord: There's an additional right -of -way that is being required by the county and by the city of 17 feet and we would like to put the trail within that right -of -way. The 17 feet on each side so 17 and 17 is 34. Lash: On each side of the road? Terry Forbord: 17 feet on each side of Galpin so right now if you recall, this is 66. So if you add 17 feet on this side and 17 feet on that side, that's 34 to make it 100. That's a very, very wide right -of -way and the point I'm making is that cities are putting the same things in right -of -ways that are 85 feet. And certainly I think it's fair to say, this isn't true everywhere 1 but there's certainly, from a planning perspective, is a movement afoot to lessen right -of -way. To lessen the width of roads except for roads that are very, very necessary and all we're saying here is that we think it's an excessive taking that infringes upon the development 1 opportunity of those lots that we're having to back up to. Now remember, the challenge that we have, if we really want to do a nice job with those lots, the challenge that we have is how do we screen those lots from Galpin Blvd because I don't think it'd be fair for me to try to sell my home to future home buyers. Oh yeah, Galpin Blvd's always going to be this real nice, sleepy road. Two lanes. One going north. One going south. That isn't what I'm going to be telling them. I'm going to be telling them that someday this is going to be a very, very busy road and I'm going to have to, in order for me to do a good job to protect those people from that busy road, I should be building a berm. I should probably be landscaping it. I should probably trying to be buffering the impact with that road. Well, if you start taking more right -of -way for trail purposes than is necessary, I can't put the berm that close to the road and it keeps moving the berm this way. If I keep moving the berm this way, then I'm moving that berm into the back yards, bringing the berm closer to the house. People will be sitting on their deck and all of a sudden there's a berm there. And every little foot makes a difference to the people who happen to be buying these homes. 1 15 1 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 Lash: So we're talking a difference of 3 feet, right? From what the recommendation is and what you're suggesting? Terry Forbord: No. No. They want an additional 20 feet. 1 Andrews: Outside the 100 foot right -of -way, is that correct? Terry Forbord: Correct. That's correct. Andrews: On the Song, current Song property. ' Terry Forbord: And that's where the problem lies because we think you can easily get the trail corridor within the 100 foot right -of -way and have all that pavement and all that buffer and everything. I mean I'm not trying to say that, I mean I can't blame city engineers for 1 wanting more rights -of -way for their needs and I guess I can't blame the Park Department for wanting as much right -of -way as they possibly can get for a trail but the point is...not to put a berm in. For the people looking at a road, well that wouldn't be very nice either. Or the other alternative is to obliterate these lots and just not have them. Or move this road, continue moving, I mean it's just not, we think ifs overkill and we don't think it's necessary and we think the diagram shows that. We think what's happens in other cities shows it... Now there are cities that are but certainly it's fair to say that nowadays cities are starting to take a look at that. If we really don't need it, why should we be asked for it. Just a few last items that I'd like to cover. I talked to Parks Director Hoffman about the construction of the proposed public trail and he didn't have a problem with this proposal. I think his staff report already says that but we would like to build that public trail as, the development will be ' phased. We'll be doing one phase and we'd like to build that public trail along that phase and then when we do the next phase, build that segment of the public trail and then as you go, because that's how you're going to be doing the grading. You kind of build it as you go and I think that's what, I'm not sure but I think...talking today. And lastly, two last items. We would have to amend our PUD approval that we already have on the Johnson - Dolejsi -Turner property in order to accomplish this. We would like, and I don't know if this is really a Park 1 Commission issue but we'd like the fees waived to accommodate that. And the last item would be that it's been the desire of the Park Director, and I think it's a good idea. I'm just not sure how to facilitate it right now. I believe that we'll be able to figure out a way but it's the desire, the idea of the Parks Director, I'll give him credit for it. If you recall there's that proposed trail corridor along through here. And he would like us to put a connection from the street B, between a couple of these Lots here down to that trail. And obviously that poses a little bit of a problem for us because to be fair to those future homeowners, I'm going to obviously have to tell them that there's going to be a trail link...but not only that, I need to kind of protect them a little bit from that trail for the same reasons that I've already identified. 16 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 Now I wouldn't have to do this but I just think it's right. We should put some kind of plantings along there. Some trees so they don't just see people walking down their side yard 1 lot line. So my concern is that somewhere along in here I'm going to have to adjust some lot lines too I think in order to make those home sites so they're negatively impacted by that connection. Now I'm going to need some cooperation probably from the Planning Department 1 and from the Engineering Department. to accomplish that. And I think that they're willing to compromise...but this is of concern to us. And now the reason I bring it up is because we'll have to amend this preliminary plat. We're going to have to try to find a way of how do we do that in here. Make two of those lots a little wider in order to be able to buffer those home sites from that link. And so we would like approval to direct staff to work with us to try and figure out a way to accomplish that, because I'm not sure how we can do that. I think the idea's a sound idea but I sense I'm going to need the cooperation of other departments, planning and engineering. Lash: What are your, I'm just looking at, I see there's kind of a short cul -de -sac right in the middle. Yep. Okay, go to the corner lot there. So if you ran it there, you'd be yeah. Would that work better? It wouldn't be in the side yard of two houses. It be along the back. Terry Forbord: Yeah, you know that's one of those things that's 6 of 1 and half a dozen of the other. You know the people that are sitting on this, their deck here trying to have their quiet enjoyment, would it impact them more to have the trail here than to try to put it between the side of the yard of that lot line. And I don't know right now. To me the way we would normally go about that, we would first of all try to get the other departments to cooperate and maybe allowing us to adjust some lot lines, because I do think it's an important issue. I don't think it'd be fair to those future home buyers if we just ignore it. So what I would do then is I would like to stake the field. I mean this is the kind of thing you go out in the field and kind of do it there rather than just on a piece of paper because you get a more real feeling of it. All I'm asking for, and I think most of you would probably agree. Yeah, this is a consideration we should give to the homeowners. And we're just going to need the cooperation of Todd's letter and he's said that he'd be happy to work with me on that. I would just like whatever approval or recommendation you give tonight, that you would direct staff, engineering and planning to assist us to accomplish that. Because we think it's a good idea. I'll be happy to answer any questions at this time. Schroers: Okay. Well thank you very much Mr. Forbord and we appreciate your work and Y Y rY PP Y your effort in trying to work with the city and I'm going to open this up to commission discussion in just a minute. I think we need to refocus what the role of this commission is 1 regarding this particular, not only this development but this area. This area is a park deficient area so as the area develops, the city needs and our mission here is to acquire public parks space in park deficient areas so the surrounding community has facilities to use. So we have 1 17 1 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 .1 h in possibilities of development of public park property keep that mind. There's p s p p p p P rty on the ' Stockdale property and other potential development sites in the area. However, those are possibilities that may or may not happen. We may or may not be able to capitalize on them. This is the biggest development proposed that we know of in the area. It is the most logical place to acquire the needed parkland and it is what's happening now in fact so with that in mind, I'd like to open it up to any commission response. Lash: I'd like to hear if there are any other public comments first. I don't know if there are. Schroers: Is there anyone else in the audience that would wish to make a statement in regard to the Lundgren Bros development this evening? Andrews: I have a question for Todd. If we were to take staff recommendation, what would be the approximately amount of fees that we would collect for this development? Hoffman: Park fees currently are $600.00. Those are increased on an annual basis. So if ' this is thing gets in the ground 1994, you'll probably see those closer to $700.00. Say you have 200 in total, 234 homesites I believe I stated. So it would run about $140 some thousand dollars. Andrews. And then kind of as a follow up question. If the city were to develop a neighborhood park simiilar to what Lundgren is proposing to build at their cost, what would be our cost to develop that? Hoffman: I couldn't answer that question... Schroers: Okay we do have, please come forward. State your name. 1 Dave Stockdale: My name's Dave Stockdale and I think most of you...I had conversations with both Todd and Terry and it's too early to say whether or not it's going to come to fruition but we are, my wife and I are definitely open to the concept of parkland adjoining ' our property. There's a lot of things that have to be worked out before I say it's a go go but we're definitely in dialogue on it. 1 Schroers: Well I appreciate you bringing that information forward because as you can see, this is a difficult, complicated issue right here and my personal feeling is that there is a lot of ' unanswered questions and we need to do some ground work and make a plan I feel, you know and have something to work with before we can go ahead and make any kind of real definitive recommendation. I mean I think we would be premature at this point to go ahead 1 and make these recommendations not knowing on what we are going to be able to or what we 1 18 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1. 1 aren't going to be able to do in the future. I mean we need to do some research here before we can make an educated decision on this. I Dave Stockdale: We are going to consider your dialogue, however it passes tonight and proceed. 1 Schroers: Any new information, we'd appreciate knowing about it. Dave Stockdale: We'll keep you posted. Schroers: Thank you. 1 Lash: Is it possible to make a recommendation contingent on the fact that we will be able to acquire some properties for public park? And if that situation disappeared, we'd be able to come back and change our recommendation. Hoffman: That was my thought this afternoon. I called to the City Attorney's office and got I in too late in the day to get an answer to that question. Schroers: That almost seems like it would be unfair though to the developer and to anyone 1 else if we say well, yeah. We'll go along with this provided that we can make another deal and get halfway through another deal and that doesn't pan out and then come back at a later date and tell this developer that no, they've got to change their plans. I don't think we want. 1 to do that. Hoffman: I think you're correct in that assumption. 