09-19-90 Agenda and PacketNann
AGENDA
CHANIIASSEN PIANNING CO!,IUISST -..WEDNESDAY, SEPtE}{BER 19, 1990, 7:30 p.}!.
CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE
CALL TO ORDER
PUBLIC HEARINGS
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
APPROVAL OF II{INUTES
CITY COTINCIL UPDATE
ONGOING ITEI'{S
ADI.TINISTRATIVE APPROVALS
OPEN DISCUSSION
ALTOTIRMiTENT
1
2
3
** ITEM POSTPONED TO OCTOBER 3, 1990**Conditional Use Pernit for a restaurant and bar on propertyzoned BN, Neighborhood Business District and located in tireSeven-forty One Crossing Shopping Center, Jerry Irrthum.
InteriD Use Pernit for a grading proj ect to excavate 60,000cubic yards of material located north of Ucclynn Drive, just
south of Hwy. 5, Shafer Contracting.
Zoning Ordinance Amendment to amend Section 2O-4O9, General
DeveLopnent Regulations of the wetland ordinance regulatingaccess through Class A and B uetLands (Tlpes 2-8).
CITY OF
EH[NHISSEN
STAFF REPORT
PC DATE:
CC DATE:
CASE *:
By:
e/Le/90
L0/8/eo
90-4 IUP
olsen/v
Fz
()
=LL
ko
UJF
@
Interin Use Pernit for shafer contracting to Excavate
60roOO cubic Yards of Clay lilateriaf for Construction of
New state T.H. 5 in Chanhassen
outlot A and B, ltcctynn Park in the southwest corner of
Hwy. 5 and Audubon Road
PROPOSAL:
IOCATION:
APPLICANT:OWNER: shamrock ProPerty Ptrn.
one llcGlynn Drive
Chanhassen, IilN 55317
Shafer Contracting Co.
Box 128
Shafer, llN 5507 4
PRESENT ZONING:
ACRE.AGE:
DENSITY:
AL'ACENT ZONING AND
IAND USE:
IOP,
N/A
N/A
Industrial office Park
WATER AND SEWER:
N - IOP' vacant
S - IOP, UcGlYnn Bakery
E - IOP, vacant
W - IOP, vacant
Avallable to the site.
PHYSICAL CHARACTER.:
2OOO I,AND USE PIAN:I ndustrial
The site contains slight topography with
sparse vegetation.
hhxA2
couiY
3!
I
J
1a
CDI
It
'l
r9
tCc
\t_
1-
@
0 ./\.LAKE ATTV
RDa
q.
tt I
s
,oP'
sJ=c
a
A
.t.
shafer contracting IUP
SepteBber 19, 1990
Page 2
PROPOSAL/SIN${ARY
The applicant is tequesting an interin use perrnit to excavate60,000 cubic yards of c).ay rnaterial for construction of new StateT. H. 5 Inprovements in Chanhassen. The site is located at theintersection of Hwy. 5 and Audubon Road. The land is owned by theUcclynn Conpany and is adj acent to their existing pLant. Thepurpose of the operation is to make outlot B coDpatible with ittsintended industrial use and to provide clay material to build a new
eubankment for State T. H. 5 east of Porrers Boul.evard in Chanhassen(see site plan). The operation is proposed to take 45 to 50
working days with constructj.on starting irnrnediately upon receipt ofa pernit and coropleting in the fall of 1990, veather pernitting.
The applicant is proposing hours of operation from 7:oO a.rn. to
5:30 p.n., Monday through Saturday. The proposed area for renovingthe clay naterial has no vegetation over 6 inches in caliper. Thearea containing sone trees on this site is Iocated outside of theproposed area for grading and will not be disturbed.
The applicant is proposing to haul the clay material t ith tanderndunp trucks and serai-trailer beI1y dumps. There will beapproximately I to 10 trucks hauling from the site at any giventine. The haul route will exit the site at the northeast corneronto Audubon Road and the trucks rrould then haul east on Hwy. 5 tothe enbankment construction east of Powers Boulevard and return viathe sane route.
The drainage and erosion wiII be controlled with silt fences shornon the plan and temporary settling basins as required by the
Engineering Department. Dust rriLl be controlled with uater trucks
and street srreepers daily or as needed. The disturbed area r*ill
have a ninimum of 3 inches of on-site topsoil respread and seeded
once the clay has been removed fron the site. The site is
surrounded by paved streets with catch basins and storn sewers onthe south and east side and a gravel road on the rrest and northside. There are no wetland areas being disturbed. There is a well
on the site which nust be properly capped and abandoned prior toinitiating excavation.
The request is consistent with the Cityrs goal of conpleting Hwy.5 inprovements. The site will be left in a condition that willfacilitate itrs future development for office/industrial uses
consistent with the Conprehensive PIan and existing zoning.
The proposed interiro use pennit application is fairly straight
foward and is in conpliance with the Excavating, Mining, Filling
and Grading Ordinance. with the conditions added by staff to
ensure proper restoration and uinimize any traffic conflicts, staffis recommending approval of the interim use pernit.
-
Shafer Contracting IUP
Septenber 19, 1990
Page 3
COUPLTANCE WITH THE EXCAVATING, I,ITNING, FILLING AND GRADTNG
ORDINANCE
Section 7 of the ordinance provides a series of standards vhich aninteriun use pernit must be in conpliance with.
Sectio! 7-10 - Pees
The ordLDaDce alloys tho clty to detennino tbe fee schadule for
each peruit aDd that each psrDit Dust be aDaually revl,eyed by th€City EDgiDeer. SectioD 7-a1 provl.deg for aa Lrrevocab].c lctter ofcrodit that riIl be reguired to sDsura conpliaace ylth coaditloasof approval.
Findino
Staff is proposing that a $38,150.00 letter of credit berequired to ensure conpliance with conditions outlined below(see Asst. city Engineer meno). The 1etter of credit vil1cover site restoration, preparing an as-built grading planupon conpletion to verify work in gornFfiance with p1lns,naintenance of adjoining roads including repair of banagedirectly as a result of the hauling and for -naintenance 5ferosion control and dust control Deasures. In addition, a feeachedule from the Uniforrn Building Code wiLL be appliedrequiring a pernit fee of $401 to be paid and that all-cltyand county staff time used to monitor and inspect thaoperation shall be paid at a rate of S3o.oo per houi. staffwill docunent the time on a nonthly basi! and biII theapplicant.
g€ction 7-12 - Eetbacks
lbe oldiDalce requires that a setbacx of 1OO f€et froD eristiDgstro€t rl.gtts-of-ray aDd 3OO foet fron adJoJ.niag property llaea barsgul.r€d for ninlag activities.
Findinq
The. current propo-sal is within 1OO feet of existing streetright-of-ways and is also within 3oo feet of aaioiningproperty lines. The proposed site for the excavafion i!surrounded on all sides by paved or gravel public streets thatwere constructed as palt of the llcclynn site. The lr1cclynnsite and renaining outlots for futu-re developnent of itteindustrlal office park are within 3OO feet of the site forexcavation. The site is proposing erosion control conpletelyaround the area of excavation and extensive street cieaniniand dust control which shall niniroize any inpact "f ah;excavation to the adjacent streets ana prop-ertiEs. ffre iOO
shafer Contracting fUP
Septemt,er 19, L990
Page 4
and 300 foot setbacks rrere created for roining activitiesoccurrj.ng adjacent to residential properties and using Ioca1streets. The adjacent properties are either vacant industrialland or contain the ltcclynn facility which owns the land thatis being excavated. The streets within 1OO feet that will beaffected by the excavation is the internal road within theindustrial office park which is only used at this tine by theIilcclynn facility and Audubon Road rrhich services prinarilyindustrial traffic. Therefore, staff is confortable that theexcavation will not negatively impact existing uses of thesrirrounding properties and streets. We further find that novariances for setbacks are required since this is a siteexcavatj.on request and not a lot-terlo rnining site.
SectioD ?-13 - trenciag
lfhe oraiDaDce requires feuciDg for areas shicb will be coDverteA tosteep graAes or rhere oD site ponaliDg exists if the couDcil
aletetniDes that a safety hazard exists.
Finding
The excavation will actually be reducing the slope on the siteand leveling it out and therefore, safety hazards $iIl notexist and fencing should not be reguired.
SectioD 7-11 - lppearaDce aDdl Screenirg
|rhe ordinalce reguires tbat the visual iupact o! gradlug attd niDiDgoperatioas be nininized and that uhere Decessary, screeaiag beprovidedl.
Find inq
This is a tenporary excavation process which will be tevelingthe area for future industrial sites and will irnrnediately berestored with seeding. Therefore, the visual inpact of thegrading and roining will be ninirnal and screening will not be
necessary.
Sectiott ?-a5 - operatioDs, Noise, Eours, ExErlosives, Dust, rate!,Pollutl.o!, ToP aoll PEeservatioD
l. tlarinul ltoias L€vela as [easureal at the perineter of the sl.tesLaMe rithi! linits set by ths XPCA aDd by the Federal EPA.
Findinq
Staff does not feel that the excavation on the site will be
excessive beyond the activities being experienced in the area
Shafer Contracting fUP
Septenber 19, 1990
Page 5
B.
rrith iroprovernents to Audubon Road and development ofindustrial sites in the area. To ensure that the noise levelsdo not becone excessive, a condition is being provided thatnoise levels not exceed UPCA and EPA liuits. If noise testingis required by the city, the cost shall be paid by the
app).icant.
Earth york ls peraltted oDly duri.ng tbe bours of ?!oO r.n. to5:00 p.8., lloaday througb Saturalay aadt probibited on tratioDalbolidays .
Findinq
The applicants have stated that they woul.d be hauling fron thesite between the hours of 7:OO a.n. to 5:30 p.rn., Uondaythrough Saturday. This is in cornpliance with the hours asstated in the ordinance. Since the applicant will be haulingon a section of Hwy. 5 during periods of rush hour traffic,staff feels that there nay be traffic conflicts. ShaferContracting is under contract with tlnDOT for the inprovenentsto Hwy. 5. As part of the EnvironDental Assessnent, Shafercontracting is required to conduct operations so as tonininize obstructions of traffic and provlde for the safety ofthe general public in accordance wi.th Section 1ZO7 of theMinnesota Standard Specifications for Highway Construction(Attachnent #2). The Hinnesota Standard Specifications aregeneral guidelines. To further ensure traffic safety, staffis reconmending the applicant subnit a Traffic Contiol planfor City approval. The Traffic Control plan can includeconditions such as_ proper signage and if necessary, trafficcontrollers directing traffic during rush hour peiiods. Ifthe Planning comnission and Council wish to further restricthauling duri.ng peak hours, they nay condition approval upon nohauling during rush hour periods. Staff contacted Un6of todetermine rush hour periods at the subject 1ocation on Huy. 5and found that rush hour periods rrere fron 7:OO-8:OO a.m. and3:45-5:30 p.m.,. !,tonday . through Friday. The planning
Conmission and city Council could a1low the applicant to hauion sundays to Dake up for the hours lost during the weekdayssince the site is vithin an industrial offic6 parf ana i-separated fron any residential areas. Staff uould support thereguired variance believing it could be warrantea in'iigtrt ofthe public nature of ,the improveuent and the hardship cieateaby. ihe. necessity of working around rush hour pe-riods tonaintain traffic safety.
shafer contracting fUP
Septenber 19, 1990
Page 5
C. Operltors ar6 requireal to us€ aII practl.cal DeaDs to ell.al.aatevlbratlo! oa adJaceat propsrty frou equl.pneat oPeratioa.
F indinq
Staff does not feel there uill be a problen with vibration on
adj acent property since it is in the uiddle of an industrialsite with other construction activity taking p1ace.
D.ODerator8 Bhall coDply uith sU appucabl€ regulatl.oae for tLe
E,rot.ctl.oD of uat€r quality.
Findinq
The applicant is providing erosion control surrounding thesite to retain any runoff and is providing settling basins, as
needed, to further reduce.any runoff from the site. There areno wetlands in the near vicinity of the area and therefore,staff feels that there sill be no vater quality problems as aresult of this activity.
E.
F.
The site is providing proper erosion control and settlingbasins to neet requirenents of the Watershed District.
Watershed District approval is required.
All top soII shall b6 rotal.Dec at th€ site uDtil conpleterestoratioB of tbe sl.te has takeD place accordliag to tberestoratioa plar.
Find ino
One stockpile is being provided for the topsoil which will be
respread on the site as soon as the excavation is completed.
The tenporary topsoil stockpile area is protected fron erosionby the silt fence being provided around the site.
operators shall coDtrly yith a1l regulatiotrs for tbaprotection of Yetlatrds.
Find ino
There are no wetlands in the near vicinity of the activity
which will be inpacted by the excavation.
Operators shall conply ritb all requlreDents of the fatersb€dDistrict where tbe property is located.
Findino
G.
Shafer Contracting IUP
Septenber 19, 1990
PaEe 7
E. Operators shall use all practical DeaDs to reduco the aEouDtof llust, alroxe aDd funes caussd by the opelatioD3. Xbeaatrospherl.c or other coaditioas nata it iupossible to prav€Dtdust flon uigratl.ag olf sit€, DiliDg operatioas shall ce.s6.
Findincr
Staff does not anticipate a problen with these inpacts withthe siters location and precautions that the applicant isproviding for the excavati.on. The applicant will be providingwater trucks for dust control and street $reepers.
I. Io coDtrol dust aDd niaiuize tractiDg of sand, graval ald dirtoDto public atreets, Lnteraal private loails to aDy public
roaalyay shall be paved vitb asphalt or coDcrete for a all,staDc€of 300 feet to tbe iatersectio! of the publtc roaatray.llterlate neaDs of coutrollhg this probleu Day be accapteA byth6 city.
Findinq
The streets that will be used for the hauling are either pavedwith curb and gutter or gravel. The appticant is prov-idingstreet clean-up on a daily basis. The proposed trucks are. leaving the site fron the gravel road located north of thesite with a distance of over 4OO feet prior to the trucksentering Audubon Road. Staff feels there is an adequatedistance where any debris will fal1 from the truck prior tothe truck entering Audubon Road. Therefore, an inpiovenentsuch as a sediment trap is not necessary.
ar. All haul routes to aDal fron the niae shall be approv€d by thoClty aail shalt otrly use streets that caa safefy acconnodatethe traffLc.
Findinq
The trucks will be leaving the site from the gravel road ontoAudubon Road and then going east on Hwy. 5 to just past porrers
Boulevard to the fill site north of Hvy. 5 (Lee tnaller uapillustrating route on plan). The truckJ witl then be goinq ii1the opposite direction, back test on Hwy. 5, turning iouth onAudubon Road and returning to the site. As previousiy stated,staff is concerned with the truck traffic auling rusti hour andfeels that conditions should be lnposed that would raininlzethe inpact. The haul route is on ftwy. 5 and is in fact partof the Hvy. 5 inproveroent project, staff is requesting ttrlt aTraffic Control plan be provided by the applicant f1r Cityapproval. Since this project is part of the inprovenent toHwy. 5, the Environmental Assessroent requires thl contractor
Shafer contracting IUP
Septernher 19, 199 0
Page 8
to conforn to Section L7 07 of the Minnesota StandardSpecifications for Highway Improvements. Section L707provides general giuidelines for the contractor to fol1ow.Requiring a traffic control plan vill aIIo!, specificguidelines to be provided to ensure traffic safety.
Sectioa ?-16 - Restoration Standardls
The orditraDce lrrovides a gerl.eg of staBdardEtestolatior. ![hese ars teviered be1oy.
outliBirg site
A. Ehe plaD uust be coasisteat rith the Cltyts Colprehetrsiye plaD
aDal ZoriDg OrdiraDce.
Find inq
The Conprehensive PIan illustrates this area as industrial andthe applicantrs proposal to level the site is in cornfornancewith the intended use of it being an industrial site.Therefore, staff believes that the proposal is consistent rriththe Conprehensive PLan and Zoning ordinance.
B.Restoratior aha1l be a coDtl.DuiDg operatioB occurring asquickly as posEible after extractioD operation bas Doveal.
Find inq
c.
Restoration will be conpleted innediately after the excavatedmaterial has been renoved. Staff will be naintaining a letterof credit to cover the restoration costs in the case that theapplicant does not or is unable to restore the site in atirnely manner.
All baDfs aDal slopes shall be left in accoralatrce uith ther€storatioa plaas aubnitted yith the peltlit applicatioD.
Findincr
Staff is reconnending that an as-built grading plan beprovided at the completion of the proj ect so that staff can
confirrn the volume of material that has been removed and thatthe site is restored as proposed.
Shafer Contracting IUP
Septenber 19, 1990
Page 9
D. 81op.s, graded .reas aDd bactflll aroas shall bs Burfacsd yitb
adeguate top soll to B€sure aDal boIA groutd cover. SuchgrouuA cover ahall be teDd€d as Daceasary untll lt ig selfsustaiDiDg.
Findinq
The topsoil is being preserved on the site and will berespread after excavation of the clay naterial . The topsoilwill then be seeded to ensure ground cover for stabilizationof the area.
E.AII yater lreas resultiug fron excavatl.oD ahall be etiDlDateal
upoD restoratiotr of the slte.
Findinq
There will be no irater areas resulting frorn the excavation ofthe site, therefore, this condition is not applicable.
F No part of th€ restoratioD area yhlch is plalDeal for usesothsr thaD op€Ir space or agricultural sball be at aD elevatiorlorer thaD tbe nininun requir€d for coD!€ctLon aanltary orgtor'[ gager.
Findinq
G.
The finished grade of the site is at an elevation that willalloLl for the connection of sanitary storn selrer and water.
Provido a.laD{FcaplDg pl-E! lllustrating reforestati.oa, groundcov6r, t,etlaDd restoratioa or other features.
Finding
The Letter fron the applicant states that the excavated areaswill be-spread with the topsoil and seeded irnnediately afterexcavation. No trees or other forros of vegetation nee-d to bereplaced on the site.
INTERI!{ USE PERI,IIT STANDARDS
uining operations are alloved in the rop District as an interiu usepernit. The ordinance provides that interi, u=J- p"ruiiE ar"reviesed under the general issuance standards estaLriltrea rorconditional use pernits, section 20-232, of the oraininiE. - fhefollowing constitutes .a cornpllation or the generii ir=o"rr""standards and staffrs findingJ for each.
shafer contracting IUP
Septernber 19, 1990
Page 10
1. fill lrot be detrinertal to oraafety, coufort, coavenielce
neighborbood o! the city.
elhaDc€ the publicor geDelal yelfare healtb,of the
* The proposed excavation is a temporary operation whichuiII be conpleted in the faII of 1990. The removal of60,000 eubic yards viII provide topography on ttre sitewhich witl be conpatible with proposed lndustrial usesand therefore it will not be detrirental to the publichealth, safety, corufort, or general rrelfare of the city.
will be corsisteat yith the obJectl.ves of the cityrs
conprehetrsive plan andt thls chapter.
The excavation will be naintaining the site in a fornsuitable for industrial use which is compatible with the
Comprehensive PIan and this chapter.
2.
3
1
5
*
will be desigaed, coDstructed, operateal atrd EaiDtaLled so tobe conpatible i! appearaDce yitb tue existiDg or iDteDdedtchancter of the general victtrity alrd will not chatg€ tbeesseDtial character of that area.
The proposed excavation lrilL be rnaintaining the site,conpatible appearance with existing or intended characterof the general vicinity. The slope will be leveled butuiII not be changing the essential character of the area.The land uilI be restored to a natural state onceexcavation is conpleted and will renain as such until
developDent of the site.
Irill Dot be hazardlous or dlisturbiag to existiDg or plaDDedt
aeighboring uses.
I{ith the precautions being taken by the applicant andwith the conditions of approval, the activity vill not behazardous or disturbing to existing or planned
neighboring uses.
*
*
Eill be served adequately by essential public facllities aDdaenvices, Lncludiug streetE, police atral fire protectioD,
drainage structures, refuse disposal, rater ald sewe! systelg
aDal schoolsi or will be serveil adlequately by such facilities
aDdl servl.ces providledl by tbe persoDs or ageDcl.es respoDsib]'efor the establishEert of the ploposed use.
The use is ternporary which does not need to be served bypublic facilities and services. The finished elevationwill al1ow the site to be served by sanitary sewer and
water once it is developed in the future.
*
f
shafer contracting IUP
September 19, 1990
Page 11
5. flll rot create €xcessive requirenetrts for public facilitiesaltd serices aDd rill aot be detriueatal to the econoul.crelfar€ of the cornunity.
7.
* The activity will not create excessive requirements forpublic facilities and and viII not be detrinental to the
economic welfare of the cornrnunity.
rilI trot involve uses, activities, plocesses, naterials,
equipEeDt audl coaditioDs of opelation that rill be aletrLneDtalto aDy persoDE, property or the geDela1 relfare because ofexcessive production of traffic, aoise, sDoke, fuDes, gIare,odors, rodeDts, or trash.
*The proposed excavation could result in excessivetraffic, noise and fumes. The conditions of the approvatwill provide standards by which the activities strouta benininized.
8.
9.
fiII have vebicular approaches to the property ybich do Dotcreate traffic congestioa or iDterfele with traffic orsuEouuding public tboroughfares.
* The excavation operation does have the potential toconflict with traffic on Hwy. 5 especially during therush hour periods. The contractor, as part of thecontract yith the State Highway Departnent, must meetstandard specifications to nininize traffic inpact. Inaddition, staff is reconmending that a TraffiE ControlPlan be provided for the Cityrs approval and if it isfelt that even with these, that the traffic during therush hour will still be potentially a hazaidoussituation, the city could lirnit the hour-s of hauLing onqreekdays to non-rush hour periods. With the traificcontrol plan, staff feels the potential traffic confLictswill be nininized and will not be a potential hazard.
fiII Dot result Ln tbe destructiol, Iosa or danage of solaraccess, natural, scenic o! bistoric features of Dajoraigaificance.
* The proposal will not,result in any significant irnFact tonatural or historic features.
fill be aeEthetically conpatible rith the area.
* TIrg- area proposgg f9I excavation, once conpleted, willstil1 be aesthetically compatibl6 with the-;;;;;i#i;;industrial sites.
10.
Shafer Contracting fUP
Septenber 19, 1990
Page 12
11. fiII lot depreciate surroutrdl.Dg Irropelty yalues.
L2.
* The proposed use nill not have a long tern impact onsurrounding property values.
l9ill n6at ataDdlarals prescrl.bed for c€ltaia useE as provid6d LDtbls artlcle.
* The proposed excavation application is meetLng thestandards prescribed for the IOP District.
Staff feels that the application is conplete and witl uininizepotential inpacts. With the conditions proposed, staff is
recornmending that the Planning Connission and City Councit approvethe project.
BECOMMENDATION
staff reconnends
notion:
the Planning Connission adopt the following
ItThe Planning Cornnission reconnends approval of Interin Use Pemit
#90-4 with the folLowing conditions:
1. The applicant shall provide the City vith a letter of creditin the anount of $38,150.00 to cover any road danage,naintenance of erosion control Deasures and site restoration.
The applicant shall subnit $401.00 grading pernit fee asrequired by the Uniforn Building Code and all city and countystaff tirne used to nonitor and inspect the operation sha1l bepaid at a rate of 930 per hour.
The applicant shaLl provide a Traffic Control Plan for staff
approval providing specifications on how truck hauling trafficwill be controlled, specifically during rush hour periods.
The applicant shaIl obtain and cornply uith all pernit
requJ.rements of the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek WatershedDistrict.
The applicant shall Dake arrangements to cap the existing wetlin accordance with aII state, county and local requireuentsprior to initiating grading operations.
The applicant sha11 supply tbe City with a nylar as-built
survey prepared by a professlonaL engineer upon conpletion ofexcavation to verify the grading pLan has been perforned inconpliance uith the proposed plan.
2
3
4
5
6
7
6
9
shafer Contracting IUP
SepteDber 19, 1990
Page 13
11.
ATTACHI,IENTS
Tenporary settling basins shall be constructed during thegrading operations on an as needed basis or as requested bythe city.
Topsoiling and disk rnul ch seeding sha1l be inplenentedinnediately following the conpletion of excavated areas.
Noise leveIs stenming fron the operation are not to exceed
MnPCA and EPA regulations. If the city deternines that thereis a problern warranting such tests shall be paid for by theapplicant.
Hours of operation are linited to 7:OO a.m. to G:OO p.8.,
Monday through Saturday and prohibited on national holidays.If the City nngineer deternines that traffic conflicts resultdue to rush hour traffic flows, the hours of operation wilL beappropriately restricted.
The city will work irith the County Sheriff to coordinate speedand rreight checks. If trucks are violating traffic llvs,staff will require that the operation be shut down and wilLask the City Council to revoke the pernit. I
1
2
3
4
5
Meno froD Charles Folch dated SepteEber L2, L99O.Section fron the Environmental Assessment for Hrry. 5Inprovements and Section L707 of the llinnesota StandardSpecifications for Highrray Construction.Letter fron the applicant dated Septenber 4, 1990.Section fron the Uniforn Building Code on Grading permit Fees.Site plan for excavation dated Septenber 7, L9go.
10.
CITY OF
EH[NH[S$EN
690 COULTER DRIVE. PO. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
I.{EI,IORANDUM
TO:
FROII:
DATE :
SUBJ :
eWi,neer 4
JoAnn Olsen, Sr. Planner
Charles Folch, Assistant City
September 12, L990
Interim Use Grading Permit for Outlot A and B, McGlynn Park
Grading Permit File 9 0-11
Site Conditions
P ropos ed Grad i ng
The submitted graaling plan proposes to excavate anal remove
approximatety 60,000 cu. yds. of material off the site- It is
apparent that the purpose for the grading operation is tlro-fold.
oir6 reason being to make the site more topographicallY conducive
to any future industrial use, and the other is to supply this
clay material to build a new embankment for the T.H. 5
improvement east of Powers Boulevard in Chanhassen.
Topsoil wiII be stripped and stockpited prior to initiating
grading operations antl will be respread over the site upon
I have reviewed the proposed grading plans preparetl and submitted
by Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. datetl Septenber 5, 1990 anil
offer the following conments and recommendations .
The subject property is located test of Audubon Road immediately
north of the existing Mcclynn Bakery facility. The najority of
the site is flat, vegetateal with field grasses and elevated
somewhat above the surrounding areas. There are no known
wetlands or water courses on the site. The only other natural
feature to the site would be a small stand of trees locatecl in
the northeast corner of the site.
A well standpipe is located in the southeast portion of the site.
It is believetl that this was a functioning well for a previous
farmsteail. This well must be proPerly capped prior to initiating
grading work.
