CC Minutes 5-9-05
City Council Meeting - May 9, 2005
h. Resolution#2005-46: Approval of Proclamation Recognizing the Chanhassen American
Legion and Proclaiming May 15th as Chanhassen American Legion Post 580 Day.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to O.
CRESTVIEW FINAL PLAT AND APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT. PROJECT 05-11.
Tim Larkin: Mr. Mayor, council members. I'd like to begin by just briefly reading a letter to put
on the record the items of concern that I have over the Crestview project. I appreciate the fact
that you've removed the project from the consent agenda so that I might briefly address you. A
great deal of effort has gone into this project on the part of the city staff and the developer in
order to make it work for all parties and I appreciate their efforts. City staff has a difficult job to
do, as do each of you. There's only one item that we remain divided over and that's the
inclusion of the pedestrian walkway to the junior high school. After meeting last week with city
staff a recommendation remains to keep the access trail and it seems to be for two reasons. A,
the comprehensive plan calls for connection to parks and the junior high school has been deemed
a park. B, due to the possibility that the school district will begin charging residents of
Chanhassen who live within 2 miles of the middle school for transportation. Therefore pedestrian
access to the school is increasingly important. While I certainly appreciate the city's concern for
these two issues I would like to submit that the currently approved access points more than
accommodate each of these concerns. As you review the map of access points to the school,
which I'll hope to do in this.. .you'll see that the Crestview access would be only 50 yards from
the previously approved Plowshares access, or Pinehurst access. And it would be 166 yards
from the existing access on Murray Hill Road. It's my hope that the council will agree that the 3
access points within 200 yards of each other is redundant and unnecessary. Clearly removing the
Crestview access point would not create a hardship for pedestrians, runners or bikers in the
Chanhassen area. Simply reviewing the map of residents in the surrounding area reveals that a
vast majority of residents, both existing and proposed, would have their nearest access to the
junior high via Plowshares or the Murray Hill access. Both the physical distance and the
walking routes are shorter to these access points than would be the case for Crestview. Given
these facts I'm asking you to remove the pedestrian access trail from the Crestview project.
Doing so will ensure that my family of 5 will be able to enjoy the private end of the line cul-de-
sac that we believed that we were purchasing 6 months ago. My 3, 7 and 10 year olds will be
able to safely ride their bikes in a cul-de-sac. There will be no possibility of this cul-de-sac
becoming a drop off or a pick up point for the convenience of those attending the middle school
for either school or for summer rec activities. Indeed without this pedestrian trail there would be
no car traffic in the cul-de-sac except for those who live there. This doesn't seem like too much
to ask, does it? And I submitted that respectfully yours. I'd like to just share some additional
data with you that I gathered this week. I don't know how well you can see that. 3 questions to
simply ask the council to consider. Is it necessary to create 3 access points within 200 yards of
each other? Where is the hardship created by using only the 2 approved and existing points.
Why demand a third access point and create an unnecessary safety concern for an existing
homeowners, yours truly. I'd like to share with you the chart. There are 3 cul-de-sacs or cul-de-
sac, yeah all three are cul-de-sacs that would be affected by this decision. Addressing each from
the standpoint of either convenience by being able to access the park, or in the case of the school
3
City Council Meeting - May 9, 2005
district, making that decision to charge residents for busing, how that might affect residents on
those 3 cul-de-sacs was an issue. These days odometers on vehicles don't have 2 digits for
tenths of a mile so you'll have to forgive me but from Whitetail Ridge Court, which is the
furthest out from Crestview, the furthest north along Galpin, from Crestview, it would be 4/10 of
a mile from the deepest point in that cul-de-sac to the existing Murray Hill access. You would
also be 4/10 of a mile to the proposed Crestview access. There are 7 homes in Whitetail Ridge
Court that would be affected by that. Again, not creating any advantage from the current Murray
Hill Court. They have very adequate access to parks currently. They have very adequate access
to the school should the need for transportation become an issue. On Crestview Circle, which is
across Galpin on the east side of Galpin directly east of Crestview Drive, it is currently 4/10 of a
mile to Murray Hill access, and I know that seems difficult to believe. Frankly it seemed
difficult to me. That's why I measured it literally 3 times. It has to do with how deep those cul-
de-sacs are. They vary in their depth. The Crestview Circle is not a very deep cul-de-sac and
it's 4/10 of a mile to the Murray Hill access currently. It would be 3/10 of a mile, which was
hard for me to believe li ving on Crestview Dri ve, it would be 3/1 0 of a mile to the proposed
Crestview Dtive access, creating a very slight advantage by putting that access there. There are
5 homes in that cul-de-sac that would be affected by that. 65th Street which is one block to the