1 Schroers: Mr. Forbord. I Terry Forbord: Mr. Chair, members of the Park Commission. Terry Forbord with Lundgren Bros. Lundgren Bros would prefer this evening that the commission would either vote for or I against the proposal and the reason is we have contract obligations with our sellers. We would rather walk away from this deal and know now rather than to continue it. We cannot continue to...or we'll be in violation of our contractual obligations. We would prefer this I evening that you would vote for or vote against it. Thank you. Schroers: Is there anyone else present in the audience this evening that would like to speak on I behalf of this project? Any other commission response? 1 19 1 1 1 ' Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 Roeser: Well I'm wondering derin now, the recommendations that staff has made here. There J g is absolutely no way that you can live with these, is that what I'm understanding here? The 20 foot trail easement for instance. Or adding the 250 square feet to the private park. Lash: Are you asking Mr. Forbord? Roeser: Yeah. I just, yeah. 1 Terry Forbord: Mr. Chair, members of the Park Commission. Terry Forbord. I'm sorry, I didn't know you were addressing me. I thought you were talking to the Parks Director. We ' feel that we have made an incredible proposal to the city. In light of all the amenities that we are going to be putting in at our expense, and also we're going to give the city additional land for public right -of -way and also agreeing to pay park dedication fees. We really feel that we ' have met the mark. I mean in any other city I think you'd be hard pressed to find any city that would not just welcome a proposal like this with open arms. And I'm not going to stand up here and say that we're the greatest thing in the world, because we're not. We make a lot ' of mistakes. I addressed that at the last meeting but we do know what, the limitations of what we can do from an economic standpoint and from a design standpoint. And we know what works from a marketing standpoint. I think there may be some fine tuning of some of those items that you raised. If you take a 250 foot by 250 foot flat area in this general vicinity, there isn't one. And we'd have to, I don't know what we'd have to do to our plan to accomplish that. The only choice I would be able to do is take up a home site and I can't 1 afford to do that. So that to me becomes an issue where I can't do that. Now essentially, if I believe that the city is going to acquire a public park, and I believe that's in the city's best interest, and I think they probably will do that, then that type of active...will be available at 1 that park within very short distance along public trails right to there. So, what was the other item other than the 250 x 250? 1 Roeser: The 20 foot trail easement. Terry Forbord: Well what would happen is I would end up losing maybe a dozen lots... The 1 alternative is taking and pushing that berm real close up to the houses. Roeser: Now you've told us that. I understand that. Terry Forbord: I wouldn't want to do that. I wouldn't want to sell somebody a lot like that and I don't think anybody would want to live on a lot like that. If there was really a need and it couldn't be done any other way, I wouldn't be proposing this but I know it can be done. We've done it and other cities do it so that's the only reason I'm proposing it because I know 1 we can accomplish that and everybody can still have what they want. 1 20 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 III 1 Roeser: See what you're asking us to do though is to set some precedence here to do some things that we've never done before. For instance, granting you the right to build a private 1 park. Granting you a 17 foot easement. We're changing some things here that by doing it, the next developer that comes in is going to say hey. Look what you did here. Look what you've given them. You know and then all of a sudden we're, it seems to me we're getting 1 ourselves into something. Terry Forbord: Well to be honest with you, the city already has approved a preliminary plat 1 with an association park like this and the city's done so also at condominiums, apartment complexes. They have very similar facilities. But you have to remember also this is a PUD. I And if you read the zoning code, the intent of the PUD ordinance is to provide flexibility... exactly the types of things we're talking about. That's what a PUD is for. It's a different zoning tool, different zoning district that is essentially there so that, to break away from the rigidity of standard subdivision planning. So the city, staff, park commissioners, planning commissions, the council and the developer or the applicant can all come together with as creative an idea as possible and it doesn't set a precedent because it's a PUD. I Lash: But the flip side of that is for a PUD, it's the developer's obligation to provide above . and beyond what's normally required. So for us to be providing the flexibility to you, we're I supposed to be getting some pretty big paybacks, and right now I haven't really seen really big paybacks. I mean I've seen some nice things but it's nothing way above and beyond what we've seen in other developments so. 1 Schroers: Here's what I'd like to ask you Terry. It's not that we are against a community having it's own amenities. Like you say, we all know that there are apartment complexes and townhome complexes that have their own tennis courts and own swimming pools, all that stuff. But how do we accomplish our job? How do we acquire public space in that neighborhood? I can tell you from past experience, things that have happened many, many 111 years ago have come back to haunt us. Things that we had no control over. Nothing to do with. People came back all of a sudden saying, where's our park and we're going, where's what park. Well we were promised a park however many years ago and it's not there. And 1 now we want our park. And so where's the money coming from to develop it? Where is the property coming from to put the park on? We're not going to get ourself in that situation again. We can't and in order to conform to the master plan of the city and the whole 1 development of Chanhassen as a whole, somewhere in your neighborhood, which is park deficient, we have to acquire public space. How do we do it? Where do we get it? You know we agree with that. I know there are people who have come forth Terry Forbord: o g p p to the city willing to sell their property. Mr. Stockdale just indicated tonight that he's having dialogue with the city. I have not heard him say that he will not sell the city his land. I have 1 21 1 1 1 . 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 heard him say that he's really interested in selling the city his land, as long as they can come 1 to satisfactory terms, and I know there are other parcels that were identified by Parks Director Hoffman that are for sale right now. Because I'm trying to buy them. I don't know if I'll be successful so I know there's land out there. If the city really wants to buy parkland, the city I can buy parks if they want to. Now the alternative, I mean there is a bottom line alternative to this is that if the city doesn't want us to develop it, then we'll find out. We'll go away and we'll just develop the site that we do have and the city can wait for the next person to come I in and they can exact from that person the parkland, if they haven't acquired any by that time, they can exact from that particular developer, if it ever develops in the future, a site on it. Again, if they haven't already acquired it. And then what the City's accomplished is that they I have a 5 acre site that needs to be improved. They're not going to have, no longer have an association park anywhere with the other amenities because that will be gone. Those 150 homeowners won't have the benefit of a park. I mean really the alternative isn't really a very 1 nice thing for the city either. Whether it's an association park or a public park, it is providing benefit to the citizens of the city. And so we think that it's a gift horse in the mouth. We really do. I understand your situation. I really do and I do believe there needs to be a public 1 park in that area. I've always favored that. Manders. I think the question on, you're talking about discussions with other land holders in 1 the area. What is an acre of land going for? Terry Forbord: In Chanhassen, residential. I Manders. That area. 1 Terry Forbord: In that area, I haven't talked to everybody in that area but I would imagine that land in that area would probably be anywhere from $18,000.00 in the worst case, or the I lowest to $30,000.00 on the high end. It just depends on the site. Berg: My concern, and certainly with your business...you know this better than I. It's easy I for us to sit here and talk about the people who are willing to deal and who are talking to the city but we also know that tomorrow they could change their mind. And then where are we? We're right back to where we are now with an association park and nothing to serve the rest I of the people in that area. That's my concern. We can't sit here and presume that there is going to be land available tomorrow. I don't think we can make that kind of assumption. I Terry Forbord: I agree. I mean there's nothing for sure and I can terminate my option tomorrow and I can walk away too. I mean there's no guarantee that I'll be here either. I mean in this type of situation, there are no guarantees until you actually get to that point. We 1 think that we're bringing a real valid proposal that if we can make it through the process, 1 22 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 �• we'll have a very nice neighborhood for possibly people who already live in Chanhassen. Most of our buyers come from the general area. We get some people from outside the area so...citizens of Chanhassen. But I do believe that the city can buy some land. I really do believe that, because if I can go out and buy it, there's no reason the city couldn't go out and buy it. , Schroers: We can go out and buy it but it's really not the best means of acquisition. Roughly speaking, just a very rough estimate in park dedication fees, we may get somewhere between 1 $120,000.00 and $130,000.00 from your development. Okay. Figure an average of $25,000.00 per acre to acquire property. Might be a ballpark figure. For 5 acres we're talking $125,000.00 to acquire the property and then there are no funds left to develop it. If we took your proposal, say we got $120,000.00- $130,000.00 from you. Went and bought property someplace else, all we're doing is a trade. We don't end up with a park that's developed. We don't end up with any facilities. All we end up with is $125,000.00 piece of property that we still have to figure out a way to develop. Buy equipment for. Facilitate and get up and running. ' Andrews: I guess I'd like to comment. We'd be in that position either way. Lash: You know, I was ready to move on this but I think we've got, unless somebody's got something. We're talking this thing to death. But my idea was to do a recommendation that was contingent on the factor of the city acquiring property for a public park. If that idea isn't acceptable to the applicant, then I'm ready to come up with a new one. A new motion so. Andrews: Let her fly. Schroers: I'm ready at this point. Lash: Okay. I guess I would move that we deny this application until we are able to acquire public property in the area. Berg: Second. , Terry Forbord: Mr. Chair, I'm sorry. What was it that I wasn't acceptable to me and I wasn't 1 clear on. Lash: We asked if having a contingent recommendation based on us acquiring a couple of 1 properties, we would make a recommendation based on that deal coming forth. And you said you couldn't live with that because you've got contracts and people and you have to get moving and so if you can't live with that, I can understand that. But then we've got to do 23 1 1 1 ' Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 ' what we have to do too. Terry Forbord: Mr. Chair. I was not responding to Commissioner Lash's idea. I was responding to the fact that we would like to know one way or the other whether the city wants this proposal to proceed. I would not be opposed to her suggestion as long as there was like a time limit on it, because if it went on in perpetuity, it wouldn't serve the city and it certainly wouldn't serve the applicant. So maybe it's fair to say that