JoAnn Olsen
September 12, 1990
Page 2
completion of the excavation. The proposed grailing plan showsthat the maximum cut in elevation appears to be approximatelyeight feet. The resulting terrain for the site will be fairly
uniform with a uniform grade of approximately 3$. It appearsthat the existing tree stand in the northeast corner of the siteis proposetl to be preserveti. Thus, tree removal is notanticipated. An existing stockpile of excess material from aprevious grading phase in the area, located northirest of theprimary grading site, is also proposedl to be removeil.
Erosion Control
It is apparent from the number of trucks to be hauling and thehours of operation that this operation wiIl have a substantialimpact on the T.H. 5 traffic, especially duri.ng the commuterhours. Staff is recomrnentling tbat a traffic control plandepicting special provisions or measures to be implemented toallow for safe ingressing ancl egressing of trucks on to T.E. 5.
Recommended Conditions
I The appl i cant
r equ i rement sDistrict.
shall obtain and comply with all permitof the Ri 1ey-Purgatory-Bluf f Creek Watersheal
2 The applicant shall provide the City with security in theform of a cash escrow or Ietter of credit in the amount of$38r150.00 to cover any road damage, maintenance of erosioncontrol measures and site restoration
Applicant shall make arrangements to cap the existing well in
accordance with all state, county and 1ocal requirements
prior to initiating grading operations.
2
Traffic
The entire site is proposeil to be surrounded with silt fence andthe existing silt fence line Iocateil west of the stockpile is tobe repaired and/or replaceil as necessary. The grading planreveals that the remaining grades for the site wilL be generallyless than the present condition. Thus, it is anticipated that,with proper vegetation, the erosion potential of the site willcorrespondingly be reduced. Temporary settling basins have beenproposed to be constructed on an as neecled basis during theconstruction process, and topsoiling and seeding will followimmeiliately behind finished gratling areas. It is staffsr
recommendation that tlisk-anchored mulch also be employed with theseeding operation. The applicant has also indicated that dustwill be controlled via use of water trucks and that the streetswill be, at a minimum, swept daily or as needeil.
JoAnn Olsen
S6ptember 12, 1990
Page 3
4. The applicant shall supply the city with a mylar as-built
survey prepared by a professional engineering upon completion
to verify the grading has been performecl in compliance with
the proposeil plan.
5. Temporary settling basins shal1 be constructeal during the
grading operations on an as needed basis or as requested bY
the City.
6. Topsoiling and disk mulch seeiling shall be implemented
immediately following the completion of excavated areas.
Applicant shal1 submit a traffic control plan outlining
measures to be implementetl to allow for safe ingressing and
egressing of trucks on to T.H. 5 in accordance with Section
1707 of the Minnesota Standaral Specifications for Eighway
Construction.
jms
Attachment:Itemized security
Gary warren,
Dave Hempel ,
City Engineer
Sr. Engineering Technician
7
Breakdown of Security for Outlots A and B, Mcclynn Park(Grading Permit File 90-11)
( Interim Use Permit File 4)
I. Site Restoration
I Silt Fence Erosion Control
3,000 L.F. at $3.00/L.F. = S9,000.00
Reseed and I'tulch
10 acres at $1,500/acre = 915,000.00
Cost = S24,000.00Estimated Total Restoration
2
II. I nspect i onlAdmi n i s tration Time
Project Inspection
Approximately 8 weeks,6 days/week, 3 hours/day = 144 hours144 hours x $30.00/hour = $4,320.00
County Sheriff,/State Patro1 (Extra PatroL)
Approximately 8 weeks, 6 days,,/week, 2 hours/clay = 96 hours
96 hours x $30.00 = $2,880.00
3. Eng ineeri ng,/Planning Staff15 hours x $30.00 = 5480.00
Estimated Cost For Inspect ionlAdninistration = $7,680.00
======================
III. Road Maintenance and Traffic Control
1. Street Sweeping = $500.00
2. Sealcoat,/Patch,/Over).ay, Repair pioneer Trail500,xrlOr = 20r000 sq. ft. at .05+,/sq. ft = $Ir000.00
Estimated fotal Cost For Road l{aintenance /Traffic Control =sr,500.00
==============_=========
IV. Engineering Fees For preparation of As-BuiIt plans
I. Engineering Fee for Surveying and Drafting = g2,OOO.OO
I
2
Summary Sheet
Site Restoration ( Phase I)
Inspect ion,/Admi n i stratio Fee s
Road Maintenance and Tra fic Control
Engineering Fees
I
II
III
IV
$24,000.00$ 7,680.00
$ 1,0oo.oo
$ 2,000.00
P1
S ub-Tota 1
s 10t ( Contingencies )u
$34,680.00
l=1193=33
$38,148.00
Grand Total For Security $38,150.00
Gary warren,
Paul Krauss,
Enginee
Planner
City
City
r
...r:i._, .,
I
I
:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
iii'
t.#U. S. DEPAtrTIENT OF T&{IiSPORTAIION
'.FEDeML Hrcflh'Ay ADurNrsrMTrolt
E N V I RO N M E NIAL ASSESSMENT
},INNESOTA DEPART],{ENI OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT 5
s.P.
s.P.
Hinn,
2 7 01-28
1002-44 [T.H. s
ProJecc F 014-3 (30)
Regrading, surfacrng
'
'
Iifool -1.:1""jr & Bridrr (ovcr soo Ltne B/B) ,lrom-T,H.4L in chanhssscn r Carvet Co*aV:"'to cSAn ( in Eden prair.ic, u.,-ipfi-io,rity..
I
t'"
J,i,
l
a
".rf....'..!
.:'i j.
lh€ Cnlden VaIIey District Offtce has a $e11 t(ained and
experlenced relocaiicn Elaff to provide these servi!.es,
The dlstrict cffice is relsrively accei6ible to the pruj-
ect so ell rel,ocation contacts r.tll orlgtnarc fro$ there.
Residents tnd the business uill be inforned o( theireli8tbility co leceive peyments such as novlng expensea.
appraisal fees, housing supplements, closinS cosLs,
lntere6E differentials. etc. These payrnents arrd theellgiblljty requircments to receire ghem are erplainedin the booklel enticled 'rRelocarion AssisLancen ehtchui.Il be available to ell interosred pertics.
As Lhe time nears for negotiaEions ulth landomerF. Lhe
relocatlon staff wl.Il persorrally concact arrd eounsel all
occupants of t.he affecterl residences and busincss con-
cerrring Lhelr potenaigl relocgLiorr benefits.
!|o disadvanteged ur especially sensitivc groups or lndl-
viduals have been identified. FurlherDore, no 3lgniflcan!
problera in obteinirrg reasonable repl.aceDent propertyr
rdithirr the corLtsunit)', for residential or burin.Bs di3-
placeDents are ant i.c ipat ed.
As che proposed proJect ls arr upgrading of an inplacefacility, bith onl.y oinor acce8s charrgos. no rigntflcanteffect on comEunity cohesion i6 anti(ipaLed. No partlcu-
Iarly senEitive group(s) sill he undrr [y i6pa.g"6,
NoLhtng .rigniflcant has been noted dt:atnsl the l6prove-
ments so far, The c,)o..!}en! th6t arises frequenf,ly ta.
"calr it be done sooner." The oeS8Live comueu(, "f hrLe
to dltse Highirey 5" j.s a caEpaign to accelerlte the up-
grade of T.H. 5.
The conlrsctor(s) uill be required to conduct operatiens
so as Eo niniolze obs:ructions of traffic and provide for
the safett' of thc gerreral public la aceordance vtth ser'-
tton 1707 of ctlc $irlne3ota Scandard Spe(:ificaclona f()r
Highray Construction, Provisions for prrssible alternatc
routing of eDergancy vehiclcs during vsrious constructign
operations hbuld be ccordinalcd $ith the local 8uLho$itie5
Ii ia angicipaced that one Lonc of trrfflc in each
direction uiIl be 0a int.l tned.
,3oc i8I
Cont ro\'e r 9]'
fra!f1c
t
!
i
F
l6
Ihc major trafflc effect.s of propoued iBprovenenLs on
lhe cotunuritiet referred to i,n Lhts report relste Co
chenges tn traffic speeds and contestion during coo-
sLructioo. oue to 1ac}. of adequat€ paralJ.el routes, i!
i3 rnttcipated thst the naJority of curreut T.H. 5
vehicular traffic uill continue to use T.H. 5 durtng the
con3tnregirrn period, The rcduction irl tr$ff[c rpee<ta. and
probable rraulLirrg inareased congestion. gre trnavoidable
consequences of drivin8 thaough majo! t onsttuctioD ionec,
I
t7u
;.ffi+*:t*-:#*'*,xf,H;,SI
,,, IhF;i:H;T;*1,*fi.,ff,:',f JU.$ I,sl,,,,"#
srstruction, maintcnance r
!c rtquired. including crst
drc Rlilrord's fcnccs E c
!r ddition to lhc Conx - t l
tlc Dcpanmcnl becausc of
itlg *ith th. Provisionslrr,
Bcforc commcnci I
arrd bcforc lny malcriar! a
d r privrte crossing' thc (
of 1708.2, 1708.3, anH(
l0 drys notice in adva : t
I7Ot.T GENERAL R
All work pcrformr4l c
tsrcks snd on its righl $
h.lory lo the R8ilroa( n(
or cndangcr opcrations of
nish fic Railroad withiet.
rnd coffcrdams to bc r rd
to thc Railroad's tr'8cl sl
cms until thc pl8[s havc '
' Construclion opc-{i(
& to cnsurc ssfcty to I ill
rs not to delay thc ope.-ti(
rrry rack changcs or ir
nructurcs.
Thc samc clcara e
tbosc customarily follove
rlork shall bc obscrvcd, r
mcnt shall bc lcfi in -:r'
fcrc with rain rnovcm ts
If thc Contracror dcsi
tll clcaranccs from oilr,
rtstutc, hc shall subm to
falscwork ltd form ar
dcbil. No work shall be,
clearances undl thc PlEIts
Rrilroad, rnd the Dr ft
tion. No clcsrances I s
eill bc pcrminrd at my ti
h thc cvcnt th?-u
Port on lhc Reilmft r
right to do rny wort -- d(
cmergarcy is causad by I
rpimbursc rhe Railroaa{o
-ff:
t-r
*
,+
*,
{
{
1707
rlg6i$$;x.ltl**rfu*,m
lfn,u*i*$,-*',,$;ffiu,ffi
mlm'*r;rffi*t,ffi
I
ar.- j
r70t
ffi
fi{'ffi1ffi *"*+,*[#"tf'fl,Tliffi
56
S/a/cn €o$Andaaq. On., ?ntc.
SHAFER, MINNESOTA 55O74
September 4, 1990
SubEittal tr'or: Appllcation for Interin Use Perait for grading work under City of
Chanhas sen Ordinance No. 128.
3
1
2
4
5
Applicant3 Shafer Contractlng Co., Inc.
Box 128
Shafer, MN 550 74
Ormer:Sharnrock Property Partners
One McGlynn Drlve
Chanhassen, MN 55 317
Legal Descrlption: Outlot rrAtr and 0utLot trBrr of McGlynn Park 1n the northeast
quarter of Section 15, Townshlp 116, Range 23, Carver County,
llinnesota
Certifled abstract llsting all landomers within 500 feet. See attached
Exhibit B.
See attached Exhibit A showing proposed gradlng plan rrlth existing and proposed
finish grade contours and inset map wlth surrounding Chanhassen area.
Shafer Contlactlng lntends to excavate to the proposed grades shown, removlng
about 60,000 cublc yards of clay materlal for construction of new State T.H. 5
Ln Chanhassen.
The depth of the rrater table is uokuown, but Clty serrer constructl.on on
Audubon Road dld not eDcounter ground rater.
There are ao knorm wells, buri ed garbage or fill areas on the site.
The purpose of the operation is to nake the Outlot 'rB" parcel more topographi-
ea1ly coEpatlble with its intended lndustr1a1 use and at the aame tlme geDerate
excess clay Daterial to haul offsite to build a new embaukuent for State T.U. 5
east of Powers BouLevard in Chanhassen.
There are Do exlstlng watercourses or water bodies on the parcel. The parcel
is surrounded by paved streets with catch basins and storm se\rers on the east
and south sldes.
S6a/tn Qaa.AaAary Qo ?occ.
6
SHAFER, MINNESOTA 55O74
The operation is expected to take 45 to 50 rrorking days. Construction wouldstart inmediately upon pernit approval and be conpleted in the fall of 1990,
weather perElttlDg.
Nornal hours of operation would be 7:00 a.n. to 5:30 p.n., Monday throughSaturday. Ihese hours are in compliance rrlth the Cityrs ordLnance.
There are no trees over six (6) lnches in caliper on the slte.
fhe disturbed area rgill have a minlmun of 3 lnches of onsite topsoil respread.
and be seeded.
The operatlon would involve loading trucks wlth a wheel loader or hydraulicexcavator. There w111 be no processing of the onsite materlal (no crushing,
washing, etc. ) .
8
9
Trucks used in the operatlon will be standard taudem dump trucke and se,i-trailer belly dunps. There w111 be approxluately 8 to l0 total truckshauling froE the site at any glven tlEe.
L2. Dralnage and eroslon vill be controlled rlth silt fences shorrn on the plan(Exhibit A) and temporary settling basins as needed. Dust viLl be coa-trolled with water trucks and street sweepers daily or as needed.
13. The pLan (Exhlbit A) shows the proposed finlsh grade contours. Excavated areaswill be put to grade as areas are completed and topsoillng ancl seeiling w111
f ol1ow imediately behind.
14.The Applicant, Shafer ContractLng Co., Inc., can be reached at any tlme week-days by calling (6L2) 462-7462. Should rhere, at any tlne, be auy questions,
corrmeots or coEplaitrts, scott splsak should be contacted at the above number.After hours, scott splsak can be couracted at (715) 425-144r. A11 lnquirr.esw111 be responded to prornptly.
No eavironmental asses6ment worksheet le requlred by the Clty.
No wetland areas are being disturbed.
Any further i.nfor,ration requested by the city wlll be furnlshetl upon request.
15.
16.
17.
7
ll. rhe planned haul route would exlt the slte at the northeast corner (fron thefuture street grade) north onto Audubon Road. The trucks would then hauleast on State T.Il. 5 to the embankment constructlon east of Powers Boulevard
and return via the same route.
10.
,r tll
{
{
(.
1988 EDtTtON
TABLE NO. 7O.A_GRADING PLAN REVIEW FEESI
5ocubic yards or less . . .
5l to I00 cubic yards
l0l to 1000 cubic ynrds . .
l00l to 10.000 cubic yards
10,001 to 100,fiD cubic yards-S30.00 for the firsl 10.ofl) cuhic yards. plus $15.fi) li)r
cach addition l 10.000 yards or fraclion lher€ol
100,001 ro 200,000 cubic yards-$165.001br rhe firsr 100,000 cubic yards. plus $9.00 for
each additional 10.0(m cubic yards or fraction thereof.
200,m1 cubic yards or mon-$255.00 for thc first 200.00Ocubic yards, plus $4.50 for each
rdditional I 0,000 c ubic yards or fraction thercof.
Oth.r Fr€.:
Additional plan revi.w requircd by changcs. .ddirions
or Evisions to apprcved plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . $30.00perhour+
(minimum charSe---one-half hour)
'Or th. totalhourly cost k) tha.iurisdiction. *hichevcr is thc grcatcst. This cost sh!ll includc
supirvision, ovcrhcnd, equipmenl, hourly wages and lringc bencfits ol thc enlpk)yces
in\0lvcd.
TABLE NO. 7GB-GRAOING PERMIT FEES'
socubic yads or lcss .......... $15.00
5l to loocubic yards ........22.50
l0ltol000cubicyards-$22.50fo.thcfintl00cubicy.dsplus$l0.50forcachaddirional
lm.ubic yards or fraclion th.rcof.
l00l lo 10.000 cubic yarde-$l 17.00 for thc filsl 1,000 cubic yards, plus $9.00 for .ach
addilional 1,000 cubic y.rds or fraction rh.rEof.
lo,ml lo lm,mo cubic yaids-$ 19t.00 for th€ firsr 10,000 cubic yards, plus $40.50 for
rrch addilional 10,000cubic ysrds orfraction thcrEof.
l00,ml cubic yards or mon-$562.50 for thc firsl 100,000 cubic yards, plus $22,50 for
cach rdditional 10,000 cubic yerds or fraction thcrcof.
Oth.r lnrp.ctloN .nd F.crl
l. Inspeclions outsidc of normal business hours $30.00pcrhour,
(minimum charg€-two hours)
2. Rcinspcction f€es asscssed urldcrprovisions of
Section 305 (8) . . $30.00 pcr hourr
3, Inspcctions for which no fcc is spccifically indicarcd ........... $30.00perhour1
(mininum chcrSc---anc-half hour)
rTh. fc. for a tndinS Frmil ruthorizinS ldditional worl lo th.t und.r . valid Frmil shall bc thc
diff.r.ncc b.tw.cn lh. f.. paid for ih. oriSinal p€rmn md th. f.€ shown for lhc cntir. projcct.
,orrh!rol'lhourly corl rorh.jurisdicrion, which.v.rir rh€ 8rcar.sr. Thh con rhattinctud. supcrvision.
ovcrh€ld. €qu ipmcnt , hourly wag.i ard frin8. b.n fits of ih. €mployc.s involv€d .
No lcc
$ 15.00
22.50
_']0.(x)
I r11
475
APPENDIX
(
{..
t
Sfadcn Qor*nAaq €o., ?ne.c.
SHAFER, MINNESOTA 55O74
Septenber 4, 1990
Mr. Paul Krauss, Clty Platrner
Clty of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Re:Interim Use ApplicatLon
McGlynn Park - Outlot "8"
Dear PauI:
r have attached the necessary subnlttals for the rnterlm use pernlt to allowgrading and removing the h111 on McGlyanr s Outlot [B'r. The material will be
pJ-aced ln the embankrnent for the future T.E. 5 east of powers Boulevard.
Should you have any questlons, please eall ne at 452-7462.
Thank you.
Yours very truly,
SHAFER CONTRACTINC CO. , INC.
By:
scotr A. SplsaF
SAS : so
Enc1.
CTIIY OF CEIIIEI,8EET{
590 COUIJTER DRIVE
CEaIIEABEEX, tIN 55317(512) 937-19O0
DEVEIPPI,IEITT RBVIEE IPPLICITION
Shafer Contractins Co., Ine. OWNER: Shanrock Propert y Partners
B x 128 One McGlynn Drive
APPLTCANT:
ADDRESS:
Chanhassen MN 55317
IELAPHoNE (Day tine)(6t2) 462-1462 TELEPHONE:
0
*t
t
0
REQUEsT
Conditional Use Pernit - $150
Interim Use Pemit - $150 $150.00
Iand Use Pfan Anendnent - $100 _
Planned Unit Developnent:
- Sketch Plan - 9200
- Prelininary Development Plan
$300 + S15 acre
- Final DeveLopnent PIan - S2oo
- Amendment to Final Development
Plan - $:oo + $15 acre
IOIAIJ PUD
0 site PIan Review - $150
0 Vacation of Utility
Street Easenent -
0 Variance - $75
I Rezoning - $250
t) Zoning Appeal - $75
0 Subdivision:
PreJ. iminary Plat:
- Sketch Plan - $2OO
- Create less than 3 lots - S100
- Create more than 3 lots -
$1OO + S15 acre + $5 Per lotlot created
- Final Plat - S1OO
- lletes and Bounds - $1OO
- Consolidate Lots - S1O0
AOTE!' EUBDIVISIOX
0 Wetland Alteration Permit:
- Individual single FanilyLots - S25
- AII Others - S150
0 Zoning Ordinance Anendnent -No charge
or
91oo
I ll'st of all property oyDar! rlthi! 5oo tost ol ths bouDdarica of tbepropelty Eust be Lacludleil vlt! tbe rppllcatloD.
ItYeDty-BLx full gl.ze folaled copler of the pla!! Dust b€ subulttcat.
* NOTE - when rnultiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee 6halL
be charged for each application.
ADDRESS:
Shafer, UN 5507 4
(6t2) 414-7444
PROJECT NA},IE McGlynn Par!: qqqlqt "8" Grading
I,OCATION Northeast Corner of McGlynn Driv e, 8 Audubon Road
LEGAL DESCRI I{TION
PRESEIT ZONING r.0.P.
REQUESTED ZONING No Chanqe
N/A
RXQUESTED INND USE DESIGNATION N/A
Request Interim Use Pernit to allow gradlng to removeREASON FOR THIS REQUEST
h111 and make Outlot "8"more topographlcall y cotrpatlble with the future intended
use,
This application nust be conpleted in fu1I and be typewritten or clearlyprinted and must be accoDpanied by aL1 infotmation and plans required biapplicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you -should confer with the Planning Departnent to deternine the specificordinance and procedural requireuents applicable to your application.
This is to certify that I arr Daking application for the described action bythe City and that I aD responsible for conplying with a]1 City reguirenentlrrith regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name -and I- an the party whon the City should contact regarding any natterpertaining to this apptication. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership(either copy of ownerrs Duplicate certificate of ritra, Abstract of ritle oipurchase agreenent), or r an the authorized person to rnake this apprication -
and the fee owner has also signed this application.
I will keep nyself inforned of the deadlines for subnission of material and -the progress of this application. r further understand that additional. feesnay. be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with anestimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The docunents _and lnfornation r have subnitted are true and correct to- ttre best of rny -
knowledge.
r arso understand tha-t. after the approval or granting of the pernit, such -pernlts sha1I be invalid unress they are recor-ded against the titre io trr!property for whlch the- appro-var/perrnit iE granted uittrin 120 days with theq.ry"I county Recorderrs office and the original docunent returied to city -HaIl Records.
Cl"c
Signatur of App cant Date
tl e t77o
ignature of Fee
c
Date
PRESENT I,AND USE DESTGNATION
Application Received on
fee Paid Receipt No.
?his application will be consi by the Planning Conmission,/Board of
Adj ustments and Appeals on
CITY OF
THINHISSTI\I
STAFF REPORT
e/Le/eo
to/o8/eo
90-L2 ZOA
Olsen/v
Fz
()
=(LL
ls
UJFa
Zoning Ordinance Amendnent to Amend Section 2O-4Og,General Development Regulations - vletland ordinance
PROPOSAL:
I,OCATION :
APPLICANT:
PRESENT ZONING:
ACREAGE:
DENSITY:
ALTACENT ZONING AND
I,AND USE:N-
c-
E-w-
WATER AND SEWER:
PHYSICAL CHARACTER. :
2OOO I,AND USE PI,AN:
PC DATE:
CC DATE:
CASE #:
By:
ZOA for Wetland Access
Septelber l-9, 1990
Page 2
BACKGROUND
The City, as a policy, has required access through a lretland to be
provided by a boardwdl-k versus filling or dredging. While this has
been consistently enforced, the Zoning Ordinance regulating
wetlands does not state that access through a wetland will be
provided by a boardwalk. A recent wetland alteration pernit
requested the right to naintain a strip of fiLl area within a Cfass
A wetland to serve as access to a dock on Lotus Iake (Lotus Lake
Betternent Association). After receiving coDments fron the DNR,fish and wildlife Service and corps of Engineers, the City has
reinforced their position on access through wetlands by boardwalk
only and recommended denial of the wetland aLteration pernit. The
Planning Comnission and City council directed staff to amend the
Zoning ordinance to specifically address access through a wetland.
PROPOSAL
The issue is access through a wetland and how it should be a11owed.Staff first differentiated access between pedestrian and vehicular.
For all tlrpes of pedestrian access, a boardwalk shall be the onlypernitted means of access. When the access requested is forvehicular access, such as a street, then a boardt alk would not besuitable and fill rrould have to be considered, Vehicular accesscould also include a boat launch, but staff wiLl be recommendingfthat boat launches be perroitted through a rretland only if there isnot a public boat access on the 1ake, providing another means of
launching a boat. Therefore, if a boat launch is requested through
a wetland on a lake with a public boat launch, the City could alloronly a pedestrian access via a boardwalk versus fiJ.ling a portionof the wetland.
A final consideration s/as the height and width of the boardwalk.
The boardwalk should be between 5 and 8 inches in height aboveground elevation and the ordinary high water nark where it is over
open water. The width of the boardwalk sha1l be a naximum of 6feet. The 6rr to 8r, height will allo!, wetland vegetation to benaintained around and under the boardwaLk.
Staff recommends thenotion:Planning Conmission adopt the following
IThe Planning Connission reconnends approval of
Amendment arnending Section 2O-4O9 as follows:Zoning Ordinance
(6) Pedestrian access through a Class A or B rretland shall beprovided only by a permanent boardwalk, dock or rralkrrayelevated 6rr to 8rr above the ground level and ordinary high -
RXCO}4},TENDATION
ZOA for Wetland Access
Septenber 79, L99O
Page 3
lrater uark lrhere openwidth of 6 feet.ter is present and shaIl be a maxinum
(7) vehicular access on fill. material through a wetland shall onlybe considered when the access nust be ior vehicles. privatiboat launches on fill material will not be pernitted througha Class A or B lretland if a public boat access exists on thesubj ect lake. rl
ATTACHMENTS
1. Section 2o-4O9 of the Zoning Ordinance.2. Planning Comnission uinutes dated August 1, 1990.
$ 20-.107 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE
(4) Sedimentation basias for construction projects.
(51 Open storage.
(6) Animal feedlots.
(7) The planting of any species of th e gents Lythrun-
(8) Operation of motorized craft. ofall sizes and classifications.
(Ord. No. 80, Arl. \r. $ 2+1624-51, 12-15-86)
Sec. 2G408. Prohibited uses itr class B wetlands.
The follos'ing uses are prohibitcd in class B wetlands:
(1) Disposal of rvaste marerial incrudinq, but not iimi,"d to. sewage, demolition debris.
hazardous and toxic substances. and all wast€ that o,orrid nor-"uy be disposed ofat asolid I'aste disposal sirc or rnro a sewage disposal syst€m or saaitary sewer.
(2) solid waste disposal sites, slurige ash disposal sites, hazardous u,asre transfer ordisposal sites.
(3) Anirnal feedlors.
(4) The planting of anl' species of the genus .L.r,thrurzr
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, $ 24(5.24-6), t2-15-e6)
S€c. 20-409. General devclopment regulations.
within wetland areas and for lands abutting or adjacent to a horizontal distance of trvohundred (200) feer, the follou,ing minimum provisions are applicable:
(l) The minimum lor crea is fifteen thousand I15,000) square feet.
(2) The minimum structure serback is seventy-five (?5) feet from the ordinar5r high watermark.
(3) Septic and soil absorption system setbacks
ordinary high water mark.
are one hundred frfty (fEO) feet from
(4) The rowest ground
'loor
elevation is three (3) feet above ordinary high water mark.