north and on the west side of Galpin has a total of 8 homes. It currently has 4/10 of a mile to get
to the MUlTay Hill access by going out and around. Frankly I think most of those children would
go up and cut through the yard, but if they took the long way, they'd go out to Galpin and
around, it would be 4/10 of a mile for them to get there. 4/10 of a mile for them to go the other
direction through to the Crestview access. And I'd like to point out that portions of those roads
obviously are not there currently. City staff was good enough to help me estimate the distances
that would be required, so I simply would submit that to the council for your consideration. We
purchased the home in September. We certainly knew that there would be development around
the home. What we didn't realize is that the council would require interconnection of both of
those roads. I think without this access point to the school, that interconnection of roads really
does not pose us a great deal of hardship because without that access point there would be no car
traffic back to the end of the line. There really is no need for it. For anyone who doesn't live
there. My concem is, and again I have 5 children like several of you do. My concem is it would
be very difficult for me to send my kids out into that cul-de-sac with the knowledge that cars
would be dropping kids off in that cul-de-sac dming summer rec programs. If the council had
some way of assuring me, and I realize that you don't. If the council had some way of assuring
me that pedestrian traffic and bikers and runners would be the only folks accessing that trail, I'd
have no difficulty with that at all. My concem is that it creates a car magnet and I think that's
unfair. So with that I appreciate your time and I'd entertain any questions.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Larkin?
Councilwoman Tjomhom: Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Furlong: Yes.
Councilwoman Tjomhom: I think if maybe staff could address the, Mr. Larkin's issues. That he
raised.. .
4
City Council Meeting - May 9, 2005
Kate Aanenson: Sure. The history on the 2, the 3 access points and the first one to come in was
actually Crestview and that's our preferred access. At that point the Pinehurst subdivision came
in and that was really, is not as, the grades are a little bit more challenging so if we were to drop
an access, the staff, and I believe the Park and Rec would recommend that the Crestview be the
ptimaryaccess. That's really at grade. It's a better access, so if there's too many, the Pinehurst
one really kind of gets, to make sure that both properties were treated the same is requiring an
access, but really the grades work better off the Crestview one. And so that would be our first
choice for an access.
Tim Larkin: Just one additional comment to that, and I appreciate Kate's perspective. Just, I
know you've had a lot of projects and just so for your memory, the reason that, and my
understanding from the last time this was considered, the reason that the Pinehurst or the
Plowshares folks were required to put in that access was I believe I owe a debt to Councilman
Labatt who pointed out that there are 43 homes in that proposed subdivision and they would have
no access through their subdivision to the junior high school, and Kate is correct that it was a
little trickier to provide access on their side of the development but 43 homes versus 5 homes, I
think Councilmember Labatt pointed out that that seemed very unfair to create a problem in our
cul-de-sac that was created by 43 homes. Again, I understand staff's concem for the issues of
grade. I also understand from meeting with staff that the reason that the method of access was
chosen in the Pinehurst subdivision was stairs. And rather than a switchback, which would be
ADA compliant, the reason that was given to me is that that school district was not willing to
give up that much land, which again seems very unfair.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, I'd just add a little more history to it. We also moved the location based
on Mr. Larkin's request. We had a different alignment that worked better and we did move it so
it had been moved from the original proposal that came forward with the Crestview, which was
closer to your home. So it was moved, and we did put sidewalks in for the kids to ride their
bikes so there's that opportunity too.
Tim Larkin: That's correct, and again I don't want to give the impression that you haven't tried.
The city staff and council hasn't tried to improve the project. You certainly have, although it
seems incredulous to me that a subdivision with 43 homes could have come in without access
and that we could have been deemed the ptimary access point. I think Councilmember Labatt
was exactly correct. That would have shifted the problem from that subdivision over to our's,
and again I don't think that's overly generous to rectify that inequity. But thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Altight, thank you. Any other questions or thoughts or comments? Well I
guess just in general I appreciate Mr. Larkin's comments and thoughts and involvement. As
Kate Aanenson said, what we otiginally I think has been improved tremendously and with the
connections there. One of the concerns, and we do hear it from time to time, that you put a trail
in off my road there's going to be more traffic. One of the benefits of having multiple access
points is it mitigates that potential. So it's, I think we've made some improvement here. Mr.