within 30 days. ' Schroers: This is exactly what I had written down. The exact same idea that Jan has brought up. Moving to accept the recommendation dependent on acquisition of other acceptable public space in the area. How long that would take to do that, I don't really know. To research it but I would also vote yes on that if we were able to do that. Fm not sure, staff may have to consult with the City Attorney to see if that's, if there's any legal implications involved. I think that's in general what we're saying is we don't have enough information to make a really good, solid decision tonight. We want some more information. We like the proposal. We like your plan. We just need to find a way to assure that we are going to be able to acquire public space and this is what we are attempting to do. So I think that we would have a good chance of voting this in contingent on what Jan has proposed. ' Andrews: Mr Chairman, we have a motion on the floor that's been seconded for denial. I think we have to ask if the motion maker and the person who seconded it wish to withdraw that motion before we consider an alternative. ' Lash: If a contingent recommendation is acceptable to the applicant, then I'm willing to withdraw my motion. ' Berg: I withdraw my second. ' Schroers. Okay. Then, are we willing to, can I have a revised motion or new motion? Lash: One thing that I guess I want to get other commission input on, because this was part of my idea for a motion to start with. I want us to think about the idea for the importance of the, I like the idea of the trail around the wetland. I don't know at this point in time if and maybe you guys can sell me one way or another, if I'm not interested in forfeiting the trail fees to have that paved at this time. Or at the time of development. Or if we would rather collect the fees and add that to our trail fund but just get the easement and maybe have it as a ' natural trail or something for a while with the possibility of future pavement. You know, I'm going to throw that out just to see. Get feedback from you guys. ' Berg: What's the lay of the land in terms of it being wet, etc. for a nature path? 24 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 , 1 Hoffman: Either way we would have to construct the nature path or asphalt path on high ground. The thing that I would ask the Commission to consider is that the value you're receiving in having the applicant construct it is far in excess of what you would have available in trail fees to do other work. It is more benefitting to a significant degree in that regard. I believe, also I...the commission some additional information briefly on the 20 foot I easement issue and regard to my conversation with the city engineer's office today. A couple areas of discussion included, and I think Larry can respond to at least one of these. ...it was the city's intention to install boulevard plantings, you're very limited. You could not do that. I You could not put boulevard plantings over a utility corridor because of what you find underneath there. So that's one consideration in the area where the additional right -of -way for the trails is required. The trail easement which we would look for outside of this line, is just that. It's an easement for trail purposes. The trail can certainly be squeezed up against the outside of that easement. What it's been referred to as before is an insurance policy. Once that, these property lines come up in here, you've sold your interest in acquiring any , additional property into perpetuity. So you certainly want to take a look at those issues at the time they are before you. Lash: Can you show us with your pencil about where you're suggesting it should be. I Hoffman: The trail would be outside of this line. From here over 8 feet. 1 Lash: The trail would be? . • Hoffman: Yeah, the trail would be. The easement is 20 feet and an easement is just a III standard. Ifs not taking the property. It's an easement for trail purposes. We're saying that, or staff is saying that the 8 feet can go here and then landscaping can go within that 20 foot 1 easement and it will act like rear yards. I'm not sure what these people will be doing on the outside of this berm, or if that's going to be addressed as part of the association's covenants. I If that would be mowed and maintained or if that would be more natural. I'm not sure what that would look like. An additional issue in regard to if the commission wanted to consider a compromise in this issue, is I have taken into consideration turn lanes which would most I likely occur at these two locations. And at some point this is probably a signalized intersection so if you put turn lanes in this right -of -way, you'd again take up a considerable additional right -of -way in that location. That's the other difficult problem in location that trail. So a compromise position presented by the engineering department would be to require additional right -of -way for the length of those turn lanes, which is about, excuse me. Additional easements for trail purposes. The length of that turn lane, which is about 300 feet, 111 to the north and south of these two access points...both acceleration and deceleration lanes that are right off of and right onto. 1 25 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 Andrews: That's not consistent with other developments that are happening. There are usually turn lanes off of collectors, not onto collectors that we're building. Hoffman: They...with the upgrade of County Road 117, which is Powers Blvd. There will be both a deceleration and acceleration... Lash: I would be ready to make a motion on this. It's going to be long. Schroers: Okay. Let's make the motion and as the motion is taking place, let us get through with the motion before there is any interruptions. Lash: Okay. Are there any other comments from other...for the trail thing that I threw out? 1 Schroers: Just to eliminate confusion. Lash: I took staffs comment. Okay. I would move that we move the recommendation by the City Council, or that we would recommend to the City Council the acceptance of a private association park with the amenity of an open field with a minimum size of 250 square feet and a maximum slope of 4 %. This is to be in addition to and not in lieu of existing 1 proposed amenities. And that full park fees be accepted at the rate in force at the time of building permit. And also as a condition to the park, I would want to have written in there that if, in the future there was dissolution or any type of breakdown in this neighborhood ' association, that the City would be deeded this park as a park and not subdivided into lots. Then to move onto the trail issue. There would be a 20 foot trail easement on the easterly property line and that this easement would be included in the grading plan for a suitable trail ' bed. And that there be no trees, planting of trees in the restricted area west of the trail bench. Also that we would acquire easements and the developer would provide construction of the nature trail, or the trail around the wetland. And in lieu of that, full trail fees would be waived. And that the amendment be done to the Johnson - Dolejsi -Turner development from last year. And let's see. There's something else. Oh, that we would direct staff to provide ' cooperation to the developer and flexibility of allowing the trail connection from the street to the wetland. And if the city were to acquire public property in this proximity, to this development, that Lundgren Bros would be cooperative in doing the rough grading on that site. And to direct staff that in the future the southern Dolejsi property would come forth or any of the other properties affecting this wetland that we would earmark that as a connection to this trail around the wetland. Is that all of it? Schroers: Are you including that it's dependent on whether or not we have the ability to acquire public space? 1 1 26 • 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 Lash: Right. That this recommendation be contingent on the fact that we are, the city is able to acquire public property near this development. 1 Andrews: Within? Lash: Within 30 days. I Meger: Would we also at this time make the additional recommendation then for staff to actively pursue the Stockdale property and other properties in the area or would that be a separate? Schroers No, I think that would be appropriate to include. Or interpret into the 30 days? Is I P that it? Lash: Yep. Plus the friendly amendment. P Y Schroers: Staff, are you clear on that? 1 Hoffman: I'm clear. A couple of clarifications to the motion. The restricted on the trail bench would be to the east. Just a clarification to the way Jan made her motion. The issue I of the 30 days, I do not believe that that would be sufficient time. If it's agreeable to the applicant, that that be extended to 45 days at a minimum. 60 days at a more comfortable I level. That would be, there would need to be appraisals made and City Council items and your recommendation should include the friendly amendment by Commissioner Meger in that regard because the Commission is going to want to know that the commission desires to see I that parkland, there is a park in that area. And finally, mention should be made about the trail connection between Lot 16 and 17 or a similar location. That that be a condition of approval as well. I Lash: Okay. I accept that. Andrews: We might as well get them all out here. Lundgren Bros had asked that we would recommend that any fees for PUD be waived for the already approved Johnson - Dolejsi -Turner property and I think that would be consistent with the cooperative effort we're trying to accomplish. Lash: The trail fee? 1 Andrews: Not the trail fees. The charge to amend the PUD in order to redraw the lot lines to put in the trail linkage. 1 27 1 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 Hoffman: That'd be an administrative charge, as far as I understand it that the Planning I Department would assess to the preliminary... Lash: Okay, so we would waive that fee. 1 Andrews: We'd recommend that it be waived. 1 Manders: Wasn't there some comment about trail fees being included in this? Andrews: We don't want fees. We want them to build the trail. I Manders: Right. 1 Lash: And so if they build the trail, we'll waive the fees. Manders: Right. Okay. I Schroers . And that's all included. I think we've covered most of the bases. 1 Berg: I think I'll second it. Andrews: Just a moment. The motion was 30 days. Are you making it to 45 or 60? I Schroers: Staff did that I think and Jan agreed to it. 1 Hoffman: ...agree on which one. I'm not sure what. I Roeser: Make it 60. Schroers: Would you like input Mr. Forbord? 1 Terry Forbord Mr. Chair, members of the Parks Commission. Terry Forbord. My contractual obligations are going to push me to the wall at 45 days. I can accept that risk. 60 I days I'd be in violation of my agreement and it would cost me a fortune to amend the agreement because our agreement is written that if it goes beyond a certain time period and I wouldn't be willing to spend that additional money at that point in time but 45 days I can live I with. Lash: Okay, so we'll change it to 45 days... 1 1 28 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 Schroers: Okay, 45 days. Alright, we have a motion. We have a second. I'll call the question. 1 Lash moved, Berg seconded that the Paiic and Recreation Commission recommend that the City Council approve the Preliminary Plat to subdivide 112 acres from Rural Residential to Planned Unit Development (PUD) into 115 single family lots contingent upon the following conditions: Parks: 1 1. The acceptance of a private association park with the amenity of an open field with a minimum size of 250 square feet and a maximum slope of 4 %. This is to be in addition to and not in lieu of existing proposed amenities. 2. Full park fees be accepted at the rate in force at the time of building permit application. 3. If in the future there is a dissolution or any type of breakdown in this neighborhood 1 association, that the City will be deeded this park as a park and not subdivided into lots. 4. This recommendation is contingent on the fact that the city is able to acquire public 1 parkland near this development within 45 days. Trails: 1 1. A 20 foot trail easement shall be granted along the entire easterly property line and that this easement would be included in the grading plan for a suitable trail bed. This trail bed may meander within the easement alignment at the discretion of the applicant, but the eventual alignment must be conducive to future trail construction and is subject to approval as a part of the grading plan review. Planting of trees shall be restricted to areas west of the trail bench. 