(5) No development shall be a,ou'ed rvhich may result in unusual road maintenancecosts or ut,itv line breakages due to so, limitation, including high r""", ".ii"".
-----
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, $ 24(5-24-13), 12-15€6; Ord. No. 8O-C, $ t, l0-S€?)
S€ca. 20-,U0-2(H20. Reserved.
Supp. No. I
I190
C
L.-
(-
City Council tleeting - nugust ZZ, L99O
specifically uhat exactlv is in that contract le'll have to take a look at it.
Councilman Uorkman: Riglrt. That,s the concern so ye,re talking about severalhundred thousand dollars and so I,d ]ike to knou.
Gary Uarren: I'Il note I hat .nd ue'Il follou up on that.
Councilman Llorkman: 0kal,. f tould nove approval.
Councilman Johnson: Sect,nd.
Reso ution 190-104:
l. Dorntorn Rcdeveloprerrt, phase tI, project g6-118.
2. Xorth Side Parking L(,1, projrct 87-17.3- Lake Drive, TH 101 t(, CSAH lZ, project 88-22-
All votcd in favor and tl,c rotion carricd unanirously.
G. UETLAND ALTERATION PE
UEILAND IO ACCESS A OOCX
LOTUS LAKE BETTERI1EX ESSI
RIIIT TO COI{STRUCI A 9ALT9AY PATH THROUGH E CLASS E
L9CATEo eT 7016 seHoy H00K CIRCLE. CHRIS Er{cEL FOR THEcIeTI0x.
acc?pt thc Prclirina
folloring:
Councilnran l,orkran: lje c ruldIt doesn't aake any sense lnd
ue'd like then to do. Horever
oecember 3rd and 10th es officrealistically uit h the Natione
' Courrcilran gorlran rould, Councilran Johnson 8lcondrd tory Assessrent RoIl and c.ll for e public hcaring for the
councilman Johnson: r puIIed z(g) on general principle. The rcconnendation isdenial so I'll aove denial of the L,etland Alteration pernit. Lte,ve hadcircumstances in the past uhen ue approved tha Consent 69enda and the
recomnrendation uas a denial and then the rpplicant caae in and said his thinguas approved uhen it uas actuarlv denied so it,s clear this is a deniar and soI'm aoving denial.
Councilman t'lor kma n: Sacond.
Gounciltan Johnson roved, Councilran Uorhan s.condrd to dcn, llctlandAltcration Prnit Rcqurst ,89-l to allor r a' rid! by,tZ. long cru3hrd rock plth
through the cLass A rethnd edJaccnt to Lotus L.k.. elt votcd in fevor end ihcrotion carricd.
councilnan Uorknan: ue'rr acknoUledging strtr ls'tiratld 1991 Lrv), lilit for
chanhassen uhich r don't knou if this is bescd on. r gulss r didn't nurber onedidn't uant to niss the orportunity to sry hor once rgain silly this rlt is.
Councilman Johnson; ft,s not as silly ls last ycar.
bas
the
ically sey 20 rillion dollars or eny nurbcr andt's Stltr gov.rnrlntr t{ot doing for us like
hc other rinor point is thlt if uc approve
budect public hearing datcs, Decenber 3rd
cague of Citics confcrcnca, rc'd bc out of
,tiaI
LL
3
X. ACXXOULEDGE STATE ESIINNTEO I9'I LEVY LIHrT FOR CHANHASSEX. REOUTRES
ESTAELISHIHG OFFICIAL PUBLIC HEARII{G BATES.
PIanning
Ausust 1
Commission t'leet i ng
1990 - Page 18
ttildermuth: Oid they get variances?
Name
Pat Lynch
conrad: Hake sure the word is some desire.
Emmings: Because if they make it a variance they can put it anyplace lhey
hJant to. l.Jhere are the controls then? I don't like this.
Conrad: The conLrols would be imposed based on the stipulations of that
variance.
Ellson: It would be done case by case.
Conrad: It would be done case by case. See I'm of the position that Irea]ly have a tough time with it period. I'm not sure that I find it
acceptable but I haven't looked at aII the unique circumstances. A wholelot of beachlots have survived for a trhole long time with a whole lot ofkids and haven't creaLed any controversy and it hasn't' brought any issuesup in the neighborhood.
t^,ildermuth: tlhat has it done to the lake?
Emmings: Yeah.
PubIic Present:
Addrcss
12OO l.lamer Road, ONR Representative
Emmings: No. They're operating iIIesalIy. But anyuray, if anything's
going to happen on it, it ought to be done as a zoning ordinance amendment -to me and I'm certainly interested in enough in it so I wouldn't mind
uror k i ng on it.
Kraussr l,Jell we can make that sentiment clear at the Board. That there is-
some desire to consider it as an ordinance and ue'lI make them auare ofthat.
Conrad: I just don'L see that as a problem-
Ellson: It's something that could be looked into I guess.
Conrad! Can look into it and I think ule should put it on the uork agendafor us as obviously PauI a lou priority. No, I don't mean that
Emmings: Even though it's deleted, sorry.
(Tim Erhart arrived for the meeting at this point. ) -
PUBLIC HEARING:
I.IETLANO ALTERATION PERHIT TO CO}ISTRI.|CT A IJALK}IAY PATH THROUGH A CLASS A -I.IETLAND TO ACCESS A DOCK LOCATED AT 7016 SANDY HOOK CIRCLE, CHRIS ENGEL FOR
LOTUS LAKE BETTERI.IENT ASSOCIATION.
PIanning Commission Heeting
August 7, t99O - Page 19
l,,lr./l'lrs. Robert Pfankuch
Debbie E ngel
1Oo Sandy Hook Road
7O16 Sandy Hook Circle
Conrad: Is this a public hearing or not?
olsen: You closed the public hearing last time.
Conrad: Okay, so now tonight was really a time to discuss it uith.
Conrad: [,le sure ulould .
Pat Lynch: Hy name is Pat Lynch. I'm the Area Hydrolosist r.,ith the DNRfor Dakota and Scott Counties. I b,as helpine out in Carver County for awhile. A year and a half ago f guess it is already. I guess this wholematter came before me in January of 1989 uhen I received 3 applications forwetland alteration from the City and f responded to those with some written
comments that it appeared to me some of the fill proposed was below what wecall our ordinary high water elevation out at Lotus Lake. t,hat I had heardback then from the City was thaL in fact these applications where after thefact or the work had already been done. From there I met on the site thatspring with 3 contiguous ProPert), ou,ners there. I'lr . Frost, l.'tr . Pfankuch
and Chriq Engel from the Colonial Grove Association. I also had been outthere with the representative from the Army Corps of Engineers. An
enforcement individual and after a lot of discussion and time we determined
uhere the DNR's area of jurisdiction r^,as out there on all 3 of thoseproperties and I staked that ]ine on the properties and there uas
commitment by the property owners to comply with the removal of thematerial that was filled waterurard of that ordinary high water mark that Iestablished and staked. AII three property owners again had expressedwillingness to restore to those dimensions. I guess I made it clear thatin addition to the ONR's approval, there uere other approvals that may haveto be met namely the Corps of Engineers, l.latershed District and any local
approval . In Lhis case the City of Chanhassen. f know the Corps didn't
have a problem with what the DNR had proposed for restoration and theypretty much stayed out of it. From there I guess if I can just jump ahead
severaL months, from h,hat we had originally proposed for restoration, there
uJere some changes. Some slisht modification on the tuo properties. Idon't knoll if that's west of the Colonial Grove properties but on the Frost
and Pfankuch properties ue adjusLed the slakes so thaL there uasn'L anobtrusive pipe sticking out into the lake waterward of the fill to beremoved. tle thought that that u,as a reasonable approach so Lhat that uouldblend a IittLe more naturally. Have a little curve around that pipe. Ithink that uJas reasonable and a good idea. AIso in that timeframe I had
Olsen: Right. It h,as tabl.ed because there were a ]ot of differentopinions brought up. so r.,hat r did was to have some of the other governingbodies submit letters on their opinions and one was just verbally over thephone and then also Pat Lynch is here from the DNR to kind of 9e! his sideof the story. !,Je're st j.II recommending that the boardwalk be what ispursued as our policy and even go as far as amending the ordinance to makethat clear and that we are still recommending that the boardwalk be r^rhat ispermitted on this recreational beachlot versus the fiII. But pat Lynch ishere to have him speak.
Planning Commission l'leet i n9
August 1, 1990 - Page 20
some discussion with a Dr. Charles HirL and Chris Engel regarding ]eavi.ng :
small access strip Lo the docking facility so that they could access their
dock. I had uritten a letter saying that the DNR didn't have a problem
r.rith that and that I would allow that to remain provided the rest of the
material was removed from the site and I stressed again that that was
conLingent upon any other IocaI, state and federal or local approvals.
That's about where ure ?re at nobr. I just as soon oPen it uP to questions
from you folks. f guess the impetus behind allowing them to leave a Path
r.,as that our permit rules would actually allot, that lot to have a 12 foot
wide concrete ramp poured doun there !,iLhout a permit from us if Lhat's
what they would choose to pursue. My contention b,as that yeah, they filled
in violation. Yeah, they had cooperaLed uithout any Problems and were
uri]]ing to remove the stuff and that I thought it ulas reasonabLe andpractical to Ieave a strip in to access the dock given the fact Lhat it's a
mul.tiple use area. The activities are consolidated on one smal.l area. In -my professional judgment, the impacts to the oetland area wiII be nominal
once it's restored by leaving that strip in. 8OZ of that lot wil.l sti]I so
back to a naLural state over ti.me Hith the r e-esLab I ishment of the
vegetation in there, Like I say, the impacts to that particular area f
didn't feel were Lhat severe given the fact that there's a rather intense
infestation of purple loosestrife there. Like I say, as far as the DNRrules are concerned and I'm not saying that they're the best but they couli-
have had a 12 foot r.lide ramp and 12 feet of sand across there without apermit from us anybray so I think ohat they're doing is again, in the DNR'sperspective is reasonable and practical
Emmings: Can I ask you a question?
Emmings: l^lhen you say they coul,d have had a 12 foot wide ramp, concrete
ramp or whatever, and it t^rouldn't have gone against any of the DNR'sreguLations, are u,e talkins about that ramp being in a place that's
Iandt^rard.of the ordinary high water mark?
Pat Lynch: l^laterward of .
Emmings: tlaterward of?
Pat Lynch: 10 or 12 feet uraterward.of the ordinary high uater elevation.gravel , an earthen ramp, planks.
Emmings: Now just so I get my thinking straight on this,ure're talking about whether or not they're going to leaveis that aII landward of Lhe ordinary high uater mark?
the paLh thaLit or remove it, -
Pat Lynch: No.
Emmings: It's aIl naterward from the ordinary hiEh water mark?
Olsen: No. There's a portion that goes just above the ordinary high water-
mark.
Pat Lynch: CerLainIy.
f don't have that. 10 feet eJaterwarcIt could be concrete, crushed
Planni ng Commission Heet i ng
August 7, f99O - Page 21
Emmings: Okay. How much ofordinary high uater mar k?
it is above and how much of it is below the
Pat Lynch: ].Je guessed roughly 40 feet below as a guess.
Olsen: t"lell that included the u,ateruard part so I think it tras about 10feet that you had them remove so it's about 30. Rough estimate.
Emmings: AIright, now t.lhat's 30?
Olsen: About 30 feet landward-
Emmings: Okay. So there's 30, approximately and I think 25 is the numberf remember us talking about last time but we're saying there's 25 or 30feet of this walkuay that's above the ordinary high water mark going dotrnto the ordinary high water mark, correct?
Olsen: Yeah, approximately that.
Pat Lynch: tJell the only, the DNR jurisdiction begins at the ordinary highwater elevation and is urateruard.
Emmings: Exactly, but as far as what was there under your jurisdiction it
uras okay with you? Is that r^rhat I understood?
Pat Lynch: Not what 'swide path.there today. What they proposed to leave the 5 foot
Emmi ngs :
path , you
So as long as they removed everything except that 5 foot wide
were satisfied?
Pat Lynch: Correct. That would mean removing about 8OZ of the material
below the ordinary high water elevation.
Emmings: Apart from the fact that we're also Iooking at the part that's
above the ordinary high uater rnark and aside from the fact that I recognizethat that's not an area where you have jurisdiction, do you feel thatthere's any impact to that area? If ue assume it's a uretland, do you thinkthere's any impact, adverse impact to that from this walkway that uould bealleviated by removing it and reguiring a boardwalk? Can you shed any
light on that for us?
Pat Lynch: I'm sorry, f'm not sure I follor.r the question. I'm sorry.
Emmings: Right now there's a rock paLh that. Ieads from 25 or 30 feet ebovethe ordinary hish water mark down to the ordinary high uater mark and alittle bit beyond. In lhat siluaLion i.n the past ure have always required
elevated boardwalks through a wetland to get to the ordinary high water
mark so people could have access to the lake. In this case, there's an
Emmings: And then part of it is beyond and you told them that, at leastwith regard to r.,hat's below the ordinary hidh u,ater mark, Chat was okaywith the DNR in this case?
Planning
August 1
Commission Meet i n9
1990 - Page 22
existing rock trail and the question uras, the question that came up uas, is_that just, is that as good? Is that alright in terms of iL's impact on
that Hetland? That's what we're struggling with and ue don't have any
expertise up here to know and that's the quesLion Ilm asking.
Pat Lynchr I would say so, yeah. I mean there are ways to lessen theimpact of leaving the strip down Lhere by, if I remember right I think it'sgravel or unvegetated clay path down to the existing dock. If that u,,ererevegetated to grass and it just had a grass hill walking douJn to the lake,-that would offset some of the impacts of having a gravel strip out there
and what that uould tend to do would be to filLer any kind of runoff that
comes from the upper reaches by the tennis courts, etc. so there are braysto somewhat offset t.he shortfalls thaL a gravel path has over a boardwalk.
And again I styess, that although our rules would allow it and deem it areasonable access option, they've got to get your approval too and if you
don't li ke it.
Emmings: No, He understand. I think ue finally understand that,
uith being more restr ictive.Pat Lynch: O kay .not knocking that.There 's nothing wrong I'M
Conrad: Did we get tu,o conflicting opinions Jo Ann from the DNR? l.tas thatone of our concerns or no!?
Olsen: No, I think L,hat was happening h,as that the applicants h,erestating, possibly misquoting PaL in saying that fiII uould even bepreferred over a boardwalk and that the City didn't have the right to gothat far and then it just got, out of hand. So no, ue really didn,t setconflicting quotes from the DNR.
Pat Lynch: I uon't argue that. If )zou compare the two, a boardwalk will
have Iess impac!. I don't think anybody could argue uiLh that as far asthe impacts. I mean if you're not placing any foreign material , and I've
read through the l{inutes that Jo Ann had faxed to me. Someone, I think Mr.
Engel said that he hadn't placed fill but he had placed rock. l.lell, thatis fill. FiII, t^rhether it's sand, rock, uhaL have you is fill. Sod. Soyeah, a boardwal k has less impact. I r.louldn't argue that but thesignificance on a site like Lhat, I don't know if it's what I would
consider a measureable impact.
Emmings: Okay, so in this particular case you think it's probably pretty
negl igible?
Pat Lynch: There are some benefits to be had by gravel and again I'm nottrying to sell the idea of a grave). path. I'm just stating that r.rhen thatgravel, I've seen the r.rater level today and i!,s up quite a biL from thelast few times I've been out but when the water,s up over that gravel,there are some benefits to it as far as runoff coming doutn that hill.Gravel would tend to filter some of the more course grain material andgranted, if you had vegetation in there it r.rould be a better job butthere's also a lot of benthic organisms and what not that inhabit the nooks-and crannies of a gravel area and you'II find wading birds pecking lhrough
Planning Commission Heet i ng
Ausust 1, 1990 - Page 23
gravel, So it's not as bad as it
today
aPPear ts
relation
may
in
AII.
to the Iine you staked asEmmings: t^lhere is thethe ordinary high water
Pat Lynch: Ohproperty where
water
rnar k?
geez. Boy, I'm sorry. I didn't walk to the corner of thethe sLake uras. I u,as over on I'lr. Frost's property.
25
fee t
w hat
Emmings: Okay. Have you got a feel at all for whether it's about t her e?
fill'areaPat Lynch: It's got to be close because it uas soggy
on the adjacent property. I suspect it's real close.
down on the
Erhart.: Pat, isn't your rules that you apply essentially ihtended Lo be
used as a stateh,ide rufes and applied generally to Iakes throughout thestate whether they be in an urban area or u,hether they be in a rural area
and that the reason why there's local jurisdiction is that you don't intendto micromanage the environmental controls on the lake. You tend to have abroad, statewide point of view. l.lould you say that's accurate?
PaL Lynch: Yeah , I 'dstandards.
agree with that. Our standards are statewide
Erhart: Yeah, and that it really works in a case where someone ownsacres. It works best uhen someone ouns 25 acres and several hundredof Lakeshore and he u,ants to put his own boat ]aunch in. Isn't thatthat concrete pad allowance is?
Pat Lynch: No, no. Not at all. If you go out, there'sthe cities urhere an individual lot ouner, several on the
access pad in his backyard.
Erhart: Not in Chanhassen.
plenty of
Iake r,riII
Iakes in
have an
Pat Lynch: t^,e]l I don't work in Chanhassen.
county. If you go out on Prior Lake, you'Il see
m in Scott and Dakota
them ,
Erhart: You'Il see them in Prior Lake? l.then r.rere those put in?
Erhart: You find actually every lot's got?
Pat Lynch: No, not every lot, no.
that's more so for the out greater
I guess I r,rou ldn 't agree wi th that
I'm saying that,
Hinnesota than it
stateme nt .
I wouldn't say that
is in the cities.
Eyhart: You wouldn't agree with that?
Pat Lynch: Not in terms of the access ramp, no. As a matter of fact, I'd
almost go the other way and say that on new construction on lake lots in
the cities, you'd probably see an increase in that.
Pat Lynch: I don't knour. That predaCes me.
Planning Commission l'teet i n9
August 1, 1990 - Page 24
Erhart: You're seeing ner^, construcLion on lakes where people individually -put boat Iandings in their yard.
Pat Lynch: Boating pressure is getting such that you can't even, at someplaces the parking Iots are so full, they don't u,ant to mess ulith it andit 's easi er .
Erhart: Give us an example of a lake in the metropolitan area xhereindividual properly ouner can puL their own boat launching pad in the lake.
Pat Lynch: Any lake in Minnesota. If they can conform to the standards. -
Erhart3 No, no, no. correct me if I'm Nrong Paul.. You can'C do thaC here
i n Chanhassen .
Pat Lynch: I'm saying as far as the statewide standards 9o you can.
Emmings: If he's saying they can do it.
Erhart: But our ordinance doesn't allor^r it.
Emmings: Oh, He can't control iL. It's in their jurisdiction
tJildermuth: But you can't do it on the beachlot right?
Pat Lynch: Your ordinance may address it, I don,t knotr.
Krauss: If they're not putting it through a wetland and you're not on abeachloE, it really falls back to DNR.
Erhart: So we're saying our ordinance, realIy someone can do that eventhough I haven't seen anybody since I've been on here. As long as itdoesn't go above the ordinary high water mark.
Olsen: Our Shoreland Ordinance is the DNR Shoreland Ordinance.
Emmings: Risht. tJel)., are we pre-empted? From the ordinar)z high watermark Iakeward, are we pre-empLed?
O]sen: No, because remember
Emmings: l^le can have stricter standards than the ONR?
Pat Lynch: You bet
Olsen: That's clear we can.
Pat Lynch: I think that's where there's a lot of hang-up right now
EIIson: Is that those people don't like that. If I recall the situation,that's uhat it was about.
F Planning Commission Heet i n9
August 1, f99O - Page 25
Pat Lynch: So again, I'verestore it to r.,hat the ONRthat's not for me to say.
gotten commitments from the property owners towould find saLisfactory and if you ask for more,
Erlson: r think lJe brere more concerned about the precedence that it wassetting and ue had never allowed iL previous and uhereas yes, this one isprobably negligible, it just opens up everybody we said no to prior andeverybody we'd like to say no to further. ft uasn't us picking on onegrouP necessarily. t^le just have consistently never done it.
Pat Lynch: ...Chanhassen because I'm not familiar r.rith the lakes in your
community but again, going back to the area that I do work, a lot of theprime Iakeshore properties are developed already and now blhat you're seeingis the marginal stuff that you've got to go through wetland or you've gotto €xcavate or dredge a channel. ThaL's r.rhaL's being developed now becausetha!'s all that's ]eft. You may be having to address the issue again.
Ellson: tlell, I think the biggest thins is what paul said. fs it true...and we felt that it uasn't and we got a little uneasy that maybe it is
necessar ily but I Lhink you've cleared that up for us so I reallyappreciate that.
Iissues. I think there's access to theirof putting small boaLs in and out. I thinkeould probably accommodate both in my
Conrad: Any more questions of Pat?
Emmings: No.
Pat Lynch: I think there's tr.ro
dock and then there's the issuethroush something like this they
opi n ion .
I appreciate your coming.
leave yet. Just kiddi ns.
just Hant to see the thins
It helps.
l.re may have some more questions.
resolved as quickly as everyone
Erhart: Don 't
Pat Lynch:else does.
I
Conrad: It's not
from those in the
a public hear i n9
audience tonisht but I'm curious if there's any comments
based on what they heard.
Debbie Engel: I just want to make one comment- I'm Debbie Engel and I'm
here on behalf of Chris basically Just to listen... I'm not sure thatMr. Lynch did touch on that but there is a gravel road down within I would
sey uithin loO feet of this put in by the .City because there's a pumping
station there and I think that's what he xas eluding to the fact thatthere's not grassland coming down the hill and it is all dounhill from thetennis courts to filter so it's not natural vegetation to filter that and Ithink Lhat's why the continuity of the rock path and that's uhy it waschosen. So it's not, there's no grassy area. It's that h,ide to handle acity truck... I'm not good on judgins distance but I would say urithin 1OOfeet of the present water level .
Conrad: Okay, thanks Debbie. Any other questions?
PIanni ng
August 1
Commission t{eet i ng
1990 - Pase 26
Emmingsi I'd like to ask PauI . If a landowner, Ne've heard l1r. Lynch say -that if a landouner, on any individual Iot in Chanhassen uanted to
construct a concrete and let's take a h,orse case, a concrete ramp to put
boats in and out on his properLy. If he started that at the ordinary hish
water mark and just Hent waterward with it would he, he'd obviously be
buildins a structure. tlould he have to come to the City for a permit for
that?
Krauss: Not unless he's crossing a wetland to do it.
Emmings: t^,ell I think he should have to. I think ue should find out ifour ordinance covers it. It would seem to me that the building of any
structure in the water oughL to require a city permit if ure can havestricter standards than the DNR has. If our ordinance doesn't provide that
nou,, it ought !o
Emmings: No, it does not. tle have
have for a dock and so does the DNR
Emmings: I don't care if ue
do is say if you're going Loin Chanhassen, you've got tofrankly that it's that many.
Minnewashta. There might bethat ought to be plugged.
an
so
ordi nance
docks are
that tells what you cannot an issue.
Conrad: You're talking about a permanent structure?
Emmi ngs: Permanent structure, yeah.
Conrad: I think ue could regulate a permanent structure. I thoughE wealready did.
Olsen: Again, we use the DNR. [^,e've adopted word for b,ord the DNRregulations.
adopt their regulations but all Ne've got tobuild a structure in the Hater, in any water
come to the City for a permit. I don't thinkI don't know of any on my lake. On
some but I don't know. I think that's a hole
Conrad: l.,e've got to get back into this thing. Is there confusions and
maybe some wording problems with the ordinance and I think we spend 2 hoursevery other ttednesday nisht talking about this. Ue better revisit itguicklv. Actually ue don't need to revisit it in time for this year but f -think in time for next year ue really should have, h,e should really monitorand see what ue're doing ulith our wetland protection ordinances becausethere seem to be exceptions and confusions
Emmings: l,Jell, maybe you throw lakeshore in there too as weII as wetland.
Conrad: It becomes a big process. ft's not easy to get your hands around -
because you obviously affect people. There's a lot of differentcircumstances that have to be incorporated into the ordinance and tough todo. Tim, any other comments on tonighL's, Pat Lynch's conversation?
Krauss: That r^rould put you in the posilion of having to review every dock.
Planning Commission Heet ing
August 1, 1990 - Page 27
Conrad: Just comments. You know I think ure brought this back because one,the applicants, the Engel's u,ere concerned that L,e may not have the right
standard and from ulhat I'm hearing, it may not be Lhe risht standard butit's a standard that's more acceptable based on what we heard than maybe
Hhat has been done with the applicant's uetland permit.
Erhart: Let me thro.., something out that's been haunting me f guess in theIast year since I heard a speech by someone over at the Fresh traterInstitute at a meeting I attended and then I xas intrigued by it and
discussed it r.rith him later and I can't remember the name of the gentleman
but he felt strongly that a community should essential.Iy decide Hhat aIake's purpose is. I'm really opening this up so stop me if you think I'mgetting dangerous,
Emmings: It's to hold uater isn't it'?
Erhart: l.lelI you know we get into this environmental thing and wetlandpreservation and trying to filter u,ater and like that but then you say uhenyou go onto Lake Minnetonka and they're constantly dredsing and doing
everything that ue uouldn't aIlow in this city. That's how the discussiongot going and his basic feeling $las you've got to decide what the lake's
for. If it's a recreational lake, then maybe you have different rules on a
recreational lake than you do on a lake that you might designate a wild
Iake or wilderness lake or something like that. Because on one hand I'mprobably the most pro environmental and *etland preservation and creationguy here but on the other hand, I can see uhere if I owned a Iot on the
lake and I had some, uhat ue term as h,etland and what is that? Is it 2
foot r.ride? How do you knou thaL a guy, r.lhat's the difference between theguy that's got a 2 foot strip of Hetland and can't build a dock through itor the nexC auy uho's got 4O foot. tlhere do ue draw the line? t^lell, ue
don't really draw the line here. You know you look at the t)rpes of growth
you've got there but there's I'lI bet you half the lots in this city, ifyou really $rere to look, really cut it fine, that there's a Hetland betlreenhis lot and the urater. I don't knou if you urant to start, I mean some
people have sandy beaches but other people have weeds growing out on the
Iake and so if you're going to open, for a future meeLing discuss whether
we have outhouses and Satellites and docks and landings and things, maybe
that's something to think about. tlhether ue ought to have two differen!
types of Iakes and two different standards depending on Nhat we designate a
Iake.