Larkin's been involved in this process right along, which has been good and that's helped
improve both the Pinehurst development down to the south of this property as well as Crestview.
I guess my position is still I think it's better overall to have that access there off of Crestview,
and notwithstanding the comments made earlier.
5
City Council Meeting - May 9,2005
Councilwoman Tjomhom: Mr. Mayor is there any way we could somehow, if this does pass,
that it could be monitored so if Mr. Larkin does feel that the traffic is excessive, or it is a hazard,
you know it can be looked into fm1her. Does that ever happen where those trails are monitored
at all for excessive traffic or dangerous conditions?
Mayor Furlong: I'll defer to staff on that question.
Todd Gerhardt: Well we have one other one that does access the middle school and has been a
concem with the people in that cul-de-sac but it's typically been dming school hours when we
drop, some parents have dropped kids off there. But you know that's what it's there for. I think
that may have improved a little bit with how they're realigned the drop off at the middle school
this past 2 years ago. It would get so congested at the middle school, parents were looking at
other means of dropping their kids off and they would go and access the cul-de-sac on Spring
Court. But with their access points, that's what they're used for and usually people that drive in
the cul-de-sacs, I live on one. They're usually going pretty slow. They're looking out for
children because there's children all over in this community, and so it's not a practice that we've
had where we've closed off an access after we put it in.
Tim Larkin: Mr. Mayor, I think in Brenden Court what they did was, put up no parking signs. It
doesn't alleviate the concem of dropping off and picking up, dropping off and picking up.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you.
Todd Gerhardt: It's an enforcement issue.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other questions?
Councilman Labatt: I'll just re-state my point to Mr. Larkin's. I just don't think it's fair to put
somebody else's problem on another prope11y owner so I would supp0l1 pulling item, or
removing condition number one again and I don't know if I have enough support for it though
but.
Councilman Lundquist: Steve to use your logic, if you don't have that access point there, then
those homes are going to be shifting to another access point.
Councilman Labatt: Well it's kind of like how when I grew up in Minnetonka and when I
walked to the bus stop, and I lived on a cul-de-sac, we just cut through the yards and the local
people don't mind your neighbors cutting through your yards that went to the parks, but we do
mind, at least my parents did and I did, when the folks 3 blocks away came down our cul-de-sac
and dropped off and they cut through, so I'm taking back 23 years or so and realizing what it was
like back in 1974 and it was a problem and I can see a problem now so.
Mayor Furlong: Alright, thank you. Is there any other discussion?
6
City Council Meeting - May 9,2005
Councilman Lundquist: I would concur with your thoughts Mr. Mayor that one of the things I
think that people value in Chanhassen is access to park and recreation amenities and Minnetonka
West Junior High is a large one, one of the larger park and rec amenities that we have in the
community and it would be my view that we should provide as many access points to that as we
could. And I guess with the nature of Crestview and how that road comes off of Galpin and
things like that, I think you have natural roads that make that a little bit more difficult to get in
and out of as well to probably mitigate some of that cut through as well, and I'm in favor of
leaving the trail there. I think we've done some things to help mitigate some of the concerns
there as well, and that would be my view again that we provide as many access points to those
park and rec amenities as we can feasibly do.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any other comments?
Councilman Peterson: No, I would agree with Councilman Lundquist totally.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Anyone else? If not, is there a motion?
Councilman Lundquist: I would move that we approve item l(c)1 and 2 as published in the staff
report.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilman Peterson: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion? Heating none we'll
proceed with the vote.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Peterson seconded that the City Council
approve the final plat, construction plans and specifications and development contract,
Project 05-11 as presented. All voted in favor, except Councilman Labatt who opposed and
the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
VISITOR PRESENT A TIONS:
Jim Broughton: I'm Jim Broughton, 6927 Highover Court North. Mr. Mayor, council members,
if I could talk about the Lake Hamson development. I believe, hopefully you've all received my
e-mails and mail so I think it was May 4th and May 6th. Things that we see that are concerns.
Mayor Furlong: Sir what I'll ask, if you don't mind, we'll have an opportunity for public
comment duting that, so why don't we take it up so we're getting it in context with the rest of the
information, if that's okay with you.
Jim Broughton: That's fine, thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Anyone else who would like to present an item before the council this evening
under visitor presentations? Seeing none, we'll move forward with our next agenda item.
7