2. The applicant shall dedicate lands to accommodate trail construction along the southern boundary of the Johnson/Dolejsi/Turner preliminary plat as depicted on Attachment #4. The applicant shall map and construct a trail paralleling this wetland. This construction is to be completed per city specifications and at the time of adjoining street construction. Final alignment of this trail shall be staked by the developer and approved by the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer. In recognition for the dedication of this trail corridor, and the construction of said trail, it is recommended that the applicant receive full trail fee credit at the time of building permit application for both the Song property and the Johnson /Dolejsi/Turner applications. This trail shall include a connection to the 1 29 1 • 1 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 street plan as indicated between Lots 16 & 17, Block 2 or a similar suitable location in the near vicinity. I 3. Staff is directed to provide cooperation to the developer and flexibility of allowing the trail connection from the street to the wetland. I 4. If the city were to acquire ublic roe in the proximity of this development, that I n' q P property rtY P Lundgren Bros would be cooperative in doing the rough grading on that site. Direct staff that in the future if the southern Dolejsi roe would come forth or any ect t t ) property rty Y I of the other properties affecting this wetland, to earmark that as a connection to this trail around the wetland. • I 6. The Park and Recreation Commission would recommend that any fees associated with the redrawing of the plat for the Johnson/Dolejsi/Turner property for this trail easement be waived. 1 All voted in favor, except Commissioner Andrews who abstained, and the motion carried. MISSION HILLS, TANDEM PROPERTIES. • I Public Present: Name Address I Jo Larson 8590 Tigua Lane Sharon Nickolay 8500 Tigua 1 Mike & Jo Ann Mulligan 8501 Tigua Circle Dick Putnam 2765 Casco Pt. Rd. Marge Shorba Great Plains Blvd, Lake Susan I Al Klingelhutz 8600 Great Plains Blvd. Hoffman: Chairman Schroers, Commission members. Item number 4 is the conceptual plan 1 development approval for low, medium and high density homes. 190 units on 62.05 acres... neighborhood commercial use...again this is a conceptual plan at this time. The location is east of Highway 101 and north and south at the intersection of West 86th Street. The...kind I of a new area of the city for development proposals. As we travel south on Market Blvd, leaving City Hall at this location across Highway 5. Travel down the new segment of TH 1 101 and right now you then attach the old segment at this portion. But again the upgrade... to 30 1 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 an intersection point at Highway 212. The site location is highlighted as you see it on this map. So the new corner of Highway 212 and Highway 101, that being the northeast quadrant. The applicant is Tandem Properties, 7808 Creek Ridge Circle, Bloomington, Minnesota. The present zoning is residential single family. The adjacent zonings to the north you have additional residential single family. To the south it would be the Highway 212 right -of -way and additional properties.zoned residential single family. To the east, or towards Eden Prairie, again is residential single family and then the Rice Lake Manor subdivision. To the west you have Highway 101 and additional property zoned residential single family. In regard to the comprehensive plan and the recreation section. The comprehensive plan identifies this site as lying in a park deficiency area #2. That needs to be discussed...as you can see park deficiency area #2 is right here and it's a very small portion of that area which remains park deficient. However, this application lies just about wholely within that little white zone which is currently park deficient as defined by service areas in the recreation section. However, the 2000 Land Use Plan, which I have here, has identified property immediately to the east of this site with some separation here as future parks and open space and that would fill this gap for the service area of this development. It's the hopes of the city of Chanhassen that when this property is severed by the future Highway 212, that an 1 opportunity would present itself to the city for acquiring that probably from MnDot or the State. Again that site is at this point is 20+ acres. The design study for that future park and open space has not been completed, thus I cannot predict what type of facilities could be 1 developed in this site. The area is heavily wooded and is squeezed between future Highway 212 and Rice Marsh Lake. The City of Eden Prairie has also identified. the land in this area lying in Eden Prairie as future open space. They are also planning for a Highway 212 underpass to the east of this site. A second proposed park was also identified in the southeast quadrant of this zone in a subdivision applied for by Mr. John Klingelhutz. You have an attachment in your packet which shows that. Some of you may recall that was conceptually looked at probably a year and a half ago. That future park, if acquired, however and developed would be severed from the subject site by Highway 212. During my initial conversations with the applicant and a representative of the home builder there, I expressed by concern that a recreational amenity of some sort had not been included in a plan to develop 190 dwelling units, which would assumedly house in excess of 400 new residents to the city of Chanhassen. The general response that I received centered on two items. The applicant asserted that the tareted demographics of the development would not require park space, but more specifically play equipment and an attempt to hold down costs is being made in order to produce an end result which is affordable. You should know that the city has also identified this project as a potential affordable housing type of project where the city could assist in home purchasing for the first time home buyers. The position that the people who would eventually purchase these dwellings represent a profile of our society which will not require play equipment, and /or park amenities is a misnomer. All segments of our society need and value recreational areas as a part of the community. The city's recreational section 1 31 1 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 of the Comp Plan states that park and open space would fill three primary functions. First, they meet positive human needs, both physically and psychologically. The second function is ' that parks and open space enhance and protect our resource base. And the third is that parks and open space concerns economics. That being that facilities can have impact on economic development and real estate values. So the commission is certainly aware that parks are a 1 value to our community. The Planning Commission reviewed this concept on August 18th, sounding a great deal like a park commission at times. There appeared to be unanimous desire to see a recreational amenity incorporated into the application. A suggestion was made to ' convert Lot 6, Block 1 froma four -plex unit into a recreation area of some type. We did not show that concept. The applicant may present an amended version of this. Lot 6, Block 1 is ' down in this location. It is a small units in their preliminary reviews, the Planning Commission thought that would be an appropriate area. Since it then would take advantage of this wetland, graded an open expanse where people could recreate in this location. Have ' that being out in the open to that wetland to their immediate north. I agree with that position. This conversion would take advantage of the large wetland on the site. The site is centrally. located in the development and would provide for sight lines to the private street, across the ' wetland to West 86th Street, and vice versa. The total area of Lot 6, Block 1 is quite small however, in the range of 1/2 acre. Staff is proposing that this amenity be a private or an association nature. Again...development up here of Oak Ponds /Oak Hill where they're putting ' in a private pool and play area. Staff is proposing the components of this facility be at the discretion of the applicant, but again typically they include landscaped grassy areas, picnic tables and benches, play apparatus, tennis and basketball courts. Obviously all of those ' amenities would not fit in this location. In regard to trails, the comprehensive trail plan identifies a trail on the western perimeter of the site paralleling both new and old Highway 101. The site is also boxed by east /west trail links to the north and south. Those being the ' trails running along what is referred to as the Rice Marsh Lake Susan trail. And then down to the south, the trail running along the southern border of the property. Along 212 and further south. As referenced earlier, this box could be completed by a second north /south trail ' to be constructed in Eden Prairie linking Rice Marsh Lake and Lake Riley. That effort is successful to get underneath 212 and that would certainly be a nice amenity...The sighting of this development calls for the construction of an important middle link to this box, running east from Highway 101 to the terminus of the project. At a future date this trail sidewalk system could then be picked up and carried into the future park property. Something that would have to be done to obviously allow the neighborhood to gain access to the park. The proposed A street should also include a sidewalk which can be extended to the north with the street's future extension. That is shown in the diagram as well. The presence of a large ag urban wetland and the proposed park space creates the perfect opportunity for this pedestrian ' system to include a loop around the wetland. Again that's indicated on this rough concept plan. The east /west trail would run from the Highway 101 to the terminus of the project down to this location and then continue on to a point in the future to gain access of the future 32 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 park space and that this...continue around the wetland and then access the park in some P p P fashion. The type of trail which would typically be constructed around that wetland would be bituminous surface and the construction would be considered for trail fee credits under current city practices. The sidewalk components of the system are to be constructed using concrete at a width deemed suitable by the engineering department. Sidewalk do not fall under the purview of the Park and Recreation Commission. They are not considered for trail fee credits. I have attempted to illustrate these concepts on that diagram. The presence of the neighborhood commercial area would also benefit greatly from such a system as would the residents so people could travel to and from the neighborhood commercial... The recommendations to the Park Commission, Park and Recreation Commission is that the Park and Recreation Commission recommends concept approval of Mission Hills as shown on plans dated June 27, 1993, subject to the following 4 conditions. The applicant shall provide a recreational amenity in the vicinity of Lot 6, Block 1. This facility to include typical park amenities. 2. Concrete sidewalks be constructed on the south side of West 86th Street from Highway 101 east to the project's terminus and on "A" Street from West 86th Street north to the street's terminus. Then that would be continued at a future time as well to the north and then loop back to TH 101 to create that trail connection as well. 3. That a bituminous trail be constructed encircling wetland No. 15 connecting the sidewalk system to the park site. In consideration for the construction of said trail, the applicant shall receive trail fee credit equal to the cost of construction. Said cost to be determined by the applicant for presentation to the city with documentation for verification. 