Conrad: There areyour point is weII
different classifications of Iakes. In fact, I think
taken Tim but there are designations. Different
Erhart: No, not on that specific although I agree with Steve. You know,
and I don't know if ule should be regulating land but when you weigh itagainst everything else that we regulate in this city regarding wetlands
and lakes and what not, it does seem like a loophole in the context of howeverything else bJe're so rigid on so I agree that h,e ought to be throwingin that too because it kind of pretty much lies in the face of t{hat we'retalkins about here tonight. Sornebody could do that and yet He're worrying
about a 4 foot uide strip of gravel so iL doesn't make a lot of sense. Areyou looking for some direction on this thing at this point?
Planning Commission Heet i ng
August 1, 1990 - Page 28
designations of lakes based on DNR standards I believe b,hich the City hasclassified certain Lhings in. A lot of the Lhings that you find, and I'mplaying with real.Iy old memory here is the DNR has a uhole bunch of controlthat I don't know that Lre can get into. Yet those, I'rn noE sure that u,e
have the power in some cases to do some of the regulating that ue may u,antto and that's frustrated a lot of p€ople uho were on the commiLtees that tdeformed, I don't knop 7 years ago or lhenever. Hou many years ago it u,as. A-Iot of different circumsLances and you listed a couple. A 2 foot stripversus a 40 foot strip end it's really arbitrary. There's so manyarbitrary things that, Lhat's ehy ure bring the ONR in and some of theexperts in to take a Look at certain lots on a sitc specific basis. Ithink urhat Pat's telling us in the particular case that brought him in hereis probably that h,etlend over there and probably the issue is not a big oneas compared to some other major oncs that r.re're probably letting it go orhaven't addressed in terms of water cuality. Yet on the other hand wejust, you know you've just got to have a standard and kind of live up tothat standard as arbitrary as that is. So I Euess I'm not anst^,ering itvery specifically but if we b,ant Lo get back into this Tim, it's almost aseparate committee where do we h,ant to bring back the lake study committeeor the environmental protection commillee and have them take a look at syears laLer . l.Jhat's happened? tlhat L,as the intent? l.lhat were theproblems? Take a look at the variances. Not the variances but wetlandalLeration permits that hrere processed. Take a good look at it and see ifthere are interested people in the city and therefore try to update theordinance and incorporate some.
Erhart: Are you suggesting we should?
conrad: It may not be a bad idea. It's like anything. you put an)z lawsin or you put any regulations or you have any kind of plan, it,s alwayskind of fun to go back, especially because there's nothing magic about uhat-that ordinance. That ordinance oas a mish nash. It eras ! politicallyderived, I'm not going to say it was a mish mash. The people on thecommittee were not happy r.rith it because it uras watered down significantly.-It was watered down to, it uas simply not as strong as what they uished andI think it would be interesting to 9o back and see if ee,ve accomplishedanything uith it other than making more paperuork.
Erhart: Your response to my discussioncategories of lakes. l.Jhat I was tryingdifferenL categories of Iakes, bre treatstandards and that's urhat I'm saying isI'm not suggesting that t.re open up thislot of wor k.
was that yeah, we have differentto point out, even though there's
them all the same in tsrms of ourthat maybe life isn't that simple.thing to review again. That's a
Conrad: You k nor., I really buy what you're saying. As you know I Iive onLotus and Lotus is Iong and narrow and the oNR has certain restrictions in _terms of safety. Safety is 11 boats can be out on that lakc at one timeand I'lI guarantee you that on a long narrow lake, that,s not an effectiverestriction or guideline. I think in a round lake that's big;40 acres perboat and whatever, -mav be an acceptabre standard but r think th6re are just-
exceptions aII over the board and I agrce with you Tim. I just think it'sjust someLhing that r.re probably as a smaller city can,t get our hands
Planning Commission f,leeL i ng
August 7, 7990 - Pase 29
around. I think it's bigger than we are. But you knou, I think in termsof reviewing what we've got, I think City staff has some concerns with theordinance. .I think they can improve it. I think we can make it easier forcitizens to understand it. I think Lhere's a lot of lhings ure can do r.rlththe ordinance and wouldn't mind figuring out how to bring it back and lookat it.
Erhart: t{hat is the staff looking for here tonight? Anything?
Olsen: You have to take action on the tretland alteration permit. They,rerequesting permission for the stone path. Action needs to be taken onthat -
Erhart: Are you opening that discussion?
Conrad: tlell, any other questions of Pat while he's here or on theordinance in general? If not, then we should talk specifically aboutpermit that ue tabled and did not take action on. Jim, start at your
in terms of the request.
that
end
l.Jildermuth: tlell, the issue is how are we going to interpret ourordinance, Are we going to confine it to boardualks or are u,e going to a
boardwal k and a gravel pad or a bark pad? Or are we going to requireadjacent lots to combine a path, uhether it's a board or a gravel path? Iguess thaL's the decision we have to make. In terms of what is alreadyexisting on this beachlot, I think I probably uould have to abstain becauseI belong to that association. That might be a hard decision that we haveto make for this situation.
ElIson: I'm more worried about the precedence. L,e don't have gravel
anyuhere and I've seen it before and ule've already, you knou have beengetting more and more of these issues lately. Thank God the Council'sgoing to make the final decision and not me but I would go r,rith the
boardwalk because of consistenc), and the way we've treated everybodyequally. I don't u,ant to make it case by case because ue'll turn the urholething into a mess. Everybody r.rill come by, h,ill say h,ell my case isspecial. Remember the one you did here. You alloued uoodchips and I thinkI'm like that one or I think I'm like the gravel one and f want. People
uill be designing theirs because r.,e're handling them case by case so f'dprefer to be consistent and again I'm glad it will be the Council's final
decision but I'm for the boardwalk.
Emmings: l.ly feeling is this. tle tabled this because we had some
information given to us that a rock waLkuay uas as €pod as an elevated
boardwalk. tle wondered whethcr or not that was in fact accurate. Fish andl.,ildlife has Hritten a letLer that says.that's not so. That a boardr^ralk ispreferred. The corps of Engineers has said they would encourage boardwalks
and Pat Lynch told us tonight that in this particular situation, thisparticular lot, that the differencd uras negligible but that a boardr.ralk is
better. And so for aII those reasons, I think ue should sLick trith t,hat
we've done in the past and stick with the elevated boardualk.
Planning Commission f4eet i n9
August 1, 1990 - Page 30
Erhart: I would favor denial of the request to leave rock in there. iustagain to repeat everybody's statement. I think I need Lo be consistent in
how ure apply the ordinance and just because this has been put in hereiIIesaIIy, I don't think this is the least of reasons u,hy ure should allowit. Secondly, I guess in a practical sense, by tb time you get the
equipment in to remove the stuff you're going to remove, if you're Iookingat saving dollars, it's a very small amount. I'd like to be sensitive butI just don't think there's that much difference between a 4 x 10 foot stripby the time you start movins, that stuff back out of there.
Conrad: Okay, thanks Tim. I have nothing neur to add. I think that those
comments summarize my opinion. I think the only thing I would add, nowthaL I think about it is that we discuss the future of the wetland. Of our_permit process. I think ule have to make that an agenda item and startcleaning, maybe it's not cleaning it up. Haybe it''s improving it. Maybeit's making it more understandable. Is there a motion?
Erhart: I'II move that the Planning Commission recommend denialAlteration Permit Request to allow a 4'wide by 42, long crushedthrough the Class A netland adjacent to Lotus Lake.
Conrad: Is there a second?
Emmings: Second .
Conrad: Any di scussion?
of tlet Iandrock path
Erhart moved, Emmings seconded that the planning Commission recommenddenial of l.Jetland Alteration Permit Request to allor a 4 foot side by 42foot long crushed rock path through the Class A retland adjacent toLotus Lake. AII voted in favor except trildermuth rho abstained and themotion carr ied.
Llildermuth: r would like to make one comment. r think if this is the r.,ayure're going lo interpret the ordinance, ure ought to have some kind of]ength provision involved there because maintaining a ro9 boardwalk is anexpensive proposition. A boardr^rark is going to be reratively short Iivedcompared to a paLhway. A specified pathu,ay or a pathway built tospecifications and it's going to require a lot of maintenance over timecompared with a path. I think there ought to be some kind of lenEthprovision factored inLo the inlerpretation of the exlsting ordinance. orif the ordinance changes, then that could arso be incorporated into that.
Erhart: Right now Jim He have no reference to a boardualk in the ordinance -at aII. This is something that ue've just kind of conjured up as r.re'vegone along here. t^te have precedence but it's not really in the ordinanceis it?
Olsen:Risht.
RishtEmmi ngs :
anything.
nouJ they just can't alter the wetland. They can't put
Planning Commission Heet i ng
August 1, 1990 - Page 31
Erhart:
conrad:
Yeah, but we've allowed boardoalks.
I think they've gone over 1OO feet haven't they?
l.lhat we ought to do, if that's where u,e're going,
boardualks perhaps in our ordinance and suggest
then we ought tothat that's
l.lildermuth: Haven't ue alloh,ed a...pathway at times?
Conrad: Not to my knowledge. tlhen it tras grandfathered in, we allowed it.But to my knowledge Jim, we've never created one since the ordinance has
been in there. And you know, it's one of those I'm more concerned on theprecedent than anything else because I realIy don't think, in thisparticular case we're talking ebout as ue've been saying. I don't thinkthat's a major impact on this. It's just that I don't know uhat theprecedent means. I think it r.rould really open us up for a lot of legal
hassles on any future wetland alteration permit process. And therefore we
urouldn't have an ordinance anymore and that's my biggest concern, That's
one of those things where you say geez, f wish we could interpret some of
Lhese things in different u,ays and unforLunately the ordinance is the
ordinance in this one. This will go to City Council August 27th. Thank
you for coming in. Thank you for attending.
Erhart:
reference
uhat . . .
SITE PLAN
CENTER ON
PRODUCTS.
AHEND}.IENT FOR EXPANSION OF THE PARKING AREA UIEST OF LOTUS GARDEN
PROPERTY ZONED IOP AND LOCATED AT 14930 }IEST 78TH STREET, REDITOND
Jo Ann olsen presented the staff report on this item.
here and uould like to makeconrad: okay, thanks Jo Ann. The applicanL is
some comments, He would entertain that.
Bob CordeII: I'm Bob CordeII from Redmond Products. I just uant to clear
up one slisht bit of confusion on it. I think both Jay and for our
purposes we would prefer the gravel . That's tlhere tle came from the
beginning because it's a temporary situation. It is less exPensive for us
to put in in a temporary situation and it is the tvPe of surface that Jav
would prefer. Going to a blacktop surface of course uould cost quite a bit
more to put in and then r.le hav€ to incur the additional cost of rGmoving
the blacktop to restore it back to the situation that Jay Nould Prefer tohave. He uants thB property for Plantings gnd not for Parking so r"re felt
that in our original ptan, that if we had an adequate graveled surface,
rolled gravel surface thaL lt would suffice for our PurPoses. our short
term purposes and also provide a 6Pace uhen le lcft that is adequate for
Jay's expansion.
Conrad: Jo Ann, how does that?
Olsen: t^lell we understand you know why they ulould Prefer gravel but u,e
have to look at it from the maintenance Point and we have to look at the
Iong term. t,hat it does !,ith the r.reLland nearby. I guess I'lI have
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR I.IEETING
SEPTEMBER 5, 1990
Chairman Conrad called lhe meeting to order aL 7137 p.m
HEHBERS PRESENT:
Brian BatzIi and
HEI.IBERS ABSENT :
Ladd Conrad, Tim
Joan Ahrens
Erhart, Steve Emmings, Annette EIlson,
Jim l,J i I der mut h
Paul Krauss, Planning Director; Jo Ann Ol-sen,
AI-Jaff, Planner 1; and Charles Folch, Asst.
Senior
City Engi neer
STAFF PRESENT:
Planner; Sharmi n
PUBLIC HEARING:
JERRY PERKINS OF POPE ASSOCIATES, PROPER]Y ZONED IOP . INDUSTRIAL OFFICE
P PARK ROAD AND PARK PLACE:
C - SITE PLAN REVIE|,I FOR A 4 .O42 SOUARE FOOT VEHICLE INSPECTION STATION.
Public Present:
Name Address
Barb & Russ Murphy
Roman Roos
Ned V. Ru kav i na
Dennis Pa]mer
Jerry Perkins
SLanley J. Krzywicki
David Braslau
Al fverson
James F ischer
Richard Andreasen
6451-59 Par k Road
10341 Heidi Lane
5275 Edina Industrial BIvd.
5275 Edina Industrial B1vd.
1360 Energy Par k Drive
5275 Edina Industrial BIvd.
1313 slh 5t. S.E., Suite 322,
15OO Par k Road
15OO Par k Road
15oo Park Road
Mpls.55404
Sharmin AI-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Conrad
ca.Iled the public hearing to order.
Dennis Palmer: I have a brief slide Presentation if I may- My name is
Dennis Palmer. I'm the genera]. manager for System control and I'm here
tonight with Stan Krzywicki our manager for the project. Svstems controi
is...clean air company. !^le're Proud of our rePutation. our Presentaliontonight is to the community of Chanhassen and tae're asking tonight for
permission to ]ocate one of our vehicle testing facilities in lhe
community. FirsL I'd ]ike to give a little background if I can. The SLate
of Minnesota exceeds the federal requiremenLs for carbon monoxide. Carbon
monoxide is a hazardous pollutant with long term exPosure that could be
harmful Lo people. I!'s been determined by the federal government Lhat
carbon monoxide is mainly produced from auLomobiles. So in an effort to
improve loca1 air quality, the State of MinnesoLa is adopting a vehicle
inspeclion program. The Program is designed to identify vehicles thaL are
A. ZONING ORDTNANCE AHENDMENT TO ALLOW AND CREATE STANDARDS FOR A VEHICLE
INSPECTION STATION;
B - PRELI},IINARY PLAT TO REPLAT LOT 3 . BLOCK 1 . CHANHASSEN
-L-AKES EUSLNESS
PARK 5TH ADDITION INTO TI,IO LOTS;
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
Meet i ns
Page 2
the gross polluters. As I said, it's goal is to improve the air qualitv. -
systems control has designed a fast automated test. The Lest involves iusL.
light duty vehicles. Diesels, lrucks, heavy duly trucks, LracLor Lrailers,
heavy duty buses, motorcycles wiII not be involved in this Program. JusL
automobiles and light duty vehicles. The stations are oPerated bv Systems
Control . SysLems Control is a Minnesota CorPoration, Private corporation.
Ne do pay taxes. t^,e're not tax exemPt. It's adminislered by the MPCA, the
Minnesota Pollution ConLroI Agency. They're the agency that Systems -
contro.l has Lheir contract Nith. tJith over 20 years exPerience, Svstems
Control has become the industry Ieader in this business. This is our onlv
business. [,Je test cars. t^Je don'! rePair cars. t^le don't sel] cars' tre
test cars. It's our onLy business, t^Je operate similar programs in
California, in Alaska, in the SLate of tJashington, in IlLinois and in
Haryland. Ne're starting a program for the State of Florida and of course -the program here in Minnesota. t^re're Proud of the contribution u,e've made
to these communities. In Maryland alone, Lheir program which is similar to
this program in design is credited for cleaning up or reducing carbon
monoxide by 2o9 tons a single day. rhis is a facility in Maryland. This
slaliorr is 7 years old. t^.Je started our program there in 1984 , We take a
Iot of pride in construction. In the maintenance and the ]andscaping of
our facilities. l^J e have clean facililies. I started in this program i.n
1983. I started with SC in 1983 as a staLion manager for this program. As
Sharmin said, a vehicle i nspection stalion is not Iisted as a use because
it's new so if I could Lake a minute and explain some of the comparisons to-
sc'me common uses lhat we're familiar with. It's a service business. tJejust tesL vehicles- !.le're a service business. Now this facility located
in Chanhassen wi]l, their traffic flow will be somewhere belween 1/3 and a
L/2 of the average sized McDonald's in a single day. It's similar to an
auio bank where you drive through. You stop for 2 minules and you drive
on. It's stricL.l-y drive thru. Most. facilities are built larger than they
need to be to assure LhaL there's no back ups in traf f ic. t^,le're not likegas stations because we do no repairs. There's no repairs at thisfacility. It's stri.ctly testing. There's no underground lanks. Noproblems with disposing of oil from crank cases. It's strictly testing, -It's a house of computers. This is the neturork design for the Stale ofMinnesota. One of the requirements or one of the criteria tre use when welocate a facility is convenience. Most people will not have to drivegreater than 5 miles to a facility on an average, That's our goal when we -locate a facility. This is an aerial photograph of the Chanhassen site.North is to your left. The lower portion of the photograph is Audubon Roadand Lhe site is locaLed, I'm afraid the arrou is kind of dark but it'sIocated in the ]or^rer right hand quadrant of the photograph. This is astreet map location. The location is o,n Park Road. This is an artistrendering of our faciliLy. This is a generic drar^ring. The facilitylocated here is 3Ianes. The facililies are brick construction and fu]IyIandscaped. Here's a Iandscaping plan Sharmin had shown at the entranceson Park Road. Again it's strictly drive thru. There's 3 }anes. The frontpart and half of the Ieft hand side is bermed, Again, an elevation of the -facility. Three Lanes. The section r,riLhout the garage doors are themanagerial section- There's a manager on this site- This is a picture ofour operation again in Maryland. One of our rather larger facilitiesAgain, iL's strictly testing. Exclusively Lesting. tle do no repairs. Themotorist simply pul]s in without appointment. pulls into the bay. Isgreeted by an inspector. The inspector puts in the driver's license p.Late.Information is calLed up and in 2 minuLes, Iess than 2 minuLes actually, -
Planning Commission
Seplember 5, f99O -
Heet i ng
Page 3
Lhe test on average is compleled. These facilities are basically houses ofcomputers, That's aII that exist in these facilities. Computers andpaper. ApproximateLy lOZ of the folks wilL have to use our informationoffice. Host people though wiII pulI in, receive their inspecLion results
and pull out. A little bit about our operations. Again, it's drive thrutesting. The average test time is less than 2 minutes. t^le do recruit
Iocal. Iy. This facility will employ approximately 10 Lo 15 peopLe. Ouroperating hours are Tuesday thru Saturday. l.le're not open Monday and we're
noL open on Sunday. Tuesdays and Thursdays we close by 7:OO p.m. and on
t^lednesdays and Fridays we close at 5:3O p.m". And on Saturdays our hoursare from 8:OO to 2:OO. AIso before we selec! a site we consider the impact
on communities. l^Je've employed Dr. David Braslau. Contracted with Dr.
David Braslau, a loca1 environmental impac! engineer, to perform airquality and traffic studies and aII these studies have to be favorablebefore we select the site, In Lhis case again they're aLI favorable. Withrespect Lo noise, noise also is favorable " A little comment. one of ourfacililles in iYaryland, after the operation the stations in no way effecL
negatively the local area development. l^le've got doctor's offices. reLail
outlets ! even a nursing home had been built afLer Lhe operation " The folks
from Lhe nursing home are always over having coffee and complimenting our
manager orr how clean and neat the f ac j.Iity is so we are good neighbors.
[,le're confident that He can do good here and help improve the air quality.
The federal EPA says lhat Ne can, they expect in the first year operation
to reduce emissions by 36,0O0 tons and by 1995, 135,OOO tons in a year. t^le
are good neighbors and we hope that you accept your staff's recommendation,
Thank you.
Conrad: Thanks for your reporl. Okay, we'Il open it up for other public
comments. Are there any?
Richard Andreasen: I'm Richard Andreasen, I'm the facilities manager at
the PMT Corporat.ion " I'd like to state in the past I've noticed the City
of chanhassen has had a great concern with new projects and how it affects
others and how it fit into the community. I believe with the increased
amount of Lraffic, exhaust fumes, noise, that the inspecLion station does
not fit into the Chanhassen Lake Industrial Park. I believe $,e should
leave the Chanhassen Lake Industrial Park an industrial park. Thank you.
James Fischer: Hy name is James Fischer and I'm represenLing on behalf of
the employees of PMT Corporation. I have spoke with several PMT emPloyees
and we feeL that the inspecLion station would be a demoralization of some
of the people wiLh, well lhe employees - [.le go outside on break. IL'squiet. There's no cars. The air smells nice and now there's not going to
be that if this goes Lhrough. There's going to be noise. There's going !o
be the smeLl of car exhaust. I know Lhe smell- I lived in California for
4 years while serving in the miliLary, I had to have my car inspected
every year. I know what it's like to sit in line and .^rait and wait. 4 or
5 cars deep. l don't believe that. I've seen iL and I've been in 2O plus
cars deep waiLing for an inspection on my vehicle. It's going to smell.
The employees aren't going to be going on their utalks on lunch. They iust
uron't like it and they don't. Thank you very much,
Batzli: t^lhen you brere waiting 20 in line deep, was that just a safely
check or just an emissions check?
Planning Commission
September 5, L990 -
Heet i ng
Page 4
James Fischer: Just emissions. To gets a certificate -
Conrad; Thank you. Other comments?
Russ Hurphy: I'm Russ Murphy. I own Murphy Hachine Company across thestreet from the proposed site and somebody had mentioned the noon walks.
There's a lot of people walking on Park Avenue and it's becoming a raceLrack. I bought the first IoL out there and I've watched each building go
up and half the Lraffic going through HcDonald's is probably 10 times thetraffic we have righL now" I don't think i.t would fit in very we1l. Thank-
you .
Conrad: Thanks for your comments. Other comments? Anything else?
AL lverson: My name is Al Iverson - I'm President of the PMT Corporation.I've listened lo a pretty heart warming presentation. t^le're aII interesledin the environment and air pollution. I have a responsibility to my
employees as weil arrd ue came out to Chanhassen Industrial Offi.ce Park backin 1986 and we were told it would be an industrial office park and we
manufacture medical surgical products. t^le have cl^ean rooms. l,le cater toour employees. t^le're pulLing up a new building. By the Hay I was nevertold abrut this presenLalion. I'm putling 1.4 million dollars into a twostory buildins. I! will have, it's built for the employees. There's anexercise room, LJe have an additional 10,OOO square foot clean room. tleare and we've been wcrking wiLh Paul and his sLaff and we feel tha! lhey'vereally been concerned about the industrial office park but Lhis is notfittins. You have to rezone to put iL in there. This is not going Lo be
conducive to an industrial office park. This will not be conducive tofuture cievelopments. I'm anticipating as PauI knows, two other buildings.Our company is growing very rapidly- We have over 1OO employees. !^Je allwant to take the pollutants out of the air but Lhis isn't the location for -it- Drive into there. See how difficult it is to, we have peopLe having arough time finding it and Lhey're going to be knocking on our door, banginto our areas. I have employees who ulalk down the street. They enjoy it.-They Lake their breaks and so forth and we Iike the Chanhassen LakesIndustrial Park. f have 10 acres there. !.,1e're putting in clean buildings.
t^Je're listening to the city. [^,e're working with the city. This isn,tconducive to wha!'s going on and I take grave exception Lo the fact that
number one, we weren't told about it. I have a project Lhat,s now 2 monthsold, f have 2 !/2 moye months into thaL project. I feel very offendedthat I urasn'L, we were never notified about this. There are other sites. -There's a lot of land around there. Right off TH 5. This good genLleman
menLioned HcDonald's. That's right off TH 5. Put it Hhere HcDonald,s is.
Somewhere close by. There's plenly of ]and. Not in the industrial office -park- Please. I have a lot of good employees. I urant to entice goodquality people to come into our company. This isn't going to do it- Myconstruction consultant Mr. Dick. Hellstrom wrote a Iist of things thatwould happen. He's 23 years, Mr. Dick Hellstrom,s been working 23 years inbuildins buiLdings for Control Data Corporation. f suspect he,s gotprobably the best reputation in the fwin Cities. He indicated tha! hewould see that property values would falI. Those beautiful pictures upLhere did no! shor.,, anything about the surrounding area. I was a residentof Florida for 4 years. The inspection stations were a mess. I think ueshould really seriously 9o visit some of these areas number one. Numbertwo, the traffic. The traffic for my employees is just going to be
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
Heet i ng
Page 5
ridiculous. Come on. Let's put it out on TH 5 someplace, There's a Iotof ]ots out there. PIenLy of land. This is ridiculous. It wiII
negatj.vely impact future development of your property lo the north. The
two buildinss we're anticipating. The office buildings. Traffic through
the area wil] be greatly increased. Air polluLion in the area will begreatly impacted. cars are the greatest contributors Lo air pollution in
this area. Hey we're trying !o clean up these cars but does tha! mean that
our company and our employees and everybody else has to suffer? Let's get
iL close Lo Lhe highway. I mean gee whiz. tJhat are He doing to alL these
people in an industrial office park where we came Lo have a manufacturing
facility and we treat our people well. The area will be much noisier than
it is at the present. There is no doubt. Hy office customer service
manager, Sue crankee has told me lhaL she's very concerned about Lhe number
of people presently who confusingly walk into our offices and ask where are
they. l can imagine a whole ]ot more people doing lhat. [,le are a good
neighbor here, tle're a good manufaclurer . [,Je're a clean manufacturer - [^Je
manufacture clean, quality products, I don't think we need lhis, Property
values will be negaLively impacted. Top quality firms and individuals that
might- have been interested in locating or buying in Lhis area nill be
debLered r,rith the emissions f acility in the area in lhis place. I'- t^till be
more difficuLt to selI properLies that are directly adjacent or rentproperties that- are directLy adjacent to this special use facililv"
Specjal use facility. This is not part of the industri.al office park
complex. The proposecj uses noL compatible with existing zoning and planned
deve.Iopment f or Lhe area, Planned devel-oPmen!. [.le came in here ' l,Je've
been workins with PauI Krauss. I mean I don't care if it's a space
station, You can'L really plan ahead for lhings like this. I'm sure vou
can say welL it didn't exis! before this. Hey, this is an industrial
office park complex and I think we owe something !o our employees and this
is where we have Lo stand Pat. This is not conducive to our business. For
anybody. f mean manuf acturing is a carreer . l^le go to great strives as a
listings of the FDA and GMP and we're a good neighbor. You know in 11
years b,,e've never been sued in the medical business. Think about i!. In a
Ietituous society. tJe go Lo great strides to keep uP and with what is
necessar), to be a good manufacturer. This is, we're manufacturers and
we're office parks out there and this is not conducive for what ure're
doing, Possibility exists for ourners site Lo be used as unauthorized
parking or dumping. PeoPIe will iust come through " You haven't seen these
inspection sites. And the traffic alone is just not conducive to my
employees. I am really shocked that we Nere not noLified about Lhis and I
will go to greal strides to iust say hey, this isn't fair- I've really
sLood behind PauI Krauss and the Planning Commission for a long time and
we've ]islened to lhem. t^Je've benL over backwards ' [,le've made changes to
planning Lo make our facililies fi! and I feel really somewhat Personally
assaulted here because Ne've listened. t^le've bargained. Ne've
communicated. t^le've, I shouldn't say bargain but compromised' I mean the
urorld's a compromise but this isn'! conducive to Hhat Ne came to the
Chanhassen Lakes Industrial Park for and that's to have a clean environment
for our employees to work and lhis is not going to fly- Period- l Lhank
you for your time. t^le have a growLh comPany. We have over 1OO employees
now. t^Je're doubling annually and I hoPe you understand we want !o be a
good neighbor buL Lhis isn't risht.
-conrad: Thanks for your comments -
there a motion to close the Public
Other commen!s? Anything else? Is
hear i ng?
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
Meet i ns
Page 6
Erhart moved,
favor and the
Conr ad: Just a
comments - Uhat
Emmings seconded
motion carried.
quick comment before we open it up for Planning Commissjon
is the projected traffic count per day?
to close the public hearing- All voted in
The public hearing was closed.
lhe capacity, yes sir.
designed it for 1,OOO automobiles a day?
Dennis PaImer: 1.,,,e average approximateLy 4OO vehicles.
Conrad: And does that groN over a time period?
Dennis Pa]mer: That 4OO vehicles is our...and that 4OO vehicles is lhe
estimate for... Yes it does grow so the first couple years...
Conrad: So maximum capacity is 4OO?
Dennis Palmer; No, that's not the capacitx. The capacity is
25O per . . .
AI Iverson: Is that 1.OOO cars?
approx i mate I y-
Denni s Dalnrer :
Al Iverson: So
Dennis Palmer:
come in ever y
Ahrens;
drawing
l ocated
alreadyto what
That's
you 've
T hat 's
minutes
Lo assure that therefor their test.are no ]og jams. People will
Conrad: Joan, bre'LI star! at your end- Any comments?
Ahrens: HouJ was Chanhassen chosen for this? It seems Lo me that it r,lould -be rnore logicaL to Locate a cenler like this in an area thaL was moreeasily accessed by highways and maybe Iike closer to Eden Prairie Center orsomething like that. I know there was an extensive study where it wasmentioned ir the staff report where it was determined that the 11 siteswere going to be ]ocated strategically in places around the Twin Cities butthis doesn't seem Iike a real great site to me.
Dennis Palmer: tlell. we typically Iocate in industria] parks and Irecognize the concern of the neighbors. I hear it all Lhe time. I don'tknow how to prove to the commi.ssion that that's not the way it is. Traffic-and air pollution. It is a quiet facility. It is clean. t^le locateconvenient to large population areas. Cars exist in this area. That's whya station is located in this area. IL,s not intended to draw cars fromother areas into a community. tJe are near TH S but we avoid major highwaysto assure there are no traffic problems.
t^le don't have a lot of people out there. I mean we wiII bea lot of people into this area but locating. If this facility isin Chanhassen, it will be drawing a lot of people to this area. Wehave problems with TH 5. BiS problems and so that may be contrary -your intent is. The result may be contrar),, to what your intent is.
Dennis Palmer: [.le use Lhe Hetropolitan Council's TAZ counts which istraffic zones to locate where pockets of population, people exist. They're
Planning Cornmission
September 5, 1,990 -
Meet i ng
Page 7
fed into a computer and thefacilities where 9Oz of lhegoal is 1OOZ and that is to
immediate east of the area.
facility and also east that
Stan Krzywicki: It's righ!of. . .Hopkins border . off of
Exce.Isior.
Dennis Palmer: I can't sPeak for
happened. These facilities, Iike
more tirnes the number of vehicles
Codes r.rith respect to parking and
SLate's requirement is that we locatepeople have to drive no more ihan 5 miles.service the.folks to the west as raell as to
There are facilities ]ocated north of thiswiII draw about midpoint.
Our
the
Ahrensr l,Jhere wiIl lhey be located?
Dennis Palmer: Minnelonka, Savage and in the Bloom.ington,zRichf ield area.
Ahrens: Nhere's the MinneLonka location?
Oennis Palmer: I don't know exactly. Stan
off of HedbergL69. Pr obab I y
could help you.
Par k
the
which is right off
nearest crossroad would be
Ahrerrs: tJhat kind of area is that? I can't picture where tha! is.
Stan Krzyhicki: Cedar Lake Road.
Krauss: No it's old, tha!'s Hopkins Crossroads and Cedar Lake RoaC.
Krauss: ft's a major intersec!i^on. There's residential development. Hi.gh
densit;, re:idential development to the north and east. There's an
induslriaL park to the south. Tr-,ere's a ni.ce residential area in Hopkins
across l.linnehaha Creek further to lhe south. To the west is an operating
gr a ve.I quai)-l-y.
Ahrens: Is that down by 169 and Excelsior Blvd.?
Ahrens: okay. You know I've been through these before too. I lived
in IIlincis and my experience with them was terrible. I mean there weYe
long wails. There were always }ots of cars and frustrated drivers because
they did have Lo wait so long and that's from what I've heard from some of
the other people tonight, have experienced the same thing and f Nasn't sure
if Lhat had jus*- happened in Illinois but it sounds like that haPPens aII
over Lhe place wilh Lhese siLes. This .Iooks very sma.L] to me. You have 14
parkins spots here. You're going to have 7 employees and 1OZ of the people
who use this facility wi]I be Parking to use the information center right?
Dennis Palmer: That's an estimaLe, yes ma'am" They stop in. 5 minue
visils and lhey leave. MosL peoPle wi]l drive through.
Ahrens: tlhat happens uhen, I think the parking, I mean I haven't seen anv
of lhe sludies of r^rhich this rePort refers so I don't have any informalion
about Lhat but it Iooks too small to me. Considering what mv experience
has been in the past, Lhere's never been enough room. They're always over
crowded and there's always long Iines of cars.
your experiences, I'm sure that that
I said, are built Lo accommodate 2 or
anticipated on an average. t^le meet lhe
Lo Lhe State's guidelines.
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
l'1eet i ng
Page I
Stan Krzyr^ricki: As far as the parking is concerned, typically what we'd
have, the 3 bay staff with 1 person being a manager so you really only have4 staff people at a time. The 1O people tha! we had talked about, because
we're running 12 hour days,7 and 7 on 2 days, we aclual]y have.part limepeople working at the stations so our staffing level is 10. The people
that work in the lanes wil. I be part time people.
Ahrens: Are Lhose projects based on Lhe number of cars you anticipategoing through if it started up tomorrow? Not on 4OO cars or more. Thenyou'd have !o have more employees right?
Stan Krzywicki: No. No, that's not correct. t^lhat ue'd actually do is,well you're right. There is a mode of tesling which makes the testingfaster which is a lube posiLion test so that sLaff t^rould..,5 people plus 1station manager.
Stan Krzywicki: And
Ahrens: So you could have 7 employees.
would be the
4oO per haps ,
Lhat
have
maxLmum.
approx imately 4OO cars going throughAhren::a day':
Then you'a'
Star lii-;ywicki: The 4OO cars is the absoLute peak,
recal.I in Illinois, there were cerLain days that you
could jusl breeze through, There are 3 weeks.
NormaIly,
could go IN
you
and you
Ahrens: I don't know when Lhat Has,
SLan Krzywicki:
The lasl week is
Ahrens: And if 7OZ of those people are parking theirinformation center, that's 4O vehicles over a 12 hour
There are 3 weeks during the month LhaL are like LhaL.
when we have, urhen u,e test mosL of our vehicLes.
Ahrens; I don't know about lhat bu! if you have 7 employees and
4OO cars, Iet's say 4OO cars going through a day and I,m focusing
numbe:" because r-hat's what you anticipate in a few years. RiShL?
Dennis Palmer : Yes Ha'am.
you
on
hatre
that
Dennis Palmer; That's less than 4 an hour, yes ma,am.
Ahrens: Less than 4 an hour. I don,t know. I jusL don,t, the parking
seems, f have a real problem with that. It doesn,t seem big enough andwhat happens if you need to expand? Can you expand in this? I mean canyou expand Lhe par ki ng?
Palmer: f don't see Lhe need
can - Yes ma'am, we can.
cars, go
period.into theIs that it?
!o expand either Lanes or parking, butDenni syes we
Ahrens: I'm stil] lhinking abou! this. Why don,t you move on.
Conrad: Br ian?
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 9
Batzli: t^lhi1e we
quest ions first.
have lhe
Hor,J Iong
in charge. Jt's your
I would Iike to hear
appLicant up here, I might as well ask thoseis your contract wiLh the State?
Dennis Palrner: 7 yeays. The program starts
Batzli: Dc you guys want it addressed-r
Dennis Pa.lmer: Dr. Braslau is wilh us this evening.
what r-hat hour concentration would be. If you'd Iike
quest.iorr with him, I'nr sure he'd be haPPy to,
1991 and expires in 1998.
environmental impact of the
He's done a sludy on
to address tha!
ln
theBatzli: Have you ever conducted a sludy on
Localion of one of your tes! facilities?
Dennis Palmer: Yes. Actually we've done sLudies on t^rhat this facility,
the impac't thjs facilily will have to the communily in terms of
environment, t^Je've done studies on existing facilities i.n our oLher
states " In Ba]limore for example,.OSHA is very concerned with thepollution levils of the actual inspecLors in the facility and Lhey Placemonitors on the inspectors to determine whether .or not there's a health
hazard. Their conclusion was that it's more dangerous to waLk down the
streets of downtown Ba.Ltimore Lhan it is to Nork in the inspection
faci.Iity. Now this wasn't their official conclusion but there ulas no
har-mful effect. I mean.thaL uras a commen!. I mean that wasn't uJritlen but
I mean I'm tr-ying Lo explain how little irnPac! it really is and I don't
know how to,
Batzli: I +.hink any congregation of lraffic is going !o concenlrate the
air pcllution in that area so that although it may be urithin certainguidelines, it Ni11 .increase it in that given area and that's the concern
of the people here.
Conrad: You're
Batzli: Yeah,
quest i on .
it addressed.
Dennis Pair,er: Okay.
Dr. David Braslau: My name is Dr- David Bras]au, I'm Ptesident of David
Braslau Associates, Minneapolis. My address is, comPanv address is 1313
5Lh Street S.E. in the old Harshall u Hish School ' I Prepared a rePort
urhich is entitled Carbon Honoxide Analysis of 5 Vehicle InsPection Sites in
the Tr,rin CiLies Metro Area for System Control Inc. dated August, 1990 and
in the report I Iooked at 5 of the sites r,rhich are being proPosed including
Lhe chanhassen sile. tjha! we look at is carbon monoxide. The Pollution
Control Agency since Lhe testing site is intended to reduce carbon monoxide
emissions, lhey are very interested in knowing whether or no! the localj.on
of the site itself wiII cause problems urith carbon monoxide concentrations.
Carbon monoxide is a gas.which is proLematicaL only in high concenLraLions.
It's very locaLized and it is easily dispersed so that the primarv intent
of the vehicle inspection is to reduce overall emissions of carbon rnonoxide
so that a hot spot such as 7th and HennePin, Lake and Hennepin, Snelling
and University which are the spots where the slandards have been exceeded
in the past, that if the inspection stations. . .overall emissions bY 2o"'",
that will then bring the levels at these sites down below Lhe standard.
PIanning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
Heet i n9
Page 1O
The standard is 9 parts per million over an 8 hour period. The standard is-intended to insure that people, including infirm people are not adversely i
impacted by carbon monoxide. t^Je assume that for the carbon monoxideanalysis at the site, Ne assume that there would be a capacity of 8O carsan hour going through lhe, Lhis is the expected, actually the capacj.ty of 3is 1O5. That is absoj.ute maximum capacity but the normal expected maximum
Level that uould be going through this site in the last 5 days of lhe month
when people have to, in other words people will procrastinate for the first-3 weeks and then in the Last 5 days they feel they have to go in and sothat's uhen Lhere's a push to have their vehicles inspected. And so weIooked aL 81 cars per hour. !.le projected the 8 hour .levels to be less than-2 parts per million at receptive siLes that were about 10 meters away fromthe roadway and that was about 30 feet. So anybody that's further auay isgoing to have a lower concentration. t^le're assuming a fairly stableatmospheric conditions. tle're assuming 1 meter per second trind whichreally doesn't disperse the pollutanLs very much. So that we really didnot, at this particular site, project any significanL concentraLions ofcarbonmonoxide.IshouIdPointoutthatcarbonmonoxideisnota,iL,s
strictly a gas. The gas is pollulant. It's not a dirty pollutant Iikediesel exhaust are like particulates that come out so the projected levelswere actually quite lour. The highest levels that we projected for any site-
uras at a 4 oy 5 Iane site where because of the background level that we hadto assun'ie, the PCA requires Lhat Lre assume a certain background Level toadd onl!o the roadway concentration and the roadway concentration generally -is on r-he order of r L,/2 lo 2 parts per mi]lion. The background level thaL
ure estimated is about 1 parr- per million so we're talking about at the most3 parts per mi))jon in:he area which is about 1,/3 of an I hour standard.
Now I don't know, I'd be happy to answer some specific questions on this :but r.re cion't, at any of Lhe sitee, project that the levels will be abcvethe standards. 1n fact in Chanhassen we,re looking at, because we onlyhave 3Ianes, we're looking at about 3oz of the 8 hour standard even uriththe worse case tr-aff ic. Thank you
Batzli: Paul , could you expl.ain t.o mepermitted use in an IOP area?
why this type of a use should be a
Krauss: Ne Looked at this from several different vieh,poinls. Firet of aIIwe note that this is a StaLe program. They,re under a State contractThere's only one of these. It's almost a quasi-public utility for, if you
u,ant to view it that way. Rightly or wrongly they've selecLed Chanhassenas a receptor site based on their analysis and we Looked at rhere else this_could go in the community and decided that a TH 5 location was not optimal.That we would rather keep that traffic on a roadway that was designed forit which Park Drive uas and hopefully in an area where it could fit invisually and we think that this uras designed to do that. tJe note thatthere are some fairly unusual uses that could 9o in that area. For exampletruck transfer terminal is aIlowab]e by conditional use permit and in factue did have a terminar developer who was looking to develop the site justnorth of there last farr. t^le tried to discourage that and in fact did sobut that is all.ourable under conditional use and that is of course muchheavier !raffic with diesel. trucks. t,e,re proposing that Lhis thing belocated in an area that we think is suitable for it. Ue think it wasdesigned appropriately. As a State operated facility and the ordinancechange is worded so that this onlv applies to state contracted facilities.It's a one off type of project. It's basically a somewhat tough one to
Plannins Commission
Seplernber 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 11
Iocate. t^Je felt that this proposal though was reasonable given theguidelines that have been established. One of lhe concerns we had was urhat
happens to this site if 8 years hence Lhis contractor loses the contract
and sornebody else gets lhe bid. I believe there were two people bidding on
the contract originally. The way we've uorded the ordinance is if that
happens, it's their problem. That investment may well be ]ost because the
only thing that is aIlowable in that building is a State contracted vehic.l.e
testing facility. So ure tried Lo cover our bases in that regard !oo. So
dgain I guess a.l-l lhings being considered, ue felt it was a fairly
reasonable site. It could be, well we had apProved the Rome office
buiLdins which was approved on the corner. Has not been built to date-
This sile was originally conceptually approved or reviewed a! any rate for
a 17,oco square foot office buildi.ng which this t^tould rePlace and we felt
that the Rome site plan could be modified to accommodale it,
Batzli: Has he agreed to withdraw the site
us and
plan?
Kr alrss ;
and can
He has in conversati.ons wilh
address that specifically.
I believe he's here Lonighl
Conraci : Do you want to speak Roman?
Roman Roos: This site plan review Process, sLaff did advise me of tha|-
Iast weel.: ani in view of what we're trying to get accomplished, I have
accepted and tclC staff lhat we would go ahead and resubmit a sma.Ller
building cn that partjcular site. There's about 2.25 acres Left. f have a
user in mind and ure are in lhe process of redrawing Lhe site PIan itself
and Lhe parking for same. I have heard a lo! of conversation this evening
and I guess I feel both sides of it because m also in the park- I think,
ancl I have *,o go back qujLe a Hays, f slarled working with Systems Control
before Chanhassen uas even selected as a site and I had the oPporLuniLy to
look at quite a few of lhe differenl Projecls that they have now
accomplished throughout the United States and I guess if we could have told
the fulure as to uJhat is going to be required in the State of Minnesota, or
in this case in Chanhassen, r,re might have been able to aCdress tha! issue.
But when I look aL lhe faciliLies they've done Lo date, and I'm talking
abcut the architectural slyles, I have Lo sav that in the Chanhassen area
right nor^r, kncwing how slaff and Council feel about TH 5, the corridor, and
looking at the transportalion system. Looking at the traffic control if
you will on CR 17. Stop Iight controlled intersection there and I'm sure
aII of this is coming out in Dr. Braslau's report, and iL is mv siLe. Tha"'
is true. I,m very concerned about wha! I put next door Lo !ha! particular
faciliLy. I think if it's done in the context that I've been led to
believe over the .Las! 6 months, that you can make it a very desireable site
for another type of offi.ce building. It has to be controlled. That is the
Planning Commission's resPonsibility. Their charge if vou wilI to City
HaII, to Council, and I think ulith the proper controls from staff, I think
Lhis can be done. It's not, as far as PHT and Murphy Machine across the
street and my building which is right behind it, ves I had concern "
thousht a ]ot abouL that. There's iust not lhe economics on i!. As
said, I have a ?.25 acYe Parce1 left next to it. Believe me I'm vile
concernecl about tha! bu! I think it will work if it's held in the geise and
the different views that I've seen in the other states that System Control
'has accomplished in the Past. I'm oPen for anv questions you might have.
And yes I did ask for a resubmittal.
f 'veI
Ty
PIanni ng Commiss ion
September 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 12
Ba:zli: Do you want me to comment on Lhe aniendment to the zoning
ordinance?
Batzli: If we get that far I think we should broaden the paragraph (c). Nogas or other flammable or parts are sold or stored on the site. I'd alsolike to take a Look at making it potentially a conditional use rather thana permitteC use. If we think that they should belong in the IOP, I guess
looking at hrhat IOP is supposed to be, I don'L rea]ly view something thatgeneraies a lo! of traffic as something Lhat should belong in therel
tlhether it's 4OO cars a day or 8OO cars a day. I was actually surprlseci to
see as a conciitional use Lhe truck transfer use as a conditional use.
Conrad i Sure.
Conrad: Annette.
Dennis Palrner: tie dcn't. . .
Eilson: Let's see. I don't mind having Chanhassen be the site for atesLins facility anci I really doubt with so many drive up and thinds all
arounci thert- it's going to be reaily a po.L.Lutant to neighbors and thingsli.ke t-hat. I'm concerned about a couple things. One, .this thins could betemporary. 7-A years you know. t^Jhat do they do with them? I mean do you
heve a history of ever closing one and what do they turn into?
Ellson: So changes are it pretty much would stay?
Dennis PaLmer: Like I say, Lhe building is mosLly computers. t^liLhoutthose cornputers, the value of the building is minimal
EIlson: Bu! you know it is a brick construction. FairIy substantial andyet there is a potential of it being temporary as far as having thecontract renewed or u,hatever and I see the nice Chanhassen saying weIIlet's work a way of making this building work for something else somedaylater down Lhe road and r was wondering if it'd never had been done before.-tlhat it could possibl.y become and it really seems like we shourd be lookingaL it short range as well as long range. t^lhen I look at it short range Ithink it riight not even be this in 9 years. Then what could it potentially-be or have them ever become is one of my concerns.
Krauss: tJeII I did discuss that with the applicants on occasion because fhad the same concern when I found out the duration of the contract. Butyou know it's clear to me as a sLaff person interpretling the ordinance,the only thing iL can become is what's permitted or conditional in theordinance. It can'! become a Hardee's or a gas sLation because we don'tallow those Lhi.ngs in there. If there is an economic Ioss to be absoibedbecause the building is unbuyable as anyLhing else, that's the developer'sproblem.
E.Ilson: And what sorts of ;-hings? Do they become dr j.ve-up banks or whatkind of thinss do they do?
Denrris PaLnrer: Cenerally, I think lhat this program and I,d ask Slan...fthirrk the S+-ate doee have the option Lo manage it themselves.
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
Meet i n9
Page 13
Ellson: Okay, and therr the long range concern I would have is the traffic
and f in not convinced as lo why you chose this location out of convenienceyet you don't want it i n a ]ocation that we normal Iy have conr,,,e::-ience typeof facilities. Both Paul as welL as the applicant talked about that. Youdidn't want the same kind of place that we'd har,,e h,j.th convenj.ence center
or a Hardee's or somelhins Like tha! Nhich are builL, as far as lraffic forquick in and out yet this one is going to be a quick in and out just like a
convenience store or just like a drive up bank so why aren't we thinking ofputting i! where Lhose other kinds of places would be? can you shed some
light on that?
Krauss: Yeah. You know I also work with the HRA and those other siles aretypicaLly in our central business district. Our cenlral business district
has a precious Iittle supply of land. Recently we discussed thepossibility of a Hardee's behind the Amoco station and there Nas a great
deal of concern as to whelher or not that was an appropriate sile for a
h.igh vo.Iurne use. Arguably, squandering a few suiLable high volume sites
you have for a rrehic,le testing slation which offers services once a year l--o
pe:ple i: "-he cornrnuniLy instead of once a week as a fast food restau)'ant
might do, night be a waste of t-hat sile. i would hat,e concerns iocating i!
nexi tc i'{ccona],i's f or that reason or in lhe t{arket Square shopping center
for thal reason. Possibly Lhose sites are suitable elsewhere. I wculd
think thaL the ciiy would be bes*. served though by protecting those siLes.
ElIson: Yeah, I can understand the standPoinL from our resources but if
resources aside, I guess I'm thinking there are a Iot more logical places
of quick in and out Lhat peoPle could Potentially see from a rna jor road
and...tesling ground or whatever - f'm taking it from Lhe fact that they're
testing year round right? You don't just have seasons of testing.
Dennis Palmer: There's a 10 rnonth testing Period. I understand that most
veh.icles are not regisLered i.n January or February. If you buy a new car
it's regist-ered in those months but then Lhey'lI assign you a sticker for
another rnonth. The...you need Lhe inspectj.on f acj.Iity to run the test.
Given Lhat, f-here would be very liLtle traffic thru Januarv and February.
The facility is based on operation of 10 months but it wi]l be open 12.
EIIson: I don't think it's as convenient in that IoP. I guess I could see
it more in a business fringe or something Like that or like I said, more of
a convenience center type location. And I guess I can't prejudice il by
knor,ring that there's only like 7 sites lefL and f'm probablv sure it's a
lot more expensive for an aPPlicant to go into a Place there than it is
here but I don't think 952 of the PeoPle are going to be going lhere are
going to know that it's easy to get to. SO I guess I don't see it in the
IOP.
Conrad: Steve.
Ernmi ngs: I think we finally found something that belongs in business -
fringe. Nc, I don't mean that. Let's see' As far as where this might
in our community, when you look at what the IOP is, this doesn't quile
to fit in a way. And yet on the oLher hand, I can't imagine where else
would go. I cion't think it belongs in a commercial area in the central
business district or anything Iike that but I guess I've come around to
thinking Lhat maybe the IOP is Lhe right place for it if iL's go.ing to
go
seemir
go
Planning Commission
September a, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 14
somewhere. I've got a few questj.ons here. Tel] me LhaL thison page 3 where it says that Lhe rooftop equipment extends 33the roof.
is a
fee t.
mistake
above
Krauss: I nc hes -
Emmings: That makes me happy, TelI me too, iL says the P1anning
Commission does not have to take action on the subdivision request as it isa metes and bounds subdivision. I! will be acted on by Lhe City Counci].
Maybe I uras just unaware of that. Is that the way we've always done those?
Krauss:
done it.Yes. It's a litt]e bit unusual procedure but lhat's the way we've
Okay, so if we're going into lots and
and biocks or- something, we do it- -
blocks, if the subdivisi.onEmmings:
into Iots
Krauss: You'll have Lo do preliminary pl^at.
Emmings: i'i ne . Oir the
Dennis PaLmer:
powereci .
eievar-ior';s it shows +-here are 3 garage docrs andlhe othe;- ti,;o, !^ihy is t.hat?
Dennis PaImer: I-ha*,'s to accommodate oversized vehicles -
Er^nrrings: Then I'rr not clear on what, iL r,,Jas sort of rny understanding thatr,re're hl'.ri ng mostiy. ca:-s in here and pi.ck-up trucks.
Dennis Pa.Imer: I"-'s Vehicles under 8,500 gross t,ehici"e weight. Therebe scr.: vehiclel with refrigeration, air conditioners or something ont,hat can't- f it ! n t-he 10 f oot door- - Glass irucks. We always had cne+L-! ,, -
Batzli: So for instance there are slep vans and construction boxedthings Iike tha: are going to be r,unning Lhrough here as well?
r,rl L l-
la ne _
t-r uc ks ,
If lhey're under 8,sOC gross vehicle weighL and Lhey,re gas
Emmings: t^Jhen r read this r didn't have any strong feelings abou! it buL rguess the Lhing Lhat's bothering me right now is primarily the commenLsr.re've heard that people that have had experience r^rith Lhese stations inother places have said that traffic tends Lo back up and cars sit for longperiod of time and tha! bothers me a ]ot r guess. rf r could be satisfiedthat didn't happen, I think I,d support the ptan and frankly I think it,simportanl enough that it ought Lo be tabled and *e ough! !o find out r.;hatthe experience has been in other places or else that ought Lo be found outbelween us and the citv council or something because a iot of cars backedup there are sitting for very long. I mean if cars are coming in andgetting out in 2 rninutes, I,m not too much bothered by it really. BuL ifthey're sitting there backed up, then r think that's different so Lhat's apiece of inforrnation that I'd like !o have before I'd really feel
comf o:'table voting on t.his.
-Conr ad : Tim,
Planning Commission
Septem5er 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 15
lhere's no conflict wj.th having a gas station in +.he
ir your minci as a professional planner, if I can use
Erhart: Well,I uas kind of exciLed abouL this before I came in her.e
tonight. Hor,J convenient lhis would be for me just Lo drive across the
street to get my trehicle tested eve)-y year. However, the more I listen Loit, r u:as really surprised that anybody have negative comments frorn the
neighbors. I'm glad you came in but I think iL brings sorne issues to iight
thaL I guess I hadn't thcught about. Fundamentally, I guess there's somequestions I had to kind of decide lhe issue. So I'11 start out wilh why
isn't, can you shed some Iight on this other use that we do permit thal's
most Iike a gas station. tlhen you're dealing with reLail people and
people have a requirement to do someLhing with their cars. They go in and
take lhe 2 minutes, about the same Lime it lakes to filL up. The frequency
of traffic on the average would be about 1to 2 cars a minute and more cars
at peak time. The question then is, why don'! we a]Iow gas stations in the
IOP d isLr ict.