4. That full park fees shall be collected at the time of building permit application at the rate then in force. Schroers: Thank you Mr. Hoffman. Is there anyone in attendance in the audience here tonight that has anything to add to this proposal? Yes sir. If you'd come forward and state your name for us please. 1 Mike Mulligan: Could you put the slide on to show you the Rice Marsh lots. Schroers: Could Y ou tell us who you are sir please? Mike Mulligan: My name is Mike Mulligan. I live on Tigua Circle, which is located immediately east of this project. There are 8 lots located in the quarter section indicated on the map there. We have our own park. And frankly we're very concerned about the amount of park space being allocated for 190 homesites. They're putting 190 homesites on less property than our 7, or rather our 8 lots occupy. Schroers: You're talking 8 single family lots and this is high density? 1 1 33 1 1 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 I Mike Mulligan: That's correct, yes. My concern frankly is that we are going to have those g ,yes y c y g g I people, if you don't have adequate park facilities for them, we are going to have those people, those kids who are just going to be natural kids, like your kids and my kids. My kids were. They're grown up now. Are going to be attracted to the relatively undeveloped part of those I 8 lots overlooking that. You don't have any access to get down to that trail around Rice Marsh Lake except for going through private property. Unless you have some facilities within that, I believe you said 62 acres, of the space that the family dwellings is going to I occupy is about 35 acres... 190 some lots. And that's our concern. One of our concerns is the concern that applies to. I Manders: So if I understand you, you're saying that there may not be enough space allocated for parks? I Mike Mulligan: That's correct. I did attend the meeting the other night and there was quite a bit of discussion about some other concerns and I understand the developer's projections, his demographics of...number of children but the fear that we have is that we're going to be, we're I going to go from a remote, isolated area of 8 lots on the quarter section that are going to be literally over run. 1 Lash: Mr. Mulligan, you said you have a park out there. What park are you referring to? Mike Mulligan: I was speaking just informally I guess. We have 8 lots on mostly, partially 1 wooded lots. It is a park. 8 house. Lash: You're talking about your private property? I Mike Mulligan: That's what I'm talking about, yes. 1 Lash: Okay. Okay. I just wasn't sure what you were talking about. I Mike Mulligan: Thank you. Schroers: Mr. Hoffman, is there a way to gain a trail access to the trail that goes to Rice I Marsh Lake Park from the development? Hoffman: Only in on street. That would be onto TH 101 through this portion going north to I the current Rice Marsh trail alignment here. There are no allowances for easements along this corner of Rice Marsh Lake that I'm aware of so. The City of Eden Prairie is interested in continuing this loop so the city has this portion now. We would like to continue it up to the 1 Eden Prairie system here. They would like to continue it around in some fashion down 1 34 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 through this area but then it would have to come on street. As discussed this evening, it may go out either to the A Street that is labeled and then up and around, or on street out to TH 101 and then north to make that loop. , Schroers: On street, thank you. Yes ma'am. Sharon Nickolay: My name is Sharon Nickolay and I live at 8500 Tigua Lane, and if you put the map up I can show you where that is. We're on the top lot right adjacent to the development. Proposed development. And I guess I'm here to echo the same things that Mike Mulligan said. The front of our lot is heavily wooded and considering the development is going into a field of corn and being there are no trees, we're a little nervous about our lots becoming a play area or the local park for the children. And I know the developer had said something about there are 190 units. There won't be any children. But there's I think 18 single family homes. About half of the other units have 2 bedrooms. So I anticipate that there will be children. And then finally, the...neighborhood but a half acre lot is just not adequate. There's no parkland near. Crossing TH 101 or there's no trail system along TH 101 and you can talk about, there will be a trail along TH 101. There will be a future park along TH 212. If you read the Villager this past week, 212 is probably a long way away. We have no toll road in Minnesota and they're talking about...making a toll road. I don't want 50 years and think there might be a park there. We've got to plan for what's, if the development's going to go in now, we have to plan around that now. We can't say okay, 20 years from now it will all work out. 20 years from now those children will be gone. That development...giving them a park. So I think a half acre, as Mr. Hoffman said, isn't enough room for a tennis court or a pool or whatever. Now enough room for much more than a picnic table and...maybe and I think we're doing injustice to the children there. Again, there's no trail system as of now. TH 101 is not upgraded. I do not let my children bike or walk on TH 101. I don't want other kids, you know 200 kids walking on TH 101. So until TH 101 is upgraded, until 212 is built, I think this is all, I think we have to think about what's there now and I think that's all my comments for now. Schroers: Thank you very much. Andrews: I wanted to comment that I would support comments made from the audience that it's probably inevitable that there are kids there with the amount of space being proposed, that they would spill over onto private property, which is inappropriate. ' Jo Larson: Hi, my name is Jo Larson and I live at 8590 Tigua Circle. A couple of questions that I have for the developer. I'm not, if this is going to be a private park, are your single family homes included to use the park? Another question I have is, the trail going, following the south side of the West 86th Street. I'm not real clear. Is it going to go around the pond 35 1 1 M Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 or is there going to be a separate trail that goes around the pond and is the trail around the pond proposed to be private? I'm just a little unclear on what's public and what's proposed to be private and if the park is proposed to be private, how do you expect to keep these people I from entering the park when there's a public trail. That's just a few questions I have that aren't real clear. 1 Schroers: Would staff care to clear up some of that. I Hoffman: I think the,...concept of private versus public is probably very fresh in your mind. The Planning Department is looking for this remnant to move further north to give some buffering to this wetland. The reason obviously for the depiction of the trail on the south side I is to make all these things connect. So you have commercial and then you have an access road into high density. You have your wetland area which you want to access with this trail so that becomes a natural connection. And then once you get to the eastern terminus, you I also want to terminate on the south side so then you can access the future park property along here. So those are the reasons for this trail on the south side. My original concern, initial concern was that we didn't have enough room there between the wetlands and the future, or I improved West 86th Street but my understanding is that planning is looking for that road to shift north an appropriate amount for these things to be able to occur. It is certainly proposed that these trails be of a public nature. In regard to the park issue, all those concerns have not I been addressed as of yet. That would be available to all the residents of the community, both single family and multi - dwellings. Indeed that would be available to the community at large. Those issues have not been addressed yet. Again, this is a conceptual plan. You will see this 1 again at the preliminary plat stage. Lash Why did this go to the Planning Commission before it came to us? I Hoffman: Just in a matter, issue of scheduling. Typically the Planning Commission would like to hear your position in regard to the concept... I Berg: I don't mean to be obtuse here explain to me what exactly we're approving here with the conceptual plan. I Hoffman You don't necessarily have to approve anything but ou want to give the applicant Y PP you g PP I some more direction... (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) 1 Lash: We have stated in here that the City of Eden Prairie has also identified land in this area and that the Land Use Plan identifies 20+ acres east of this. So how far east? 1 36 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 Hoffman: Again, it would be the length of Tigua Lane addition or Rice Manor so this is the I terminus of the project. And then you have that...until you hit this area which is identified as future parks and open space. 1 Lash: Which is about how far? Hoffman: Quarter section, 1,320 feet. Thanks Al. I Resident: That's to the entrance to Tigua? End of Tigua? 1 Lash: And is that property developable? I • Hoffman: Is the property developable? Lash: Yes. 1 Hoffman: This property? I Lash: Yes. Assuming we're going to be able to have baIifields and some big time stuff there? 1 Hoffman Well I'm not certain if that would be appropriate. It's fairly heavily wooded. Again as I indicated, there's been, staff is not, or the city has not looked at any preliminary . I studies of what that parkland should potentially be. However I can tell you, it does look at, feel much different than this property. As you know, this is all wetland area. It's shaded the same. This property comes up off the embankment more quickly and is higher and is treed I so it could be utilized to a much different degree than the property north of Rice Marsh. Lash: And the 2000 Land Use Plan, is that our's or who's plan is that? I Hoffman: Correct. It's the city's plan. Lash: So the City's goal is by the year 2000 you have acquired 20 acres there to have as a I park? Hoffman: Well, I don't believe it's labeled in that regard. I think the 2000 just indicates that I as the year 2000 is where the city would like to be. In regards to this, what the property looks like, I believe that the residents who are here this evening could be a resource for us. 1 I've looked at it on the aerial. I've not walked it in person so if they have any comments for us. 1 37 • 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 Lash: Okay, and then the other site that you referenced? Where is that? Hoffman: That would be located to the south of TH 212, down in this vicinity. Lash: Okay, given the fact 212's not there, how far then, how difficult would it be for people in this new development to access the park that would be down in the new development to the south. 1 Hoffman: Again, this development was never approved so I can't say it would go in. It potentially could but again the City would not advocate plans to make a connection there because it's going to be, you don't want to create some habitual patterns and then sever those ' with 212. Lash: No, but what I was thinking was that that was something that was coming on fairly soon. That would fill the bill until the other property that's on the north side of 212 would be acquired. Hoffman: I couldn't tell you how long it's going to be. Manders: What you're saying about both of those properties there is that there would be in ' the plan to be acquired for park space and that's it. Hoffman Correct. Resident: I have a question for Mr. Hoffman. Is this plan after 212 is built or before 212 is ' built? Hoffman: It's probably contingent with, at the same time that the 212 right -of -way is ' purchased. Right -of -way is being purchased at the present time in some areas along 212 as . land becomes available. It's most beneficial for the city to purchase it at that time because then we get participation from the State. ' Mike Mulligan: Excuse me. My name is Mike Mulligan. Again, I'm a resident of Tigua. My understanding is that that portion of 212 is not funded at all and that the only land that's 1 being purchased is land where there's a very, I can't think of the word I'm trying to say. A natural condition that requires such a stress condition. Andrews: I'm unclear of any direct knowledge. Mike Mulligan: ...fund of the highway is for the eastern terminus. 