E:'ha r L
office
:, c,\
par k
i ndust r ralthaL Ler- !n?
Kraussi If you had an induslrial park that's large enough where vou're
se.l-f gererating demand, Iike an OPus II sort of siLuation, I think it's
very reasonab.le !o locale specific facili!ies tailored for lhaL Population'
otrrrs II has 12,OCO people working there every day and there's People lhat
live there. l.Je don'L have anvthing like that, t,le have 5,ooc employees in
the city as of the count Lhat Sharmin comPleled IasL week, which is a
soodly number but lhey can adequately be served bv our central business
disl:-ic', ar:d I i:hink cur business communiLy would prefer' lhat lhev be
serviced t here .
Erhart: So you're saying you
people in the induslriaL park
Krauss: Yeah . t^lhat it boi 1s
appropr iate in our conLext.
Erhart: I didn't understand.
which is the fringe commercial
would expect a gas station !o serve the
as opposed Lo outsiders coming in?
down to is I don't think i!'s reaIIY
Take a look at lhe genera] business dislrict
development. t^lhat's the other one?
Krauss: Highway busi ness .
Er har- t : t,lhatgas stat ions?
was lhe reason why this use couldn't be in there along with
Krauss: WelI, there's no! a specific use bu! if you Iook a! where those
districts lay in our community, lhey're in and around the central business
district and the available sites are Very limiled. Thev oftentimes have
exposu]'e to residential neighborhoods. As you recalI, McDonald's itself
Krauss: I don'! know Lhat I could answer that effectivelv. The IoP
disLr j.ct predaLes me. I know there was some desire at points in the past
to offer services Lhat would be utilizable by residents of the industrialpark s,rch as rcstaurants, that sort of thing. Chanhassen has always been
rather restrictive on where gas stations locale. In fact ordinance
amencJr.renLs e:ere approved Iast year that made it even more restrictive uJith
an eye tourards limiting the number of intersections Lhere found that. So
I'm afr-aid I cion't have any specific information for you.
Planning Coinmission
September 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 16
Nas very controversial when it first came in, That site next to HcDonald,s-i.s preeunably one of the possibilities he)'e. It's available. It's on the
nrarket I believe. It would presumably generate lower traffic levels aswe've he.:r'd tonight than HcDonald's would. The other sites might be theones that we corrsidered for Hardee's or the Burdick property on 78thStreet. AlI of Lhose a].e areas that the City has spent a great deal oftime, effort and money in gelting it to coalescent to a real centralbusinessdis!rictofferingservicesneededbythecommunityonadai]yof
weekly basis. I'm not sure lhat this fits the bil].
Erhart; ft's required by the community isn't it?
Krauss: Once a year.
Erhart: Kind of Like a denti.st. You should go more often but i! conn
ciol.j;r to once a yea]' . I don't know. I would think that, I would thing:-eat ]ocation would be next !o Gary BrouJn's station and then Gary cc,over ani recruit business. Going righ.- out Lhe door. The businesshighway. Fast focd restaurants. Autonlotive service stations. Do Hea service station or an auto repair station in the business park now?
e=ka
uld gi,
hav e
Krauss: There's oneauto repair use that
background on that?
there by a conditional use
have in the business park,
permit. Jo Ann, the
do you have the
in
t,Je
Olsen: It was before me. The radiator store?
Erhart: Auto Un I i rn i. ted?
Dennis Pal.mer: That's a different testing entirely, That,sparticulate matter. Dieset,s create dust particulate. We,refor the testing resources
a test fornot equipped
Erhart: Do thev test di.esels now someplace? rs there a,..to lest dieseLs?
Dennis PaImer: Yes, they do. They're typically tested at the factory.Host of the pollution from the diesel is inside the particulaLe or...andnitrous oxide is very difficult to do any repairs to.
Olsen: : don't know
-Russ Hurphyr That service center or whatever you want to call it is...building. They have two automotive places in there and the othertenants in the building can't even park there... you're going to mix 4OOcars r,rith semi trailers trying to manuever in here. I
Erhart: The other concern r have with the thing as h,e go along here is acouP1eandI'mnotsure!youknowit'ssortofdescribedasapIacewherecars come i.n and go through their 2 minutes and leave and at 1OZ, that;sonlv 4 cars trill be parked Lhere so rve calculated that out and that's nota problem but you know, is somebody going to want to come arong and expand -the program to include diesels at some time? How do we knou,? Isn't itnatural? It's welL gee, you've got your faciliLy. The State's sot acontract r+ith vou. rt would be natural to incrude that testing too.
Planning Commission
Septerrber 5, 7990 -
Heeting
Page 17
Erhart: Do you have any facilities lhat tesL diesels anyPlace that you
curn? AII gas? I guess if we proceed wiLh recommending aPProval on this,
and I slill haven't decided so I'm having a hard time but I Lhink there's
some olher requirements we should add in here. .Number one, I think we
should strengLhen both the conditions here and the ordinance to say thal
there is no outside storage of material or waste materials or anything else
at any time, I Lhink we ought !o specifically prohibit lesting for diese]
powereC vehicles and I think we ought to draw, perhaPs tle could draw on the
Iine how big of vehicles we wanL coming in here. It's one Lhing hat'ing
some cal-s parked next to us in a line but then ure have to have trucks and
industrial t:-ucks t.hat are allowed, then I think there's sorne very rea)-
Iegitimate concerns on the behalf of the peoPle from PMT so I guess I
personally lhink we ought to ]ook at cutLing the line someplace. Vans or
something where they're relatively quiet. Again, I think we've alreaciv got
permit.ted in there no retail sales, The other thing is r-hat this is, as re
poin*-ei out hefore, this is under a 7 yea( or 10 year conLract, I'm no!
sure r.:hich. Uhat happens at the end of thaL period? I can see visions of
that gas sLalion down on TH 5 sitting there empty for many years after it
lr.as :lbarcl.ned and lhey realLy become uns.ightly Lhen. I would lhi:rk that
since this t-hins is under contract and there's noL that rnuch investrnent in
+-!-re L,ui.Id.ing, that if this facility is nc+' used for 1 vear, r-hat perhaps
maybe w: sho::I: :-equire in Lhe conditional use that i!'s dismantled and the
lot h'e reLurned !o it's natural sLate or somelhing. l think this is a
whoie neiL ar-ea an,j i think those IaHs are going to be changed and updated
rapicily ancj I think with Lhe lack of inr.,estrnent in f his f acilitv, I Lhink
we ought to be protecting ourselves from a sudden change. end I agree r.rith
Br j.an's or sc,meone stated this should, if we're going !o go aheaci and make
an ordinance change, it ought to be a conditional use as oPposed to a
permi+-teci use. So I have sorne concerns wilh this. I maybe agj-ee with
Steve. Haybe He need to get a little bit more information. I guess my
feeling is in general, again I wasn't oPposed to it but when you har."e an
area and yor.r: neighbors come in and obiect to a change of use in it, I
think there's a lot of meani.ng to lhaL and so I'm real concerned about i!
so I9ues3 I'II make nny decision when someone makes a moLion.
conracl : So you're waivering? You could go either way?
Erhart; Yes.
conradr I don'i know that I'rn going to be able to Persuade anybodv orre way
or another. Definitely I have no Problem with it being located in
chanhassen, I think it's great that this site r,rould be here. I don't have
any problem with pollution. I!'s imProving pollution. I think it's
terrific agairr . The Pollution asPect just doesn't ring with me at all.
It's ir:iproving the Problem. There's no difference betuleen cars going
i.nto HcDonald's and cars going into this site. I iust have no Problem wiLh
that whatsoever. The question in mv mind is tlhere it's located in
chanhassen and which is wha! I think everybody has been sor! of hammering
on here . I-lishHay business r"ithout a doubt seems aPPropr iate f or rne .
lOO,Oco cars a year seems like a highwav business type of use and lhat's
sort of wha! i*,,s designed to lake. Industrial park, it gets marginal and
I th.ink we't,e gone lhrough lhose exerci.ses of is it fhe right use. I think
PauI's commenls are trving to, he's trying to find a siLe that's'appropriate f or if-. I think the bollom line for me righL now is it's a nei^r
use. IL's a use surprising the neighbors and Tim, as you said, Lhose neul
Planning Cornmission
September 5, f99O -
Meet i n9
Page 18
uses have to be reviewed carefully because neighbors kind of look at thezoning to see u,,hat's permitted. I don't lhink it's a permitted use. Ithink it has io be a condi.tional use which means sLandards. So my basicfeeling righl now is to lable it and to have staff take a look at thestandards that wculd be applicable based on problems from othercommunities. I'd be very concerned if somebody said if Lhe traffic is
backed up 3 and 4 deep, as a resident or as a neighbor business, I don'tthink that's appropriate. That's not what they,re doing. And I also hearthat these are not scheduled and that bothers me, I prefer to havescheduled maintenance uhere we have a day, an hour, ulhatever and theyprobably looked at thaL and found it's pracLically impossible but in mymind I think ue need the sLandards to drive this thing. I don,t have aproblem being a permitted use in highway business. I do have a problemwith it beins a pe:-rnitt-ed use in an j.ndustrial and therefore urould
recommend that we search it out. The governing or the methods of allouingit as a conditional and also having staff revieu any kind of controls that
Chanhassen woulcl like to place on it. I had one other question r,rith thestaff report and it. saicj on page 5, under grading and drainage. TheaFFl:cant is p:'opos!.:rg to use Type I silt fence for erosion control +-o thesoutheast. Is tha: ciuring construction? Those are my comments. If
somebody r.rould li ke tc make a motion.
Emr,,ings: I'm going !o move Lh6t we table Lhe application to allotr staff todo two things. One is to acquire information from other communities thathave these facilities to find out r^,hat their experience has been. Andseconcily, and it's rel^ated, Lo a]]ow staff Lime once they've had a chanceto contacr- these cornmunities, to develop some standards for this use as acondi tional use .
Conrad: fs there a
Erhart: I'II second
seco nd?
it.
Conrad: DiscrJssion .
Erhart: Another lhing that I wanted to
assume there's some ot.her facil'ities in next time this comes up, ICities area right?
have Lhethe Twin
Dennis Palmer: WelLfaci I ities uriII open
not in operation.
January 1st.
Erhart: Oh, alright. So there isn't any addresses that we
Ellson: 8ut Joan can give you an IIIinois address.
Erhart: There's no testing stations in the Twin Cities that
a nybody?
could go visi+,?
is or"rned by
Ellson: It's no! required yet. I think we should be able to do this
beLureen now and going to City Council. I don,t know that it needs to betabled and come back.
Emmings: Not if we're going to establish standards.
The program r.riII begin, all
Planning Commission
Sept eirrl,er 5 , 199O -
Meeti ng
Page 19
want standards, we should take a look at i*,. ff your
to allow it, then you're right. Any other discussion?
or
your motion considering it to be a permitted
should i! be conditional use in any distric!
Conraci:
postur e
If
!s
we
nct
Batzl i : Is part
highway bus i ness
Iocated in?
use in thethat it's
Emn:ings: I guess afler ]ooking a!
it does seem appropr iate to the BH
this I
and if
agree wiLh Ladd's comments that
Batzli: l,JouIdn't
was locateci?
you raLher have these standards apply nc matter where it
conrad: Yeah, i! should probably be conditional in both.
Batzli: I suess I'd like information on, I kepL on thinking lhat this
going to be preity much lirnited Lo common folks, car traffic but 8,5oogross vehicle weight, if that's the correct number, might be a Iot of
differerrt construction Lype delivery vehicles and things like that as
I guess I'd like to knoul frorn staff, because I don't have a clear idea
what ki nd of vehicies we're tal ki n9 abou! anyrnore I guess, l.lhat ki rrd
vehicle: are Eoing +-o be going through this facility.
tJ3 S
weIl.
of
of
E11i.r! ns:ls: Yeah. Ancj that's particularly important if :*.'s 9c,ing t.c: L,e dcwrr
in the IOP.
Betzli: tle.l I maybe, maybe not but the interesting Lhing is, there's going
to be 4o0 trips maximum someday and that's Lrue. If you do have a IoL of
larger vehicles going Lhrough there it misht but if this is going to be apermitl,e.l us€, r actually think it changes the ref Iection of whar, I
consider an IOP district because I guess I didn't consider a use like that
generatin3 t.hat kincj of traffic Lo be appropriate before tonight and I
don't know if I stil1 do but.
Conrad: That's lough because a lot
a! your industrial users, they have
many !raffic counts.
of your induslrial , if
2-3 shifts and they're
you take a
gener at i ng
look
that
Enrmings: But you know Lhey're a lot bigger Ladd. I guess I was lhinking
abouL that too. Like Rosemount, they've got, if they have 1,OOO emPloyees
and they do don't they? So they're generating that kind of traffic but-
it's also a how many acre site
Conracl : But what does that have to do with i!?
Emminss: tell I think it might have a lot to do t.,ith iL. I don't knou.
was first lhinking gee, that's ]ess than Rosemount and then I'm thinking
i^ro',r, that's a big site and Lhis is iust a little one. I Lhink mavbe the
impact is a ]ot more.
Conrad: If you put a lot of little uses like that together, then you mav
have some impacts.
Krauss: If I rnay,
precedence sett i ng
i. nto the question of
viewed it it's not .
!hat geLs
and as we
whether or not
You're talking
this
abouL an
Planning Commiss ion
Seplember 5, 1990 -
l',1eet i ng
Fage 20
one off type of licensed
new Staf-e law.
used through Lhe State of Hinnesota to satisfy
Batzli: But you know safety inspections might be next. A federalinspection might be next. You know it might not be a one type deal .
Conr ad :
but then
See t hat
the feds
would worry
can dictate now
soo n iil
4OO cars-s lhere.
rne. tJhat we're saying right
some other thi.ngs and pretty
Emm i ngs :
for esee .
The proof is thal we didn'L foresee this one so I guess we can't
ConracJ: lJell you know this type of'use has to be, it has to have a place.tle're trying to find a place for it, That happens to be Roman's property, -..l
that's fine but you know, it's trying !o sort it in ]ogicalJ.y where it's Ibes+- serve,C i n Cha nhassen .
Batzii: I don't know that anybody on the Commission, and I,m kind of "1
speaking broadly here, is against having lhis type of facility and even I
poter,tialLy !n ChanhaEsen somewhere. The question is wheLher it belongswhere they're proposins I think. I don't know if you feel that way. There"'lis a coicerrr , I mean we are drawing a lot of traffic into the area on roads ithat are already congested and ue've gone over lhat time and time again.In the comprehensive plan, that TH 5's already busy, well you've sot 4OO -!more cars a day here. Small maLter on a big ship maybe but hey, it,s 4OO Imore !riPS.
Conr a ci : l'1aybe we should stop development.
isn't development.
is it?
Batz L i : This
Conrad: Uha t
Ahrens:
Batzli:
El lson:
Conrad:
Er hart :
IL's a semi-quasi public use.
That's developrnen!.
But 4OO cars could come just easily with a
Absolutely.
You know the flip side of that whole thins.
new office building.
tJe're worryi ng
also allow as a
aboutsome 8,5OO pound trucks here and on the other hand weconditional use concrete mixing.
Batzli: Yeah, I saw that and the transfer terminal .
Erhar!: S,o, the fact is it exists
f ir;n tha'- has trucks, I don't knowknoi.,;? They ha,ve !rucks there aLl
Audierice: . ,Ii, 's construction -
'Batzli: But I mean are they going
next !o this building
uJhat they do in that
Lhe time,
LS SOme
bui ldi ng .
kind
Do
ofa
you
in and out? Generating a couple hundred_
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
Heet i ng
Page 2t
Audi.ence:
goL a lot
conrad: Again, I don't see iL
about Lhe fulure. I'm worriedstuff goes in there.
big problem today. I'mtraffic. I'm uror r i ed
reaIly norr ied
about {.lhat other
tlel], they're out in the morning and back at nighi. But you've
of . . .
Erhartr On one hand.we'd aLl like to have it to be some real prisli.ne
industrial, office industrial park like Baker Park you know but it's notthere. Pl'4T's got a nice building. l"le have a nice building but then risht
across from us is a service staLion. Two service stations and acontractor's yard ulith a potential concrete mixing planL so I don't know.This is a tsough one. I don't. see it as a big problem but"
as a
about
Lrhart: I he
wishy washy.
one thing I said f'd never do as a Planning Commissioner is be
Conrad: The motion has been made and seconded to table this and for staff
review" Is there any more discussion?
conrad: And your reasons Annette?
Ellson; I think that it shouldn't be in the industrial office park and noi
that they shouldn't be looking inLo that but I think thev could have Iooked
into the typical neighbors and what PeoPIe's reactions are by the time it
goL to City Council. And I think the other districts are better for it.
conradr PauI, have we given you enough direclion in
Iike to see when this comes back?
Lerms of what we 'd
Krauss: t^lell I think ute have enough direction to come back and 9e! you the
informaLion you're seeking. t^lhaL's not clear Lo me is if fundamentally
they come back in, Iet's say we come uP with revised ordinance standards.
It's processed as a CUP, is it still going to be obiectionable from the
nature of the fac! that it's on lhis site in the IoP district? If it is,
I think thaL the applicant should be aware of LhaL so Lhev don't uraste
their time on it.
Conrad: I think there's
something that could be
Lherefore I don't think
right now to say if aII
it? t^le don't know bu!
say it is a conditional
not comfortable that Ne
then it won't be turned
not toying wilh people.
be done.
a lot of swing - !.le're balancing right now and
a condition migh! satisfy me Lo sav ves. And
there's anyway to read the Planning Commission
the conditions are right, are ute going to vote for
I think it's one of those things where ute have to
use. tlhat are those standards and if tre're stilI
have control with those standards in that dj'strict,
down. It's not a waste of somebodv's time ' l^le're
tJe're taking a good look at what we think should
Emmings moved, Erhart seconded to table action on the Vehicle InsPection
Station for Jerry Perkins of Pope Associations for further study of other
existing uses and directing staff to study this aPPlication as a
conditional use permit - AII voted in favor except Annette EIlson uho
opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1-
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
l*leet i ng
Page 22
Conrad: Okay, Might this come back when Paul?
Krauss: tlell it seems to be your intent to wherever it goes toa conditional use permit urhich requires publication so it could
the next meeting. I would anticipate 4 weeks from today.
Emmi nss: That's true
continue it?
if we just ]eave the public hearing open. Just
Process asnot be at
Krauss: [^le have a pub]ication requirementthat we've satisfied that by posting it as
Conrad; Everybody comfortabLe with !hat?
Conrad: Sorry for the delay buL I thinkdefinitely make it on the agenda as soon
coming in- You had a commen!?
for the CUP's and I'm not surea rezoni ng -
Emmings: f'm comfortable ]etting him worry about it.
that's what
as we can,
we have to do
Thank you aII tje'IIfor
AI Iverson: f wasthis to show up or
Co nr ad : [,Je have n ' t
eveYy 2 h,eeks. Notpublished.
There's no
meet i ng .
cur l-ous .the ne xt
date given for the next place for
r ight now . We're
next meeLing. The
not next meeLing.after. It wiII be
gu ess r. ng
meet i ng
t,ie meet
Krauss: We']I renotify.
Conrad: Neighbors
AI Iverson: t^le did
warning aboul this
will be communicated to.
not receive Lhe previous. I didn't have very much
meeLi ng .
out to everybody?
Mr. Iverson talked to me about it last week.
Conrad: Not i ce go
AndKrauss: Yes.
Al Iverson:Last when?
Krauss: Last wee k -
AI fverson: For me it was.."7PauI.. ,tell us earlier.days isn't much noLice and I don't know r.rhy
Krauss: The fact of Lhe matter is, we,re not clairvoyan!. tJewhen these things are going to come up and we notify people onthat we've been adhering to for years which gives them about ahalf tb 2 weeks notice.
don't knowthe schedule_
week and a
Krauss: And PauI , if I could interject. If you could geL some idea on
what the truck traffic would be, it would help me. A car a minute isn't so-
bad but if you're talking about a lot of lrucks, what kind of traffic are
we tal ki ng about here?
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
Meeti ng
Page 23
Public Present:
Na me Addr ess
Eugene Strobel
Sandra Re i tsmaLarry Per kins
Randy Patz ke
Jo Ann
called
Olsen presented the staff report
the public hearing to order.
on this item. Chairman Conrad
conrad: Go ahead .
Sandra Reitsma: Hello. My name is Sandra Reitsma. I'm DirecLor of Human
Resources at Redmond Products and I iust had a few comments after looking
through the staff rePort. tJhat I'd like lo do' vou've gotten a little bit
of history of our grou,th at Redmond Products and I'd like to address some
of the demographics of our work force in that growth. In 3 years we have
PUBLIC HEARING:
SITE PLAN AI.IEND].IENT FOR EXPANSION OF THE PARKING LOT RESULTING IN VARIANCE
TO THE SETBACK REOUIREHENTS IN PROPERTY ZONED IOP. INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK
AND LOCATED AT 18930 I.IEST 78TH STREET. REDHOND PRODUCTS.
Redmond Products
Redmond Pr oducts
Redmond Products
Redmond Products
Eugene Strobel: My name is Eugene Strobel . I'm the engineering manager
with Redmond Products. tJhat we're proposing to do is increase the parking
from 175 parking spaces Lo 279. This is to meet the current needs and some
future needs that we're look.ing at for the site. A few thi.ngs that were
mentioned in the staff report that I'd Iike to clarify. One, u,e are asking
for a v:riance for the percent of impervious paved area and that's
increasing it from 7oz La 792. HotJever, this is based on the adjusted
square footage of the site. It doesn't take into consideration the entire
site which extends beyond the frontage road. And if you incorPorate the 1
acre plus property that sils south of the frontage road, that would droP
that percenLage down below 7OZ. Secondly, the berm on the south edge of
the property that r.Je're cutting inlo, we wiII not change the height of that
berm. What r^re're doing is terracing the north side of the berm which is
the building side so the view from TH 5 will be as it is now. The height
won't change, We should not make the parking lot more visible. [,le are
proposing to move the entrance, the easterly entrance to the ProPerty
further east and the center line of the driver,rav would be 40 feet from the
property Iine. Our adjacent neighbor, his entrance is verv close to his
propel-ty li.ne so there is a close Proximity. However' I'd Iike to point
out that this is 1of 3 entrances to our site' It's not for truck traffic.
It's a secondary entrance Lo the employee vehicle car Parking and where we
expect traffic in and out of the parking lot would be during shift change
or at the start and close of the business day so tle don't feel that that
would represenL a hazard to other traffic on the adjacent ProPerty. Also'
I'd like to point out that Lhe.variances that we're asking for are not
temporary as indicaLed in the rePort. [.,e're not looking for a short term
solution to a problem that we have currently. So the amendments to' if it
should be approved, of Putting it back into original condition in 3 years
is not something lhat we're looking for. tle have other sPokesmen from
Redmond Products to talk about other issues-
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 24
Larry Perkins: I'm Larry Perkins, the Chief Operating Officer at Redmond. -I've been here 5 months and probably should take the blame for some of thechanges in the strategic planning at Redmond. As most of you know we had asite plan and some things Lhat tJe h,ere going Lo do, in fact starting this
summer out, on a site. I think it's a 54 acre site out in your industrialpark. After coming to Redmond I caused us to do some strategic looking
down tlre road 5 to 7 years as to just where we would be in sales and Hhere
b,e might want to be located !o manufacture those jtems. Basica]Iy what it -amount-s to is that's Loo large of a facility that Ne had planned, If tre,regoing to get thaL large, we would have to ]ook at all kinds of olher issuesincluding siles, other states and that sort of thing. t^le Iike it very muchhere and u,c,u]d Iike to stay in Chanhassen. t,e'd Iike to develop this site a-Iittle bit more so that ure can maximize the possibilities on this site and
h,,e lhink that it has considerable opportunity to us and also to the City ofchanhassen. By the way r should mention r Nas a city councilman myself and-put 3 years in that position so I can appreciate some of the things thatyou folks have to 9o through and some of the things you have to u,restlewith. It's not easy all the time, We want a ]ong term solution. t,e don't_r.lant short term approaches or band aid approaches because that doesn't doeither one of us any good. t^,e can'1 plan long term if we have short termsolutions or band aid approaches. Our growth, as Sandy mentioned, has beenphenomenal . tJe've had a 5OZ compound growth rate in the last S years and
hJe expect Lo continue to grow, probably not quite at that percenLage ratebut I'd like to point out h,e're the number one selling hair conditioner inthe nation today. tJe're Lhe sth largest hair care manufacturer in thenation and every botl]e, about 31,/2 million bottles has Chanhassen,Hinnesota on the bottom of it so we're proud to be here and considerourselves partners wiLh you folks and hope that you may be amendab.l.e to
some of the things we'd like to do.
more than tripled the number of employees thaL we have uorking there.
t^le've gone from 75 empLoyees to over 25o employees. [^le are aware we have a-parking problem. We do carpool but it's not enough. We have currently 253
employees. 53 of those work on the second shift. Our day is from 7:OO inthe morning until midnight. Our office hours are from Sroo to 5:oo so
we've got different times that people are coming in. l.,le have 175 parking
spaces. At any given point in lime we may have up to 60 temporary
employees working there so r^Je may have over 3OO employees there over the
course of a uork day. The average age of our employees is 32 and over 56?.'of our work force is female and those two figures can shor"r you one of the
reasons that we have problems with our carpool.ing. tle have a daycareissue. tle have people who are coming in and wanting to drop off children -different places in the morning. l"le have them picking up different places
in the evening. tle have people that are coming from as far away as Anoka,St. PauI , Roseville. I personally live in Elk River. t^le come into
Chanhassen. We work here. We spend our money here during the day, tle
need places to park. 352 of our employees l.ive right in the Chanhassen,/
Eden Prairie/Chaska area but over 3OZ of the employees come from thesedistances that I've talked about. t,e wouldn't normaLly be coming into
Chanhassen. At- yea)- end we anticipate about 260 employees. If we're ableto continue our growth, we're looking at the possibility of 3OO employeesat the end of next year. [^Je're a successfu]. company and we would like to
keep that success here in Chanhassen. Thank you.
Planning Commission
SepLember 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 25
Emmings: Can we get a littIe royalty off each boltle si.nce our rrame is on
Lhere or not?
Larry Perkins: t^,e pay $160,OOO.OO in reaL esLate taxes of which I know theCity doesn't get aII of it.
Emmings: Let me say thank you.
Larry Perkins: But we hope that we're good coporate cilizens and I think
have a decent reputalion in the city of Chanhassen. l.Jhat we say we'II do,I think our record would show that we have done. In terms of landscaping
and that sort of lhing, I think r.re probably go overboard and certainly
ulould in this area as well. 5 years ago we had 40 people, Today we have
25O people and ute'd like to be able to max this site out al 325 to a
maximum of 35o people. To do that of course we need parking andstrategically we think we need a minimum of 3OO parking spaces. The
investment that He r^rould be making. There are so many things that fittoget.her. Strategically this is a very important part of i!. The parking
issue. There are other important issues that ure're studying and it's kindof a chicken and Lhe egg type thing but they aI1 have to fj.t logeLher. As
soon as they do fit logether, hJe would like to invest some 6 million
cloLlars here at this site. About 2 7/2 nillion of that urould be in
buildins modifications and the rest of it would be in equipment. AIl of
the moclifications wouLd be inside the building footprint. There may be
abouL a 2,5OO square foot external expansion which would be very minimal
buL most of the expansion will be done inside the building without effec!
to the exter-ior - If we are not able to get these variances, I don't say
this in any Nay in a lhreatening manner. Just you have to understand where
we're coming from and what we're going Lhrough for a decision makingprocess. l.le need to expand, We know that our growth plans ca)-I for that.
tle r^rill have to look at other sites. Having been a president of a public
company in Mi.nnesota, f 've gone through this process before. t^Jas in the
food processing business and have looked at many different sites. I can
leII you lha! unforlunately, as much as I love this state, it's not the
best state to d,r business in in the manufacturing environment. For
example, if we wen! to South Dakota, this facility with about 2OO peoPle
and it r^rould be abouL 2 million dollars a year more Profitable to be in
South Dakota. That's $1o,oOO,OO per employee per annum in lerms of
tJorkmen's Compensation, property taxes, income taxes and Lhat sort of
thing. So that's why we chose not to develoP this site out west of town in
the industrial park. tle would noL ever get Lo the size that uras Previously
comtemplated on that site but we do think we can geL a ]ittle Iarger here
and then our plans would calI mostly likely for another site somePlace else
in lhe Uniled States. But we'd ]ike !o exPand and put this other 50 or 75jobs into the economy here and invest in these other assets. Other things,
we'd like to have a fairly quick decision. tJe'd }ike to do this before
winter because as Sandy had pointed out, our grotlth rate is such that ure
need to plan ahead. [.le're flyins a fast moving airP]^ane and you need to
plan those approaches weII in advance of the airport so Lo speak ' I think
Lhat's sor! of a summary of where we're coming from. tJe appreciate y<iur
consideration and uJe are asking as Jo Ann pointed out, for Lhese variances
but we wiII do them very, very carefully such that,Lhey don't change lhe
look or appearance and I can assure you of that, both from the east and
from lhe south and we'd lry to hold every commitment that tre made to you
and Lhen some and that's our intention. Thank you.
Planning Commiss ion
September 5, 1990 -
Meet i ns
Page 26
of these fellows spoke he said that if we computed it a
came up below 7OZ. Can you teLl me what's going on
Conrad: Thanks for your commenLs. Are there other comments? Any otherperspectives on this? Anything?
Erhart moved, Emmings seconded to close the public hearing- All voted infavor and the motion carried. The public hearing uas closed-
Erhart: I'm having a hard time maintaining my uJishy !.rashy nature. Let meverify two things. [^je're talking about a variance Lo go to an impervious
surface area of 79.32 still? And a variance to the setbacks from, Lhefront setback of 3O feet to someurhere beLween 9 and 14 feet. tJith that Ican find no reason a! al. I to support Lhe proposal and agree wiLh slaff's
recommendaLion to deny it. And I do say that ue Helcome very much Redmondinto lhe village but I don't think we have any precedent for allor,Jing thatkind of surface area for any industrial siLe in the city. Correct me ifI'm wrong. ourselves and everybody else sticks !o the regulations and Ne
do thaL to essentially protect each other. That's my comments.
Emmi ngs: [.Jhen one
different way Lheythere -
Olsen: l,Jhat lhey're talking about is, I don't have the surveys out herebut there's, you have l^lest 78th Street, the frontage road and then there'sa]so some property.... It's essenLially separated and I believe isn't lhatunder HnDot 's conLrol?
Eugene Strobe]; That would be my question is why, I don't understandwe're on).y taking the property north of the frontage road urhen ure pay
on the property souLh of the frontage road also. If you include thatspace south of the frontage road and north of TH 5, it changes thecalcu]ations so even with the additional paving we'd run below 7OZ.
tJhy
taxes
gr een
Krauss: I don't have the tax statemenLs here and I,d like to look at itbut I'd be aslorrished to find out they were paying property taxes onright-of-way for Th 5 and for the frontage road. That,s controlled byMnDot. l.jhat this appears to be is a fairly common occurrence where right-of-way is taken by easement instead of right-of-way dedication, you oftenLimes have residenlial ]ots that are platted to the center Line of stt-eets, -You measure the setback from where the easement rine is that establishesthe city's authority to build a road. That gives no difference in thiscase. As wilh the homeouner that lays claim to the center line of hisstree!, we normal).y say no. [^Je have an easement for that and that,s justnot the case and they don't pay property taxes on that eilher.
Krauss: Yes.
Larry Perkins: I think our point is to have drainage and to haveimpervious or non-impervious land, I think our point is that it is thereand if you'd just expand your horizons and take a look at it, you'd findthat it is there. So if it's intent that we,re after, we think ele complywith that.
Emmings: So you're saLisfied Lhat Lhe 792 number is correc!?
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 27
Emmings: t^lell yeah, I suppose if we could expand our horizons we could bedoing a Iot of things but I suppose we ca.Lculate these things the same wayevery time on each lol , or Lry to and by the r,tay we do tha! apparent].y you
come up short. f guess based on that I can't see any ground to granL avariance, Like Tim, I agree with the staff report that it shou.Id bedenied. I also, I may be dead wrong about this but if the alternatives is
moving to South Dakota, I don't think it'd be the parking.lol tha! makes
them move to South Oakota. It trill probably be the 2 million bucks soanyway, that's the way I look at it.
Conrad: Annette .
Ellson: How many parking lots are on the Lotus thi.nk that they wanted?
Olsen: 7A. That's if they do the mass parking.
Ellson: Right. That's t-he one idea, And then this is anoLher 2OO plus or
whateve]-.
O.l^sen: \'earh , r ight .
EIlson: And they want City Council to lookactually l,roking for close to the 3OO right
have right now?
al both
t her e?
proposals
AddiLional
they 're
urhat they
so
to
Olsen: No. It's a total of 2OO.
Ahrens: 357 tota I .
ELlson; Okay. I was getting lhose numbers mixed up.
Conrad: But including the Lotus.
Randy Patzke: No.
Conrad: So Lotus is no longer needed?
Eugene Strobel: LoLus is an option.
ElIson: You wouldn't do both?
Larry Perkins: t^Je maybe urould. [,Je maybe wouldn't. tle'd
many options as we can, [,Je've also ]earned tha! hrhen you
pIan.
Iike to have as
p.Lan, you over
Ahrens:
spaces.
But you have 279 parking, you're proposing 279 paved parking
Randy Patzke: One thing to remember is lhat we're talking, Redmond'srequesting...only on their site plan for the setback variances in terms ofthe surface area. The issue at Lotus is only a lemporary and maximum of 3year solution, t^Jhere a variance is permanent solution to their parking
needs.
Planning Comm ission
September 5, L99O -
Meet i ng
Page 28
Larry Perkins: That we would own and control and know that we have those
assured forever.
Randy Patzke: The parking spaces on the Lotus property...owner of LoLus.That's only a temporary situation.
Ellson: HelI, I like the idea of Lhe alternatives and maybe it's not
carpooling becauase of people at daycares but I believe iL was brought upbefore about using some of the open lots and shutLling people or doingthings Iike that. l think it's like Tim said, it's a pretty huge
precedence and in my opinion it is a band aid. It isn't the long termsolution for lhem. It's their short term band aid and Lhen heaven forbicithat it gets only uorse and ooh, it's jus! such a precedence for anybodyelse who u,ants to do this lhat it really concerns me. I guess I'd like to
know thaL they've tri.ed this shuttle and that they've done other things. I
mean people who work downtown certainly walk a long ways to lheir officesat times. f can't go along with i.t. Sorry.
Olsen: That's the hardship.
Batzli: That's the hardship? I guess I can't support granting variances
based on that as the hardship so Lhat's where this is.
Ahrens: tJeI1 it doesn't seem to me Like this proposal really solves yourproblems. You have temporary parking spaces. 70 temporary parking spaces,You're anLicipating employing over 3OO people right? And you only areproposing a permanent solution foy 279 parking spaces
Sandra Reitsma: It's a 2 shift operation,
Sandra Reitsma; No. - -
Ahrens: WeII you know, f don't think it meets the requirements forgranting a variance either. Bottom line, that's how I feel . There,s not ahardship. Except I can see where they think there's a hardship becausethey don't have enough parking spaces but I don't think under our ordinanceit meets the requiremenLs,
Conrad:parking Your truck parking area seems !ospoLs. I drove it the other day.
be huge and there's only a fewIt seems like you just have a
Conrad: Annette, anything e ). se?
Eatzli: Jo Ann, has there been any effort by the applicant to show ahardship to get t.hese variances other than they're expanding and they need -acJditional par kj ng?
Ahrens: Risht. But you have overlapping shifts which create a need foraII of those parking spaces at ]east temporarily.
Larry Perkins: tJe do have some carpooling that occurs already. t^le have
175 spaces now...maximum of 3OO with the temporary employees now -
Ahrens: Right but you're using, you're right now using your temporaryparking 78.
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 29
huge area for your truck turn around and lhere's no way you can convertthat to employee par king? It's just humongous. Like I think I coulddrive one of the big semi's in lhere and turn it around with one hand.Seriously, HeIl, that wasn't a serious commerit but it's huge and I'msurprised you haven't looked a! thal for additional parking. You'retalking about doing some things on the Lotus properLy. I'm just kind of
amazed that you haven'! considered .in your own parking ]ot. Isn't there
something that you can do there?
Randy Patzke: Not really because at., -are required... tlhen you do get atrailer in there, backed up Lo the door. You get another one pulling in
and one pulling out, you wiII find that area gets to be quite congested "
Conrad: I was
Hr ong, .
Randy F'alz ke: l.Jas it by any chance a Fr iday?
Conrad: I don't know. No . ft was yesterday -lookec huge. But anyway, that's your business.
RanC'/ Palzl.,e: - . -when you gets trucks in there,
f a"_t i-_ r.:-i l.l +ilI up.
in there Lhe day there were no trucks, I guess I just hit iL
No trucks and it just
you'd be surprised at how
Larr-y Perkins: I guess lhat wha! occurs Lo us. IL does look huge and it
sounds like a lot of cars. 179 cars is not that many cars"..look at thaLplan, in n'rany, many cilies lhat would be just a very, very acceptable
situation, tje just hate to have this be Lhe criteria that forces us into
another moCe when you look at the elevalions, Lhe side views, the trees and
all the oLher- sorts of things. The pond is already there and so on, we...
to have somelhing ]ike this cause us !o have to go elsewhere.
Conrad: t e were hopeful you were going to move out a little biL west and
satjsfy that need. Yeah, I hear Nhat you're tryi.ng to do, Certainly
understand that and I appreciate the problem that you're trying to resolve -I have a tough time wiLh the variances myself, I guess we are looking for
the Iong Lerm and I think if we got wirhin a LZ oy 2? variance, I think
we'd do some real, we'd be interested. Or at least I'd be looking at itseriously. tlhen we're talking about lO? variance to the impervious surface,
it's defeating some of Lhe things that ue kind of hold dear to our
industrial development and it's tough. I don't know that the Planning
Commission's going to be real receptive as you heard and we're pretty, you
know our job is Lo make sure the ordinances are right in the first Place
and kind of adhere to them. tihen we see problems, we try to change the
ordinance. That's really r,,Jhat our iob is. Granting variances makes a lgt
of people upset. Especially the other business neighbors and then it
basically says your ordinance stinks to begin raith so take a look at it and
that's whaL we try to do. ReaI carefully and come up with a better
ordinance if that's what's needed. The CiLv Council probablv would be more
receptive Lo your concerns and your bus.iness perogatives and alternatives
anC I Lhi.nk they may pay a little bit more attention to your. I sure Iike
Lo see a ]ong term solution. I guess I'm really no! salisfied that we have
a .Iong Lerm solution hearing your numbers. I think you're trying to get
some aIlernatives out !here !hat do any!hing because the employee's have'got to be irritaLed. They can't be pleased you know and I can emPaLhize
Planning Commission
SepLember 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 30
Nith that. t]e have to deal with employees occasionally and tha!'s tough,
But r guess r have a problem r^lith the variances in this particular case. I
really like our 7oZ. It typical^ly conLroLs amount of use and there's a ]ot
of reasons fo( LhaL 7oz - I'd like Paul to make sure that r^,e're calculating
it in Lhe right r.ray in terms of what the applicant brought up across the
street. If that can be calculated in, then I think I'd take a different
look at it. I don'! think it would meet the intent of what auy 7oz
impervious surface is but still I'd have Lo take a different...I sure would-
hope we could use LoLus, I think we are pretty flexible on how you could
use Lotus and I have no idea what City Council wiII come in on that one.
IL's not a ]ong term solution and I understand thaL. I wish we could helP
you find a long term solution for your employees. I don't have it. I just-
don'! have it yet you can see I'm not bending a wh9le lot on our slandards
so I'm probably of no use to you right now
Larry Perl,ins: The 7OZ versus aOZ, that I understand your concern onLhat... LeL me assur-e you on the employee issue, we don't have unhappyemployees. tJe have a waiting ]ist. [.le have very, very fow turnover, You -can talk to anybody that works aL Redmond and see that it's a very, very
desi:-able place to work. It's an extremely successfu.l company, I! sh:resit's uealth wit-h it's employees. Also, we have lots of balls in the air
as to our )ong range planning, This is one of lhem. It's a very, r,rery key-one. l.le will design that facility to the size of the parking slalls. Nor"rbear jn nr.inci xe have 175 nor,J. Tha!'s.,. The impervious one, that's aIittle bit tougher one. I understand that...
Conrad: I didn't r,Jant Lo apply that. I just didn't to always be a human
resources person. Concerned wiLh your shift changes and problems of whereto park buL yeah, J wasn't insj.nuating they weren'! happy. I'm hopefulthal you can do something on the site next to you. Other than that,I don't have any good soluLions for the problem other than my drive thru.Is there a motion?
Erhart: I'll rnove the PIanning Commission recommend denial of
Amendment- Request #85-1 as shown on the plans dated August 21 ,
Site Plan
1990 .
Batz 1i : Secc)nd .
Conrad; t^le thank you for coming in and r,re like you being in tourn and you
are a good neighbor but l think in this case we're holding !o somestandards. Again, when you talk to City Council, they probably have adifferent perspective on things. Thanks for coming in.
APPROVA L OF I'IINUTES:Emmingi moved, EIIson seconded to approve Lhe Hinutesof the Planning Commission meeting dated August 15, 1990 as submitted. AII-voted in favor except Batzli who abstained and the motion carried.
CITY COUNCIL UPDATE:
Conradi Report from t,he DirecLor. Has everybody read !haL? Great report.
Erhart moved, Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend denial-of Site PIan Amendment Request *85-1 as shown on the plans dated August 21 ,1990. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Planning Comm ission
September 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 31
Erhart: Can I ask a couple questions on iL?
Conrad: Sur e .
Batzli: Hey, nice quote in the paper.
Erhart: Thanks. I appreciate that. I bras surprised I didn't get fined
for getting my name in the paper. UsuaIIy that's an automatic. I have a
couple questions on lhis Paul . Quick1y, I guess we talked last time about
updaling Lhe weLland ordinance. Okay, r.rhy do we have to do that again?
Rem i nd me -
Kraugs: WeIl there's a number of reasons. First of all our wetlands
ordinance, from staff's viewpoint, was very innovative. and forward
thinking. Over time we found Lha! iL's very difficult to adminisLer for a
number of reasons. It also does not incorporate current technology if you
xilI, of r,retland preservation and tha!'s one tha! consider not only what
p).anr- species is out there, which is what aII the classificaLion system now
dc'es, but what's it's intrinsi.c value? Is it good wildlife habitat? Is it
good filtration for pollutants? !^lhat purpose is it serving? [^le have made
decisions in the past, most recently the one that comes Lo mind is with
HcDonald's. tje told you with McDonald's that the wetland Lhat was next Lo
McDona]d's, wh.i]e it was a Class B wetland, was essentially worthless and
that il was more valuable if you had the authoriLy Lo transfer that
requirement elsewhere, and we sort of did that but we had a pond over by
the Eckankar siLe that we had some credit on, [.Je have no formalized
process of doing that. tle have no wetland, very critically we have no
uretlands rnaps - tJe don't knou where a wetland is. l^le have a generalized
set of maps that Fish and tJilcllife prePared, That's their view of where
aetlands are. tle have a veyy generalized set of maps, very small scale
LhaL the DNR has prepared tha! nobody can read anyHay and the DNR onlv
protects wetlands thal are 10 acres and larger that thev identified 10
years ago and f can show you some 50 acre tletlands that they've missed'
Erhart: tJhat would we do with more maPs? A more deLailed map?
Krauss: tJeII a number of lhings. tle had Problems in a number of
subd.ivisions where there were tletlands that r^tere Iocated during a
subdivision process but lhere was never any clear evidence of Lhose things
exisLing. Nhen residents, if the. residenLs did calI uP the citv and thev
say do I have a wel]and on my property, urell f don't know. When develoPers
urork with us, t^ihen they come in, tre sit down with whatever information ute
have and we talk about the potenliaI oPportunities and liabilities of a
site. The pr-esence of a r^letland is exLremely imPortant. [^le want to knot't
what the contour of the thing is. Where exactlv, what's the exact
perimeter . t^lhere it outleLs. t^,hat it's conditions are. t^le have no
i nfor nrat i on on that.
Kraussi No, lhey don't and we
tje t,lant to set that ourselves.
don't trust Lhem to give it to us frankly.
Erhart: Guess Nhat lhe questions are on? Storm water utiliLy fund.
Erhar!: The developer gives you thaL.
Planning Commission
Sept enrber- 5 , 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 32
Emmings: Doesn't it also require you to go to the site to figure that outin that deLaiI?
Krauss: That's the Lhing. Every time this comes up, whether iL's a
homeowner who wants to place some fiII in their backyard or it's a -
develcrper or iL's the city who wants to develop a park, everytime we har.reto call up somebody from ONR or somebody from Fish and tJildlife, Come out
and walk the site with us and they do it out of the goodness of their hears-theoretically because these are not uetlands that they aIl protect. Weprotec! a lot more wetlands than they do. And if you ask a DNR official
where the Hetlands are, you get one ansuJer. If you ask the Fish andtJildlife guy where iL is, you get anoLher. If you ask the Army Corps, you
rnay get a third. Hhat it boils down to is the city embarked on a procedure
where we determine that we would protect rnany more hretlands lhan thefederal cr state agencies uanted Lo protect. That it was in Lhe
community's best interest to provide the bes! available uetland protection
we could. That tells us that h,e can't rely on their staff people on a hitand miss basis to locate these things for us because they interpret thendif f erent].y than we do. It's real important too that r.retlands beconsidered as part of a sysiem. t^lhen you consider a bret].and on a one of fbasis, ure may preserve a wetland on one program and then on another
Prog.!.am,.1ikeaStormuJatermanagementPrograrn,destroyitbecausewe,ve
pumpe.:l aIl kincls of storm water runof f through it thaL's going to sedirnentthe thins cver or nutrient load the thing. t^le have no real understandingof how these interrelationships work because we have no overall storm u1ater-
managenrent plan. Every property is taken as it comes on a one off basis.
Erhart: Di.d Met Council require that weplan?
put together- a uJater management
Krauss: The State is. There's a state law. I think they adopted it about3 years ago. I think the deadli.ne gives us another 2 years to do one. So -that elenienL of it, the storrn Hater rnanagement element of it is in a stateriandate" t^Je've estimated, I forget the exact doIIar amount bul it,s in the
$15o,oCO.OC-$175,OCO.00 effort. NoN there,s 3 programs of the storm water -utility fund and that's a rnisnomer calling it an utility fund. Hhat theStaLe's enablirrg legislation requires thaL you call it. We,d rather calliL a surface HaLer management program and f won,t get into semantics ofwhelher or noL a utility fund is a tax.by any other name, It,s clearly afinancial liability against whomever it,s posed but the program as weenvision it is ari interreLated program that deals with storm watermanagemenL. rt deals t^rith uretland protection and throh,ing in an element!hat-'s becoming a major concern. It deals with water cuaiity and very f eurcommunities, in fact only one community so far has done that and that'sEagan. [.le're under a great dea] of pressure from the Metro council. From -the PCA. From the Hetro tJaste Water, HI^,CC and Lhe federal EpA to Hork onwater quality in the Hinnesola River. There's a ]ot of discussion groups,we've volunteered ulith the Metro Council to serve on the task force whenthey put that logether to address thaL issue. criticalry the EpA is saying-that the State or the Metro Council cannot expand the sewage treatmentp.Iants Lhat serve us because water quality in the river's deleriorated too
much - Nobody knours whaL the answer is but, they knou, r,rha! Lhe problem isand that's basical.Iy coming off frorn non-point source pollution so everyLime it- rains, stuff gets flushed off Lhe streets. Stuff sets flushed offthe lawn. rt gets flushed off the farm fields and winds up doL,n the river"-
PLanning Comrnission
Septenrber 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 33
[.Je've experienced local problems. Loca] concerns tha! you know we've go!
people on Lake Lucy complaining about r,raLer quality deteriorating and Lhatthe Iake's eutrifying, l.Je've got the people on Lake Riley concerned lhat
Iake uater quality has been deteriorated. tJe've got the l''!etro council
hydrc,]ogist that have been doing testing tha! seems to indicaLe that
there's sorne degregation of lakes. The professionals, and I don't claim to
be one in this area, argue abou! the statistics of exaclly the nature of
the problem but it's clear that Lhere's a problem that hasn't been
addressed. Gary l.Jarren and I Lalked Lo the city council about approaching
these issues in a comprehensive way last year. tle attempted to get funding
for it out of the general fund. Understandably the city Council utas loathe
Lo raise property taxes to generate Lhe income that would be required Lo
undertake this work. They did give us sufficien! money to look at funding
sources which is where this storm Hater utility fund came from. He think
i! clearly behooves lhe city to do this in a comprehensive manner. t^le
could do it piecemeal " I've already talked to hydrologisLs, if we can geL
Lhem or l.Jild]if e folks to work with us on a wetland Program. I lhink we
could dc thai as a one off program. It would be as effective either from a
cost et-andpont or- f rc,m an environmental sLandpoinl . If sLorm water
ut j. IiLies raiseC a lot of issues, you know the Lax by any oLher narne. It
clearly, as I said, is money lhat will be paid. For a lot of reasons
Lhough it uas felt, and we've discussed this with Lhe CiLv Council in work
sessions, it was felt to be fairer, or more fair lhan ProPerty laxes. A
lot of people have indicated a concern that ProPerty taxes are regressive.
To the extent that Lhe average home these days, I mean you buy a home for
your family, iL's $15O,OOO.OO-$2OO,OOO.OO. If we raise ProPertv Laxes to
gerrerate i:he revenues we need, 4OZ of it woulcj 9o into fisca] dispariti.es.
The school districL would get x number of dollars. The Countv geLs x
nuriL,er c,f doLlars" llhen it boils down to what we geL, vou know you have to
have i, fairlv significant revision in taxes to do that. The storm Nater
utilir-y js a 5 year program. I'm not going to sav that afler, at the end
of 5 yea:'s that some sort of continued effort isn't going to be anticipated
because it js. BuL the level of effor! is extremelv high in the first 5
years because Lhere's so much work to be done. There's the Planning work
lhat !.re think we need to do. There's Lhe ordinance work we Lhink we need
to do. There's also deferred maintenance that we've never done on storm
water systems. The siorm water Ponds that need Lo be dredged because they
sedirneni over' . Ne simply don'L have the manpouter to do it ' t^,e're not, I'd
have to say from a slaff slandpoint, we're not ]ooking !o be exPansive.
[^le're not looking to add staf f in sotne sort of willv nillv fashion. l^Je
anticipate using consultants so that Hhen lhe work is done or the Planning
efforts, that they're out the door. t^,e're not hirins anybody long term to
do that. And ideally the ordinance ls one that's tailored so that we can
handle it in*house. t^le don't need a lot of additional assistance. If
there's some desire on the city Engineer's staff to have a sLorm brater
engineer as one of Lheir staff People. But the level of effort in the
first 5 years is quite high to accommodaLe alI these things. At the end of
thaL period, and it's sunset. It's a 5 year Program. At the end of that,
if it's continued, the ]eve] of effort would be quiLe a bit ]ess. The idea
of doins it as a utility is under neu sLate law, that I believe is several
years old, it a]Iows you to consider this as a syslem. Much like the water
utility. Much like Lhe sanitary sewer. !.le had some develoPers at the last
rneeting complain thaL they feel they're being doublv hit. Tha! lhev
installed st.orm drainage Ponds in their subdivision so why should they have
to do anything else. t^lel], lhere's several answers to Lhat. First of all,
Planning Commission
Septernber 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 34
they dorr't have to do anything else. It's encun:bant upon the people wholive there in the future uho are using the system to pay for it's upkeep. -When a developer puls in a storm water pond, there's nobody maintaining ithat but our street crews and we only have 4 guys on the street crew.
There are rnany things that aren't done because they just don't have thebodiestodoit.MainLenanceofthosepondsisone.!,ledon,tdothat
until one fails. !.le just don't harre the wearr.rithall to do it. tJaterquality effortst one of the things that improves u,ater quality
significantLy is regular street sweeping. Particularly in the spring sothat you don't get that flush of organics into the system. We can't do it.
tJe just don't have the manpower. You kno., so f guess this is really an
atLempt to again attack this in a comprehensive uay and we don't knor,u howelse to do it. tle don't see the City Council raising property taxes to do Iit. A Iot of communities have adopted Lhese things. About 6 ot- 7 of themthat I'm aware of in the ]ast couple years. The cost per homeowner israther nominal. It distributes costs as a utility distributes costs, i.e" 1the user if you will pays. A home is assessed a reLatively smal] amount
because a home occupies a relatively small amount of surface area. Redmondor Rosemount is assessed a commensurately larger amount because !hey have
8O% of impervious surface oy 7OZ or whatever. You know, there are a Iot of iconcerns " I undersland that. Nobody's Lrying Lo pull the wool over
anybociy's eyes. Ne do realize that this is an additional cost factor. TheCouncil asked us to look at several things. They asked us to look at the :impact on agricultural. property. tJe're calling around to other communitieslo see what they've done ulilh that and that.'s rather tough to do because
most of the communities lhat have adopted these things don't have any aglancl anymore so we may have to set lhe lrend on that. But there's a lot ofdata that f 've seen thar- indicates ag Iand, is not necessarily part of thesolution. I!'s also part of the problem. That'the nutrient runoff incultivated a9 Iand. Nor.J this might not apply to youl- property Tim r,rith a :tree farnr but wherr you cultivate a fietdseveral hydro).ogisLs in the l,letro Counci
the data that I've seen fromis that it's producing greaterIlevels, about lwice the weekly amount of nulrient runoff that we'reexperiencing in single family subdivisions.