38 i Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 Andrews: In the article in our Villager this week, they mentioned the fact that whatever potential future construction of 212 appears to be delayed quite a bit further and it's doubtful that it would be built at all. 1 Schroers: I think Mr. Klingelhutz may have a response in that regard. Al Klingelhutz: I've been on the Highway 212 committee for just about 40 years now. I'm Al Klingelhutz. I live on 8600 Great Plains Blvd. I talked to, I was to the last Highway 212 meeting which was on the 13th in the Chaska City Hall...Eden Prairise and not many of those ' meetings that I've missed. Talking to Evan Green, who is the head engineer for Highway 212, he said already that 90% of the Highway 212 in the city of Chaska has been purchased... About 80% of Eden Prairie has been purchased and none of Chanhassen's at this time. He , did say he...City of Chanhassen and starting to urge people to start selling the right -of -way at this time...Highway 212 has been designated up to Lyman Blvd at this time. Funding you know is not available to build it up to there but they assured me at the meeting I met with Evan Green and another fellow from the Highway Department in my office last week Thursday morning. Right after the Planning Commission meeting here. That within the next 3 years that if people aren't selling right -of -way for Highway 212, that they would be starting • to purchase it in Chanhassen. The Highway Department would. Like I said, this has been going on for 40 years but this is the closest I've been to seeing 212 happening. Schroers: Can you give us a logical reason why it's been purchased in Eden Prairie and has been purchased in Chaska and has not been purchaed in Chanhassen. Al Klingelhutz: I can't really give you a logical reason for it. In Chaska the landowners have been going to the City of Chaska and asking the City of Chaska to help them be able to sell the right -of -way in Chaska through the RALF fund, which is a fund that's set aside and paid for by the Metropolitan Council and when the highway gets built, the Metropolitan Council will be refunded that money that they are using to purchase this land at this time. 1 Schroers: Very good. Thank you for that information. Alright. Now if we can get back to. Al Klingelhutz: Oh, one thing I did mean to say. I never was in favor of having 212 come into that area. I always felt it should go south of Rice Lake. Schroers: I think so too. Okay. Back to the recommendation. Just to summarize briefly. It seems to me that the residents now living in the area adjacent to this development feel that there is not adequate park space along with this development. It doesn't seem like we are 1 asking for a lot of park space here and in lieu of that, is anyone ready to make a recommendation or a motion? 39 i 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 1 Andrews: Since this is only a conceptual approval, I think our motion can be somewhat more vague than what other motions that we make. My motion would be that the Park and Recreation Commission would recommend that the applicant provide additional park space I than what has been proposed. That conditions 2, 3 and 4 of the staff recommendation be accepted basically as is but that we would prefer to see something more done in providing park facilities for the potential residents of this developments. I Lash: I would second that. I Andrews moved, Lash seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend conceptual approval of Mission Hills as shown on plans dated June 23, 1993, subject to the I following conditions: 1. The applicant shall provide additional park space than what has been proposed to I accommodate the future needs of the residents in this development. 2. Concrete sidewalks be constructed on the south side of West 86th Street from Highway I 1 01 east to the project's terminus and on "A" Street from West 86th Street north to the street's terminus. Then that would be continued at a future time as well to the north and then loop back to TH 101 to create that trail connection as well. 1 3. That a bituminous trail be constructed encircling wetland No. 15 connecting the sidewalk system to the park site. In consideration for the construction of said trail, the I applicant shall receive trail fee credit equal to the cost of construction. Said cost to be determined by the applicant for presentation to the city with documentation for verification. I 4. That full park fees shall be collected at the time of building permit application at the rate then in force. I All voted in favor, except Commissioner Roeser who abstained, and the motion caned. 1 Berg: I guess I'd like to state, just in addition to that. Not, just to be on the record. Along as this is just a concept. I'd like to see something done between the developer and the homeowners to provide some sort of protection if you will. I Schroers: For the existin g homeowners? I Berg: To discourage this overflow that the neighborhood is concerned about and encourage them to work together to come up with something that's amenable to both. I 40 1 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 Schroers: I think that's a good suggestion. Lash: Do we want to...but do we have feelings as to what we're looking for minimize size ' wise yet? Schroers: I think we're going to deal with it again when it comes back. t Lash: Because we've got potentially 400 people there and obviously a half acre just isn't going to cut it. We have some guidelines that we usually use. Resident: 190 units, it will be 400 minimum. If there's a couple in each house, that's what we have. Hoffman: Parks handled within a service area is 1 acre per 75 people. So depending on how you look at this. The site obviously needs recreational facilities for it's own residents but depending on what that land... Lash: I guess it would be probably beneficial for the applicant to hear from the Park and Rec Director what our normal guidelines are so at least they have an idea so they don't come in with something that we'll still find unacceptable. 1 Andrews: I think the applicant's received comment from both Park and Planning that we're looking for something more in park and I think we should let the applicant propose something and then respond at that time. Schroers: Okay. Was there one quick question? Yes sir. 1 Dick Putnam: I'm the applicant. It was kind of interesting listening to Terry's problem which was sort of reverse of where we're at. We have changed the plan and I'm meeting with Paul ' tomorrow morning to go over. It's a good news, bad news. I think it addresses a lot of the concerns that were raised in the first plan. The bad news is, the unit numbers went up. One of the concerns of the Planning Commission and the neighbors was that this was high density, 10 -12 units an acre and the folks that are here this evening live on 3 acres, 4 acres, 2 acre lots. So the shock was kind of significant. I guess what we need to know is, the city put a plan together long before we were involved. We were recruited to see if we wanted to put a project together and bring in a good builder like Rottlund to build multi - family units. Now we find that we come in with a plan that's for an elephant and we come out with approval for a giraffe. The plan that we're going to be putting back into the city, back to the Planning Commission addresses a lot of the good concerns that were raised. Changing the units. A lot of the concerns the neighbors had making the lots adjacent to their lots 20,000 square feet 1 41 i 1 .' 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 instead of 15,000. Doing something with private small scale park area that much to what Todd outlined. The same thing. It must be that great minds work in the same track because we put this thing together, it must have been the same time he was doing his. That's the good news. The bad news is, the units actually go up and we're closer to about 200 multi- family units total and 17 single family lots. So before we have a project, we need to know if, on one hand the city staff is saying we'd like to see this available for first time housing assistance program and at the same tiine the neighbors are saying, we think these units may be ought to be more expensive. So we've got some real disparity objecting between a city ' comprehensive plan and perception, and rightly so, of the neighbors that have lived there for 15 years. And I can't tell you how it's going to resolve itself. It's certainly going to get ' dumped in the City Council's lap. And says here's your comprehensive plan, we're within or under the density guidelines significant. It's a good project that with these changes meets the suggestions that were made but it doesn't meet the idea of being at 6 units per acre or ' something. And it does increase the price of the housing to $150,000.00 per unit or something. So I can't tell you how that's going to resolve itself but that ought to be interesting. Regarding the private park issue. If the units that are being proposed by ' Rottlund, which they built some of the same units and some similar units in Eden Prairie, just past Dell Road's intersection. The gray buildings behind the big earth berm. That was a project we developed that had single family and neighborhood commercial and 100 units that ' Rottlund has there. They built similar units around the Twin Cities probably, and I want to guess 1,000. 1,500 of those similar type units in various communities over the last probably 5 years. They have a track record of who buys them for what reasons. How long they're there, that we'll have made available to the staff and anybody else that's interested. These homes are not built as family housing, pure and simple. Some of them are designed for retired people with main floor master bedrooms as an example. One level. They are not ' designed like my house with 5 bedrooms or anything else. And I guess we all have to understand that to apply the same standard to the project that Lundgren has for example, which is family housing and probably some fairly good sized family units. Where our project Trotters Ridge, south of Highway 5, isn't necessarily the same as it applies here. And I guess in terms of the amount of park space, if we're looking at a figure of 1 per 400, 1 acre per 400 people, we'll be happy to make available at $21,000.00 an acre, $22,000.00 an acre. Not 1 $30,000.00 that Terry was talking about. The same price we're paying for the land. If the public wants to buy a portion of it, and put in a 4 or 5 or 6 acre park, that's fine. Same price that we're paying for it and we'll take it off our $140,000.00 park fees. I think it's unfair to say that we need a 4 acre park. Then the project just doesn't happen. So I guess we can look at the totlot, the picnic tables, the more passive type of area but we have to look at the public ...build the active play space. The ballfields, the tennis courts. These folks can't afford to put ' in pools and that sort of thing if you're building a housing unit for a total price of say $80,000.00 or $90,000.00. The single family units that border up against the existing ' neighborhood, that's a whole different story and those are the same as any other home in town 42 1 1. Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 I. 1 I guess other than some of the lots would be 20,000 square feet rather than 15,000. Schroers: I realize what you're saying. That you can't compare a large single family house I with a multi -unit dwelling but in terms of park, we're providing park for the people. Not the dwellings and each person needs a recreation space. That's where the problem comes in. 1 Dick Putnam: Todd, your fees are not structured to have different fees for multi - family units like some communities, is that right? I mean one fee per unit? 1 Hoffman: No. They are structured for multi - family. Dick Putnam: Are they? What's the fee on multi-family do you know? I Y Y Y . Hoffman: At the present, I don't want to misquote myself...I believe they were $500.00 per 1 unit. Dick Putnam: As opposed to $600.00? 1 Hoffman: Approximately in that area. ' • Dick Putnam: We're going to average in the majority of those units, probably slightly over 2 people per unit as an average. Your normal single family home here I'm guessing is I averaging 4 1/2 -5 probably. Something like that. And to get your total average down in that 3 to 4 range. So right now the park fees that are being paid by a project that let's say 10 units per acre is 10 x 500 is $5,000.00 an acre in park fees as opposed to 2 units an acre, or I 1.7 like our Trotters Ridge, which is $1,200.00 an acre. So there is a significant factor in loading heavily on multi - family units paying their fair share. Probably more so as a matter of fact. And I guess I'd look at that as, if there's a need for an active park space here, there's I land, Todd between that park that you're looking at and our site that has part of it is the wetland. Part of it I think is just open field space isn't it? I think it is...out there and quickly looking at it. I believe the land north of 212. Right in between there? That property would I be a logical situation I suspect if you need a ballfield space. I'd hate to see you go in and cut woods down to build a softball field. Schroers: Well that won't happen. I Resident: What about the drainage? I Dick Putnam: Part of it is low but I think part of it is a little...also in there but that would be something to look at. The other thing I'd suggest for the neighbors too is to look at granting 1 43 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 an easement, or sellin g a portion o f the Lakeshore to continue that trail around Rice Marsh p Lake. They might not like to hear that but the reality is that, the City of Eden Prairie and Chanhassen are going to develop a trail system. Your problem of being encroached on will be far greater from the people walking around the entire lake and then figuring out that they can't cross that narrow 3 lot area, or 4 lots. That might be something to look at that might be in the best interest of everybody. And yourselves to gain access to it. As opposed to just bringing it out and expecting people to detour down 86th Street, up TH 101 and then back ' again. Because it truly is going to be a Lake of the Isles kind of a trail system around there. Or Starring Lake in Eden Prairie or Anderson Lakes or whatever. Then you ought to look at...that property on the lake. 1 Schroers: Thanks for sharing that with us because we will be looking at this again. ' Lash: When you were suggesting that you would sell the acreage to us for the same price that you paid. What difference would it make to you if you sold us the property for that . price or if you dedicated the property and a portion of your park and trail fees were, or your 1 park fees were waived. • Dick Putnam: It wouldn't make any difference. 1 Lash: Okay. 1 Dick Putnam: I think $500.00 per unit total, whatever that is. If that's what the city would want, I mean that's fine. You are entitled to 10% or whatever anyway. It's a question of you identifying that's where you want a park. Otherwise you end up with these things scattered all over the place. That's kind of your choice. I guess that's an alternative. To think that a private park in this case would be developed using the standard I heard thrown out of 75 to 100 people per acre, for a private park that won't work. Now if you want to do a public park ' there, we'll certainly work with you on that. But it'd be nice to know that going in I guess - right off the bat. Maybe Todd can talk to you a little bit about that and see if that's what you want to do. Or look at the adjacent property also which may make some sense. Hoffman: Dick, could you please state your name for the Minutes. Dick Putnam: Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't have the thing memorized like Terry did where every other sentence was the same phrase. I thought there was a tape recorder he was pushing. I know him so I can make fun of him. I'm going to talk to him about that afterwards anyway. He's got to improve that delivery. It's a little... My name's Dick Putnam and I'm one of the owners of Tandem Properties. And any other questions? 1 1 44 11, Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 1 Schroers: No. Thank you. So with that, we are setting a record for going through an agenda at the slowest rate ever. We're all the way up to 5 already. Can you believe it. 1 MOTEL EXPANSION/RFSTAURANT, BLOOMBERG 2ND ADDITION, BLOOMBERG COMPANIES, INC. Hoffman: Other than if there's an applicant here who would like to make any comments, it would be our, staff recommendation that the recommendation as stated... I Lash: So moved. Schroers: Is there a second? I Roeser: Second. 1 Lash moved, Roeser seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend the City Council accept park and trail fees for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 and any subsequent lots of the I Bloomberg Second Addition. Said fees to be collected at the time of building permit application at the rate then in force. Current commercial /industrial park and trail fees are $3,000.00 per acre and $1,000.00 per acre respectively. The repsective acreages for the lots 1 are approximately .75 acres for Lot 1 and .35 acres for Lot 2. All voted in favor and the motion canied unanimously. PROGRAM REPORTS: I P R O A. SEPTEMBER FEST. 1 Ruegemer: Just in regard to the new Septemberfest celebration that was formerly our I Octoberfest celebration. The schedule is in the process this week of being finalized...early next week. We did add quite a few new schedule of events...new items to gear more towards an all day celebration. So it will be more than just a 4 or 5 hour celebration. It will be from I 12:00 noon until 11:30 at night so there will be a lot of variety. A lot of...and some name bands this year so they'll draw some people to make the celebration a success. Some of the same...as last year but Pm very excited...Does anybody, the report was basically an update. I Are there any questions from the Commission that we can answer at this time? Lash: I think it sounds great. 1 Manders: Sounds like fun. 1 45 1 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 I Andrews: Any tie into the park pavillion that we bought. Paid lots of money for. As far as Y P P g I this event. Will there be anything out at Lake Ann Park? Ruegemer: Oh at Lake Ann Park. There will be the softball tournament for the fall league I teams and that's from roughly 8:00 in the morning until 4:00 or 5:00 at night. But there won't be anything directly out there other than the ball tournament. I Andrews: Any chance of maybe putting together like an after tournament picnic for those people? I Ruegemer: I guess what I would encourage those teams is to come back into town and get involved in the rest of the celebration. Andrews: Okay, very good. Lash: Have you ever thought of having like a triathilon or biathilon or some kind of a thing 1 like that maybe tied in with this thing? Ruegemer: Yeah we have talked about that. Thought about a family bike...somewhere on I that line to get the community involvement but that might be something we could think about for next year. Any input from the commission. I Berg I've been looking for a triathilon a little bit closer to this area because I'd like to see something like that. 1 Lash: ...running or bicycling or whatever to Lake Ann. You could have, does it have to be certain things? You could have...across the lake or... 1 Ruegemer: If there aren't any other questions. B. FALL SOFTBALL. I Ruegemer: Just to give you a quick update on the fall league. We will be going definitely g Y q P g g g Y I on Tuesday and Thursday night with 8 teams per night. There'd be double headers per night with those teams. The teams really seem to enjoy that. Playing a couple, just commiting to one night a week and play two games. That really seems to be a real positive thing for the I team this fall. Unfortunately the women's that was proposed for Monday night and Co -Rec for Wednesday night had really only two teams interested in participating in those leagues. Unfortunately those will have to be fold I guess for this time. I would have run the leagues 1 with 4 teams. However...these programs again will be offered again next year in the hope of 46 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 getting those leagues going. We'll be starting next week for the fall league. There will be their opportunity for the other teams in Chanhassen to get more games in at the end of the season so. So the teams are looking forward to getting out and get some more exercise here. Manders: One comment is, the idea of the double header type. I think that's great because 1 you get the games in and one game you're certainly not tired out, if you're in any kind of shape. And my question would be, what's the possibility for that almost year round. I mean is that just not feasible? 1 Ruegemer: Yeah, you'd be looking with, in doing the double headers per night, we really don't have the facilities to do that. There'd be bye weeks and that type of thing to get more 1 teams in in doing that. But there's other leagues that do that. Or communities that do that. I know Champlin does that. I deal with their league and that was close $1,000.00 to participate in that program. I think compared to like 28 to 30 games during the summer but they do have lighted fields and they do have their facilities that can accommodate that type of a league. Manders: I guess I'm just thinking of fewer games but you'd get them, I mean the same number of games and fewer nights. Andrews: I guess another comment I'd make is it certainly would be a help for traffic in and out of the park and parking problems if we could get 1 person there for 2 games versus 2 people there for 2 games. It would help our congestion quite a bit. So I think that's a good idea. Rugemer: Thank you. 1 C. SUMMER DISCOVERY PLAYGROUND. Lemme: The next item is mine. Chairman and Commissioners. This is just a brief update evaluation of the remainder of the summer. We do an evaluation of the playground program. It was in my summer program evaluation last month. Unless there's any questions, I guess I really don't have much else to say except for what's on this report except that we did have a relative successful first time Lake Ann Adventure Camp. Next year that's going to be even 111 bigger. People were asking questions constantly as they saw these kids out there and it was just an ideal situation for a...camp. Meg er: When you say bigger, do you mean more kids that week or... (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) 1 47 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: A. SOUTH RAILROAD CORRIDOR. Hoffman: Chairman Schroers and members of the Commission. Item 7(a) is a real...item. As you'll recall, the Commission reviewed the issue of improving the south railroad corridor probably a year and a half ago. The conclusion at that time was that the city did not have the resources to make this project a success or to make it happen. In the interim, Hennepin Parks ' picked up on the corridor as a regional rail corridor. They work with Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority to come in and supersede any agreements which the City of Chanhassen had with the Rail Authority and to take control of these corridors for their system. Again that is excellent news for the City of Chanhassen. What they have concluded is that they will terminate the south railroad corridor at Bluff Creek Drive with a trail head of some degree there. And money is budgeted for this project and the project will most likely occur or will occur as far as I know, in the summer of 1994. This is a map that shows... We're looking at the north railroad corridor which most of you know is in place and currently ' being used from Hopkins out to Carver Park Reserve in the City of Victoria. The south rail will be completed in it's entirety from Hopkins south to it's terminus at Bluff Creek. TH 101 and Bluff Creek. 1 Lash: So where does this thing cross at TH 5? • Hoffman. Where does it cross at TH 5? Just in Eden Prairie. Lash: Where they took out the tracks? Hoffman: Yeah. Roeser: What are they...wide open or what do you do there? Hoffman: That is addressed as part of their plan. ' Schroers: They'll have to build an under or an over it or something there in Eden Prairie for Highway 5. Hoffman: They address all the situations as a part of this. Trunk Highway By -Pass. By -pass TH 5 east to signal at, there it is. They're going to do a by -pass. This is an exciting deal. ' Chaska is obviously disappointed. They would like to see it come into the city of Chaska. I would think that they'll be working with the County and the City of Chanhassen to make that extension. The...in the city of Chanhassen is, I won't say minimal but it's smaller than other 48 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 1 cities just because of the difficulties presented in the other cities but it's in excess of $170,000.00 investment in the city of Chan alone so. I Manders: One question. You're saying that this was intended to go over to Bluff Creek Road, which means that there's going to be a bridge put in on TH 101 then? 1 Hoffman: Correct. Roeser: Eden Prairie just put a new bike bridge in, did you see how it cross the tracks down there. Manders: On TH 101? III Roeser: On TH 4. Is it TH 4 that goes to Glen Lake? 1 Berg: Yeah. Roeser: Boy is that a nice bridge. I Y g NEW SPECIAL EVENT PROPOSAL, "FEBRUARY FESTIVAL'. 1 Hoffman: 7(b), if you've read through it...you certainly can do so. Additional month, that 1 would not be a problem for staff. Schroers: Can we just tackle it now and knock it down? Somebody got some thoughts and I ideas? Go ahead Jan. Lash: One thing I would want to do is to check in, and I could have done this for you but I I forgot. Is to check in to see when winter break is scheduled for the Minnetonka School District and the Chaska School District. So if you want the optimum. Berg: I think Chaska is March. 1 Lash: Yeah, I think it is too. But to not schedule it during that time when a lot of people I will be gone. And when you have the snow sculpture, were you talking a contest? Hoffman: Probably contest or we could make our own. 1 Roeser I think you should have a cross country ski race too. Around the lake. 1 49 1 • • 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 I Lash: And I was thinking either maybe hockey or broomball or figure skating so we can get g Y Y g g g some kind of ice stuff there and maybe have chocolate or hot apple cider or something like I that. Hot drinks would be nice. I think it sounds fun. It'd be interesting if we have any die hard winter people around here. 1 Berg: Why are we using Lake Ann? I Hoffman: Why are we not? Berg: Yeah, or I mean why are we not using Lake Ann, yeah. 1 Hoffman: Change in venue. Lake Ann is used for other special events. It's used a lot during the summer. If we want to do an on ice, on lake festival, Lake Susan presents itself very I nicely for parking in the adjacent lots. A whole lot of parking there. In the winter, what's the difference between Lake Ann and Lake Susan. A new location. II Schroers• Any other comments? Suggestions. • Manders: I think it's a great idea. I Schroers: Let's pursue it. 1 Hoffman. We'll present it to the City Council for their approval and then we'll take it on... HIGHWAY 101 TRAIL PROJECT, STATUS UPDATE. I Hoffman. Item 7(b) was presented, the feasibility study was presented to the City Council last night. It was at times difficult to follow the comments made by Council. I Andrews: I can summarize. 1 Hoffman: I will leave it at the discretion of anyone, or commission members that were present there to summarize what you heard and leave it at that. We certainly want to take the I project on. We want to look at, I think the main issue is the funding alternative...newspaper article in the Villager so... I Andrews: I think the issue was funding. Roeser: I think the funding scared people. It scares me, that kind of money. 1 1 50 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1. 1 Schroers: I think it's safe to say there's considerable amount of work to be done before anybody realizes a useable trail along TH 101. , Andrews: I guess Councilman Wing had asked for information to be provided regarding comparative trail costs. And his comments were that there should be an assessment for any excess trail cost. I guess I would like to be, as a Park Board I'd like to be provided that same information before anything is done on it as well. I don't think we should do anything that's free but I think we ought to be fair for our citizens and I guess I really, and this is just a comment in general. I don't want to create a park system where it's us versus them mentality as far as development. I think we're looking at spending a huge amount of money for a park out on the west end of town. I think many people on the east side would say, we don't need ' that park and I'm hearing from the Council that just the opposite is a concern from the people living on the west side that they don't want to pay for a trail. I think it's something that the Council and the Park Board have to be very, very careful of when we look at how we ' proceed. Lash. There were some exceptions on Minnewashta Parkway... , Andrews: But I think it's just important to be fair and also to communicate that to the public so people realize what really did happen. Schroers: Questions from TH 101? Anything? COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS: Lash: I have one because Todd referenced it earlier in the evening and we didn't discuss it ' and that was, if we...private parks in the city, then we need to have a philosophy on public programs going on and would we be providing...into those private parks. Andrews: I'd like to see it as an agenda item on a future meeting. I think that deserves a policy. Certainly before the problem arises would be preferred. ' Berg: I have one comment and it's just relatively brief. I wish there could be something done concerning advertising on our parks. I'm talking specifically of Chanhassen Park Pond. ' Roeser: Pond Park. Berg: Pond Park. I resent having real estate signs on a beautiful area. I wish something could be done with a CSO or something. 51 ' 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 Hoffman: I forward a directive to the Public Safety Department to assist the staff in that ' regard. I pull them on weekends that I'm in town. That's when they go up is Friday morning or Saturday morning and they're there until Sunday night. So I pull them up. ' Roeser: Throw them in the pond. Berg: I take them down. 1 Schroers: Give them a warning and then fine them. 1 Hoffman: I could also forward letters to the parties involved. Berg: They're also doing it on city property further down on Kerber on boulevards and 1 whatever but they're particularly offensive on park property. ADMINISTRATIVE PACKET. ' Schroers: Anything of particular interest in there from staff or from Commission members? ' Andrews. I hate to delay this any longer but, just because of some of the things that are happening with the Economic Development Zone and HRA. When I saw these letters that were sent out to the various interested parties dealing with the Opus project area, I guess I 1 would appreciate it if HRA is considering to create an Economic Development Zone or a TIF district in that area, that I guess we'd appreciate being advised so that we can wisely allocate our funds. ' Lash. Then I was curious on whether on letters to Borchart's. What that was in regard to... ' Are they concerned with the acquisition of park property in that area? Hoffman: Correct. That was the intent of the letter...Their letter was a single letter received ' by the City in opposition of...The other letter...opposition but disagreement... Schroers: Anything else? 1 Hoffman: 1 have a two very minor issues to bring...They've had a third break -in at the Lake Ann Park. However, the responsibilty parties were apprehended by Carver County Sheriffs so ' that incident is under investigation so I...commission on that. The second issue is that, I received a call today from Hoisington, Fred Hoisington. Hoisington - Koegler Associates who's working on the documents for...at Highway 5. As the commission is aware, the Planning staff 1 put forth an ISTEA application for the overpass...into downtown. However, there's no 1 52 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 I 1 accommodations for that in the trail plan so I said simply, people in your office are working on the update of the trail plan. Make those accommodations. We certainly want to feel 111 comfortable however that you as a Park and Recreation Commission feel comfortable with that and recommend that the Comprehensive Trail Plan be amended to include the necessary segments to make that a part of the city's trail system. I need a motion in that regard this 1 evening. . Schroers: So moved. Is there a second? 1 Andrews: Second. I Schroers moved, Andrews seconded that the Paiic and Recreation Commission authorize an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Trail Plan to incorporate the pedestrian overpass recently approved as part of the ISTEA application. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Lash: I also wanted to just mention that...regarding the garbage receptacles at the park. 1 Hoffman: The City Manager asked if I would respond. I have talked to our park I maintenance people. It was our opinion that the young racoons can get into either if they're covered or uncovered and they can't get out. They checked the garbage receptacles...and the little ones can't get out so they dump them out and then they go away. But they're not smart I enough to know that they shouldn't come back and dive in there again. The big ones can get in and out at their leisure so there isn't... Lash. I'd rather have them there than in my garbage. 1 Andrews: Are we anticipating a two meeting September or a one meeting September? 1 Hoffman: I would hope that we anticipate a one meeting because we have what, September 20th. 1 Schroers: So that's basically two meetings, yeah. Lash: And then also on the note here about Jerry, about the kid. The Chanhassen 16 year 1 olds. Rue 8 emer: There was a 16 year old Chanhassen program... I 1 53 1 1 1 1 Park and Recreation Commission - August 24, 1993 1 Andrews moved, Berg seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion 111 caned. The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Submitted by Todd Hoffman 1 Park and Recreation Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 54 1 I 1,,, 1 CITYOF to 1 CHANHASSEN I 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 Action by City Administ, 1 Etrdors ✓ L7G0:f- Moditietl M EMORANDUM Rejected 1 Date IO -____ Date Submitted to Commission TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager I FROM: Paul Krauss, AI Date Submitted to Ca1it� CP, Planning Director PK /'� /v. - „ _q3 1 DATE: October 4, 1993 SUBJ: Proposed Establishment of Fees for Flood Plain/Zoning Information and Status 1 Planning staff is regularly inundated with requests for letters of zoning compliance and 1 information concerning the status of a given parcel relative to flood plain zones eligible for federal flood insurance. My staff has told me they are receiving between 10 and 20 calls per day for this information. Ninety -five percent of these requests are made relative to the listing of 1 properties by realtors or by mortgage companies seeking to finance a purchase. Staff has no objection to providing this information, in fact, we believe it is one of the services that we offer. These requests require that we research the question and often times put something in writing. I The information is essentially sold by those individuals requesting it, to whoever is utilizing their services. Over the years, I have heard of a number of communities that have begun to charge I for this service as well as provide a means for answering them on a schedule that is more convenient to a staff that is pushed for time trying to get out commission and council packets and responding to other needs. With the advent of the phone mail system, we have an opportunity I to screen out these calls, respond to them in a more orderly fashion give out more accurate information in writing, and I believe impose a fee that should rightfully cover the city's costs in providing the information. I am proposing that we charge a fee of $25 for preparing these letters, I as well as establishing a 3 day turnaround to get them out. Staff is asking the City Council to adopt a resolution amending the city fee schedule establishing a $25 fee for letters of zoning compliance and flood plain zoning information requests. We would further propose that this fee I not be applied to individual property owners who request such information for their parcels either by phone or in person at City Hall. 1 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution establishing a $25 fee for letters of 1 zoning compliance and flood plain zoning requests. 1