Erhart: Do you have a copy of that?
Krauss: Yeah. As a matter of fact I do. I have it upsLairs.
Batzli: Really you're assuming a lot of different things because you're
assuming a certain crop and fertilizer and a lot of things.
Krauss: Yeah. I didn'tgiven to me. In fact.assume it Brian. ft was information that Nas
Batzli: t^,ell if a guy has 20 acres of alfalfa and he,s not cultivating itand he's not fertilizing it, you're not contributing to the problem.
Krauss: Right. They gave us severa] figures for a9 land. one was underactive cultivation, A corn crop type of thing where you have exposed rows.Clearly if it's all pastureland, you're talking about something eLseentirely.
BatzLi; Then you're talking about their minimum tiltage?
Krauss: Yeah. There's a lot of detailed issues that I think are going tobe wor ked on betb,een now and the time this comes back to the City Council.[^le're going to ]ook at the ag land issue. lre were asked to ]ook at the, togive the Council some assurances that this is not a redundanL effort. ThatLhis is noL something Lhat the tlateshed Districl wouLd do if we didn,L doiL- Or if the PCA has some funding source or a program that He,re notexploring. tJe've conlacted aII those agencies, l^,le've asked them to reviewthis program and let us know what they Lhink.
conrad: tJhat's the City required to do by law for storm uJaLer management?
to develop a stormKrauss r tlelI, for storm Nater management ule're required
hJater, comprehensive storm water management p1an.
Conrad: A p.l-an.
Kraussr Now that doesn't deal with water qualit.y to a great extent and it
doesn'L deal with wetlands. In fact the DNR would argue that it'sdestructive to wetlands.
Erhart: What's their purpose then? t^lhat's their purpose.,.
Krauss: The DNR?
Erhart: No, the S!a!e. The State requiring a plan. To prevent flooding?
Krauss: Yeah. Basically and also Lo promote agricultural with your drain
f ielcis ancl i:here's a sLaLe board, they keep coming up r^,ith lhese
organizations that I've never seen but there's a group called Bowser. An
acronym that's, aII lhe tjatershed districts in the State are required to
review pians developed by local units of government and they're supposed to
develop their own comprehensive documenL and Lhen alI that gets forwarded
to the Bowser Board and they have Lhe right to approve it up and down. And
iL's al] under this State lar.r that requires the communities to underLake
these pLans" The long and the short of it is, at local government, we're
on the front ]ines. We do the work. tJe pay the freight and ue set the
standards, especially if we want standards hisher than those that uould be
guarant.eed by the State and the Feds. I think that in the past the Cily
has said that they hJanted that.
Erhart: Have you got a sense here. Do you see that, acquisition of
uetlands in need of protection. Don't we have protection now of Hetlands
in our or di nance?
Krauss: tJe do but there may weII be a conditi.on, and this is the kind of
thing that we need !o have explored when we do a wetlands ordinance. tJe
may well have uanted Lo say someLhing Iike to McDonald's saying look, that
wetland you have there is really unnecessary. It's not an ideal one.
Ue']l let you fiII it but you've go! to pay into a fund so Lhat we can
acquire a better wetland an improve it downstream or wherever else it was
appropriate to do that. A ]ot of communities oPeraLe their sLorm water
utility Iike that- I'm sorry, their storm r^,ater management plan.
Erhart: t^ihat you're saying here is that you
uet I a nd?
may acquire land to create a
PLanning Commission HeeLi ng
September 5, 1990 - Page 35
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
l1eet i ng
Page 36
Krauss: Create. Preserve. Expand .
ELIson: Improve?
Krauss: Improve . Yeah.
Conrad: WeII the ordinance really has to be gone through. I think it,sjust really worthwhile. And in terms of r{hat wetland and the storm ulater
management does, all I can do is relate to the lake that I Live on andover, this year is the worst. l,taybe we can see 4 inches under the surface,
Maybe .
Erhart: See 4 inches of what?
Conrad: 4 inches under the surface. If you do a segidisk readingtlhen I moved out Lhere it was, Lotus was always dirty but uhen we moved out15 years ago you could, the segidisk was about 2 to 3 feet, And I ran itthis summer, it's a couple inches. That's primarily. Lotus is sort of Iike-a septic system of Chanhassen. EveryLhing drains. It's got a biswatershed and it's just real indictatj.ve of rains and there's just nodoubt. You take anoLher Iake Iike Christmas Lake. .The r^ratershed isminimal. It's up on a ridge. Nothing flows into it. It keeps it's claritybut in terms of Chanhassen's lakes and the uatersheds around the lake, it'sembarrassing. The development has, in my mind really, and we though! we'dbeen doing Lhe right lhing as new developments come in and He puL in theponding and aLl that stuff. AlI you,ve got to do is take a look at theIake and it's really pretty pathetic. That bothers me because I spent aIot of my time thinking, how we preserved the quality and we haven't doneit.
Ellson: Nell would it. be a lot worse if you hadn,t done ulhat you've dore?
Conrad;
aII thethat I
major,
t^l ho
nice
I ive
major
knows but storm
wetlands in theon. It's real Iy
impact.
r.Ja te r
worLd
stor m
management is a big factor. You knoware not going to preserve Lotus LakeHater management I believe that has a
Erhart: Are lhe nutrients coming from fertilizer do you think?
Conrad: Lawns -
Erhart: Lawn fertilizers?
Conrad: Yeah. And you've got a lot of creeksused to have the farms where Brian lives. Thatand I don't know, it's got to be an improvement
doun there over the farms but.
that are flowing in. Ne
used to be all agricultural -since residential hrent in
Batzli: f Houldn't countdevelopment, Everybody's
development.
on i
out
t. r
there
mean you've
fertilizins run through the
every weekend in that
Conrad: Nice green grass, yeah.
BatzIi: It looks like a fairway.
Planning Commission
September 5, t99O -
HeeL i ng
Page 37
Conrad: So I don't know. I'm going to ge! involved in the sLorm water
management. I don't know the right r,ray. It's interesting Lo hear Paul
taLk about iL because I haven't heard much about the funding and how to doit. I just think it's really imporLant that He Iook at iL. I know we can
Iook al, I Lhink Hhat PauI has been saying about mapping, if I go back, the
environmental protecLion committee always hanted to map but it was never inthe budget. It was always a standard. They said you can't protect whatyou don't know. If you don't knour what you've got, you can't protect it.
jAnd you also can't measure whether somebody's hurting it or not and that's
\the other side of things. tJe really don't know what's there- And some
\other Iittie issues, I think lhe original intent of the wetl^and ordinance
\r,ras to force the applicanL to prove Lo us that Lhey weren't hurting
'anything, tJe've taken responsibility on to get governmental bodies
involved to help the applicant prove that. That was sort of, it's a whole
different, You know basicaLly the City Council at that time, and the
committee, really wanted to put the burden on the applican!. Say hey, you
p)-ove to us lhat you're improving and I don't know Lhat we've ever done
that. so there's a few issues that I Lhink are significant in reviewing
that ordinance is probably prelty va]id, How to fund for Lhis whole thing,
you know an appropriate way of cioing it, I guess I'd be real inLerested in
asking the City Council uhat other items come prior to this, I think there
urould be a urhole lot of folks thaL are, especially in a polilical year that
would be willins to vote this issue as a priority. I have no doubt thaL a
Iot of homeowners on lakes are concerned and I would hope that people urho
are using Lhe }akes are concerned too. Because my fron! yard is flooded
urith a whole lot of people. They're not necessarily residenls " I Lhink
the lakes are being used I guess is uhat 1'm saying and with aII the
accesses, I Lhink they're probably overly used but on the Posilive side,
they're being used as a recrealion source and I think most PeopLe should
care "
Those Nere Lhe
I 'I I set thaL
on] y questions I had.
Anything else on Paul's staff report?
Lrnart:
Kr auss ;
Conr ad :
BatzI i :
here the
Krauss:that the
sluff for you tomorroN.
Hy only question islast couple times -
No they have not and
ordinance says that
HoH many months has
something that isn'L on there. I haven't been
Has Moon VaIIey come in for a permit?
I've sent them tNo registered letters stating
you t:il] have a permit in 5 months,
Batzli:gone by now, do you know?
Krauss: ThaL was in l'tav we adopted Lhe ordinance and I told them
repeatedly, I said you've got to figure on about a 3 monLh review Process
so let's get working on it and I've received no response to either letter.
!.lhich doesn't surprise me because I guess Nhen Roger and I got into this'
ure were fairly sure that it would come down to some sort of liligation.
Now they may be just using this as a tact. I don't know. As I say,
I haven'! lalked to Zwiers. They may come in at the end of 5 monlhs and
start the process and say well we're working on it' But the ordinance
clearly required Lhem Lo have the permit a! Lhe end of 6 months. A]ong
those lines too, I think you sara that the Council aPproved the Jeurissen
Planning Commission
September 5, 7990 -
Meet i ng
Page 38
program. They were equally relunctant. Expressed many of the concernsthat you did. For example the applicant wanted to have a loulering of theletter of credit. The Mayor said hrell how about doubling it instead. Sothe Council r^,as very supportive I think of the lJay it was handled. They'd
a.Lmost like Lo, Lhey expressed a preference almost to see lhe ordinance
Iooked at again to see if it could be made more restri.ctive. I guess I'mnot sure what wiLl come of thal" t^le're trying to expLore that.
Batzli: I think it's nice it's being used. It would demonstrate to MoonVaIley that there are olher people that this encompasses and not them "
EIIson: Risht. I think thatpicking on them.
r.Jas their big pet peeve was that you were
Erhart: I've goL a question on tonight's agenda, ActualIy the
uras deleted. Requiring ordinance amendment for the placement ofDid we ask for Lhat or is this something thaL you jus! did?
one that
antennaes,
K]-auss: No, iL isn't. It fal]s inLo the realm of when I get to Iook at aseci-ion of the ordinance, I have problems wiLh interpretting it andunderstanding what it was intended Lo do. Nhat I've told, in fact in theCiLy Council memo, I said Lhat we wanted !o, there was supposed to be
def initi.ons that were incorporated into that ordinance that never were.There's some specific requirements I th j.nk you,d urant to see..,application -and those aren't in the ordinance. I told the City Counci] too it,d be myrecommendation that you adopt an ordinance that 6ays cLearly that anLennaesnot be alloweci on agriculturaL land guided for other uses but I said that!hatt^rouldnot,rmeantheP]anningCommission,sraLiona]eiSthatthat
does not apply today regardless of rahat it says because that,s not guidedthat way. Llntil the new Guide PIan is adopted
Erhart: tlel] again I guess my feeling is, we have a number of work iLemsand we ge! a copy of this... Just a whole lot of issues on there that havebeen on thele for going on 3 years I think. Just a long time and f see new_issues coming up bu! we're not attacking the old. So we don,t lose site ofLhem...
Can I updaLe you on a
There was one comment
coup ). e
that I
of other
had Pau I
thi ngs
and it
loo?
related to yourConrad:report.
HaLZ1.L: 1
Conrad: Go
have one that's unrelated while you,re looking for yours.
BatzLi: Are we.going to dothe comprehensive plan?
anything on the business fringe down here on
Krauss: In the land use ).anguage, which Hark and I are uror king on to getthe final drafts done, f added a description of discussions tha! we've had -on that area and some indication of a desire as to Nhat you might r,ran! itto be and then the implementation section, we,re talking abouL looking atihaL ordinance and rooking at changing it and such buL it's not so.ins to beresolved as f see it by the Comprehensive plan, There,s just not enough
PIanni ng Commi ssi on
September 5, 1990 -
Heet i ng
Page 39
time to Lackle lhat. t^lhat the comprehensive plan does is provide therationale for doing what you had discussed doing.
Batzli: I guess I'II be interested in seeing wha! you've done on that.
Erhart: Yeah again, I'd Iike to see progress-
Batzl i :plan andyears itit again
That's a good step because if we issued the next comprehensive
ue don't change the focus and the directi.on, I think in 10 more
will be too late to do anything down there by lhe lime we look at
E1]son:going Lo
I didn't even
be doi ng this
know the State Nas going to this. -,.now Ne're
in '91?
Ahrerrs: They had a big thing on public radio today on this.
EI Ison: oh did they?
conrad: Go ahead PauLgot some minutes here.
inLerested in.
I just realize uJhat I
The comprehensive plan
to talk about. You've
was what I was
wanted
upda Le
Krauss: As Lacid is aware, and I think if you read the memo in the packel ,the Metro Council laid something of a bombshell on us 3 t^teeks ago. I hadgiven Lhenr our population projections in December. They neglected to
comment on it until 3 weeks ago at which time they said, by their
computations they figured we're entitled to 95 acres to the MUSA ]ine. Toput it miICIy, I called up the staff member and read them the riot act for
about a half hour,45 minutes. I spoke to, well I didn't speak to his
supervisor . I spoke to our Metro Council rePresentative and the Mayor.
The upshot of that is is the response that's in the rePort !o the MeLro
Council giving them all the data that we have which I think quite clearlv
says lhat ure know what we're talking about. [,Je know what's on the ground
here. t^Je updated, Sharmin called aII the emPloyers in town. tje got a
current employment count which is 2,5oo emPloyees higher than they're
saying we should have 10 years from now. t"le've been saying that we have
about 12,ooo people. As Jo Ann said when we got it, there is a God because
the data came up. tle got the preliminary census counts which confirmed, bv
the way we're bigger than Chaska. I don't know if that's good or bad.
tle've outgrown them in population, not in number of households but
according to their counts there was 7L,7OO PeoPIe in Chanhassen in APriI.
Sharmin's checking their counts and believes that they missed some homes.
t^,e've 119 building permits since last year. I assume somebodv's living in
some of those someplace so we're over 12,OOO. AII that data t{as Presented
to the Metro Council along with a recurrent lheme that savs let's not Play
statistical games. Let's look at reality and here's the reality of how
we've been derreloping in this communiLy in terms of how many acres we've
been takins down a year for industrial growth. Even at the relalively
modest or moderate rates of growth that we're anticipating over the next 10
years, which are about 50? ar 602 of what's been happening in the last 2 or
3 years, at that rate we need 15o acres a year available of residential
Iand. Some interesting things have haPPened at the MeLro Council. Ann
HurLberg who manages Lhe comprehensive Planning section, for reasons that
have not been fully exPlored, pulled the staff member thaL was working on
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
Heeti ng
Page 40
the project off. They have assigned a new staff member to it that Jo Annand I and Mark met with him today. His name is Rich Thompson and I've methim before. He comes from local planning as does Ann Hurlberg which is abreath of fresh air over there because it interjects a little realitythat's been missing from the Hetro Council. It kind of bleur me away
because he offered to meet out here and in fact did come out here. I'venever had that happen before with a Metro Council person.
Emm i ngs : T hey 'r e sett i ng you up ,
Krauss: Yeah, that could be, That's what Don Ashworth indicated afterthat. Other interesting things that have happened though is Savagerequested a 2,4OO acre HUSA line addition that Has initially opposed bystaff.RichThomPSonworkedonthatandtheyagreedthattlhiIetheywererelunctant to see it, lhat it didn't require any new additional regionalfacilities. That any impact was basically a local one and that theyadmitted that the regional model was defective there and they authorized -it. And we're a larger- community than Savage is and we,ve got 6,000 jobs
Ithat Savage doesn't and his initial reaction, take this with a grain ofsalt but his i.nitial reaction was Lhat that represented a different utay of _handling MUSA line amendments and he didn't see why the way they handled -
that hrasn't applicable to the Hay we are processing this. He asreed thaLour approach in terms of dealing with this in a comprehensive way insteadof piece mealing it uJas the optimal way of doing it and I guess it was very-receptive. [^]e're 9oin9 to follow Lhat up by a meetinS lhat we,re going to i
have Mike l*4unson and Ann Hurlberg and some other of the top staff peopLethere is coming out here in the next week or th,o. t^le,Il give them a bustouy. t^ie'll give them our dog and pony show and how them our statistics. jI lhink we're on very good ground. The census coming as i! bras was reallyfortunate. I mean it really backed up 'everything that ure've said. TheHetro Council mc,del is so far out of sync. So far off the wall that it'soutrageous to think that anvbodv urould put any credibility at aII to thelhing. And Metro courcil staff pretty much has always admitted that, Theyhaven't changecl anvthing but they've admitted that. The long and the short-of it is, f 've got very good expectations that our process can stay ontrack. NoN a decision may well have to be made if in fact Ne can't reachsome sort of acceptable compromise position on this, that you may uuant tore-evaluate it and you may want to decide, you may decide to change thepfan. You could decide that the p].an was right and ask us to carry itforward at the l'letro Council. I,m certainly not unwilling to do thatbecause I've maintained since ve gotten here that the Hetro councir iswav off base on this one and r think we have the statistics and the data toprove that.
Erhart: Theis it r isht?in.
question is, do you
[^,le can't expect to
plan is, where
something that
feel
sell
the
you
we haveyou don
it loday,
t believe
Krauss: Oh Tim, f'm very comfortable that this represents a reasonablerate of gror.rth. Not an excessive rate. Not anything Like ure've beenexperiencing that is so tough !o get a handle on in t.he last 3 years. Bu!one that i.s cognizant of the fact that r.re may be going into a recession.The fact Lhat the rate of househord formation i.s diminishing. on the otherhand, there's every reason to think that the 1990,s coul.d be a realexciting decade in Chanhassen. f'm very comforlab]e with that p]an.
Planning Commission
Septernber 5, 1990 -
Meet i n9
Page 41
Batzli: Are you comfor LabI enorth of TH 5 probably won't
into the MUSA line?
Nith lhe fact that many of the landowners
develop and so He're putting the wrong Iand
Krauss: Brian, I'd prefer to be pragmatic with that. tle're ta.L king about
a 10 to 15 year Lime horizon here. I will never dispute what somebody
tells me at this point in time what they're feeling bu! that's an awfully
long time. If they don't develop it in 10-15 years, that's their business
but there's sufficienL ]and available that lhere are other opportunities.
tle projecled a rate of growth to the Hetro council and then came up with a
Iand supply that's somewhat significantly under shools the amount of land
that we could have rationalized puLtins in Lhere so we may run out. It's
not impossible or i.mprobable that in !997 we 'II have run out of land again
but yeah, f'm not uncomfortable r^rith the homeowners positions. Nobody's
trying !o force their hand.
Batz]i: From a ciLy perspective of if Lhese
have enougl'r larrd if a ma jor ity of the people
the next 10 years?
Batzli:
land in
peop I e
in that
don't
area
develop, do you
don't develop in
Krauss: [^Jel] you know you've goL a lelter in here froin a property owner
r^rho's in Lhe gtudi- area who wanLs to be included. I've heard, we've had
other letters come through. I've heard through the grapevine thaL one of
the better known developer-s in loHn is puLting together a series of
properties inside and oulside lhat study area- I don'L knotr which ones
they're taiking about but I've go! to believe that there are enough
parcels. LJe'\,e had people here testifying that lhey want 20 acres here,3o
acres ther-e that they were willing to do something today. If that haPPens
over the next 5 years, 1sli]l think you have enough.
tlhat does Eden Prairie's recent pronouncement that they want more
the MUSA line do to our requesL?
l<rauss: Their announcement uas kind of interesting because it Nas one tha!
was made t,o the newspaper and not to the Metro Council. I spoke to Ann
Hurlberg about it and she had never heard about it. In fact I sent her
that article. Ne have never envisioned ourselves in a comPetit.ion with
Eden Prairie Iike if thev set it we don't. Eden Prairie for some reason
envisions it that u,,ay. I've spoken to their P1anner, in fac! I made vou
aware las! November I brent over there as a professional courtesy to let
them krrow what we were doing and he maintained !ha! Chanhassen and Chaska
never would have grown at all had Eden Prairie been Iess responsible and
opened up Lheir HUSA line further. I Lhink that that is a facelious
argument. I don't see that it holds ulater at aII and in fact during the
1980's, Eden Prairie had plenly of ]and to develop and developed a! a
dramatic rate and Chanhassen and Chaska managed to eek out their share as
weII. So I don't see that as competition.
Conradr I told Paul not to hold a public hearing on the comprehensive plan
untiL we knew whaL the Met Council was thinking abou! our Plan. t'Je'didn't
go to the public and Present a 2,OOO acre addition tahen Het Council Has
saying no, hre're only going to give you 4O0. And we'II never know. As
PauI saici, you can go in and fight and trv to battle but I think from the
standpoint of presenling to the communiLv, I think I'd like to Present to
them something that we think's going to float and that Has mv directive to
Hhe n?
Krauss:
week or
Kraussr tje had seL two, weII we had cal]ed you to see if you b,ereavailable on two separate dates. One bJas September I forgeL what and theother's October 1Oth. Right now clearly the September option is out. Markand f are shooting to have the material aII completed for a meeting onOctober 1Oth.
Conrad: And you're meeting Nith Het Council people?
hasn't been scheduled but ue're going to try and do it tl.ris
Now Paul , originally we u,ere scheduled to have a public hearingIt b,as this month wasn't it?
That
next.
Conrad: And what will,Lheir fLexibiLity?out of that meeting, h,hat sense will you get for
Krauss: tjelL they will not give us, I mean I don't expect lhem to give usand Lhey've indicated that they're not going to give us a letter that saysthis is fine and dandy. Hhat I'd like to come ou! of this is anunderstanding of what we're proposing. An agreement on their part thatit's reasonable and rational , They may have some details. t^jhen Lhey do aformal review, which they have not been asked to do of course, that theymay corie up with iterns such as water quality which was one of lheirconcerns. That they may feel we haven,L approached Lhis from the waythey'd Iike ue io. BuL lhat there's a basic understanding lhat what we'rerequest i nc is reasonable.
conraci : Eut it seerns like the numbers. you know what m talking about,they coulci debate a lot of things I suppose in there but the premise forland use is growlh. And don't you have to come out? This is one of Lhose -absolutes. l,^Jhere are you today and what's Lhe projected, well where are wetodav shculd be an absolute. You should be able to come ouL wilh agreementon that. Then the only place to disagree is percent of growth over thenext 15 years. Are we going to get a sense of their agreement to ournumbers? tjhy should we go throush the planning process when they,retota]ly, when they may be LotaIIy against the projectj.ons. It makeseverything downstream from those projections invalid.
Krauss: It does and that's why we went to them in December with thosenumbers before He got into it.
Conrad: And they rejecled them.
Krauss: !^leII they didn't. They said we agree. In fact Hike Lundstonwho's been...been around forever, agreed !ha! their regionar moder was wayout of whack. He agreed that at the verv least they were will,ing to accept_the TH ?72 Eli numbers which were considerably higher than theiri, alLhough-they've still never made an official change and that they t^rould take arevieur of wha! r.re had. The reasons for proceeding forward though Ladd aresever-ar. First of arl, we're handling ourselves with the Metro council in -the manner in which we want to be deart with when a deveroper dears withus, i.e. r,re si.t down ahead of time and tr.y Lo Hork issues out. Most peopledon't do that, Most people just go ahead with their MUSA ]ine amendmentand slap iL on the desk in the Hetro Council and see b,hat happens. So I
Planni n9 Commission Heet i ng
September 5, 1990 - Page 42
Planning Commissi on
September 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 43
r^rou.Ldn't uJant us to be unfairly pre judicing ourselves because we've gone anextra sLep with Lhe Met.ro Council. A reasonable step but an extra step.In addition, staff is sometimes, their staff is sometimes bound by policies
tha! are wrong and in their professional capacity, they're stilI defending
a policy- Then they'1I telL you on one side Lhis is silly. On the other
side they say I've got Lo r^rrite Lhe thing up this uay. [^le've kepL Harcy
tlaritz, our Council representative inform;d of this the whole time. l"le're
in the Soulhwest Community Government Association r^,here they've been
working on similar issues - Dirk DeVries is a councilmember who represents
some of those districts who I've known for a while. Both Dirk and Marcyare highly supportive of wha! we're doing. Harcy can be extraordinarilypersuasive for those of you r^rho haven't met her. I think there's every
reason to lhe extent that He're convinced that this is right. If Lhis isthe right plan, and I'm comfortable uith it but the more important question
is urhether you're comforlab1e with it. If this is the right plan, then we
should have Lhe willingness to carry it forua:-C,
Batzli: I Lhink the danger of doing that is they'II accept lower numbers.
You have to go in there with these are the minimum numbers and you have to
confident and comfortable those as minimum numbers.
Krauss: I think you also have to realize Lhat the Metro council staff
opposed the Lake Ann Interceptor and Lhat was only buil't Lhrough a
coordinated program by several communities with legal assistance and
everyLhing else. If there's a higher ground on lhis, I mean ethicly andprofessionally, I'm very comfortable with ulhere He're at on this. To give
you an idea of the kinds of poli'cies the Metro Council is bound by, Lhey
aclually had a committee recommendation that TH 2LZ go from 4 lanes, from
Eden Prairie to TH 1O1 4lanes. TH 1O1 it dives outside the HUSA line so
they thought that should only be a 2lane highway. t^lhen i.t gels back to
Chaska iL's back in lhe MUSA line. They felt that should be a 4lane
highway. Now can you imagine putting yourseLf in a position where vou
sland up in front of people and say something like that? t^lell their slaff
did thar. Right nou they're telling Chaska that okay, they'lI agree to it
conrad: i"ie]l see that's not a problem. The willingness to carry it
forward bu1: you don't carry it forr,rard against a waII that's not going to
L,end. If we're cLose. You know if we're suggesting 2,ooo acres corning
into Lhe HUSA because it's projected and Lhey're 1,5oo acres or whatever it
is, we're close. But if they're saying 4OO acres and we're 2,OOO, we're
no". close. Ne're not in agreement so, you knour and I don't know that I
Hant to present a public hearing to people when you think that Lhere may be
tha', roadblock anci you're saying no. tje're Horking on tha! roadblock but I
guess the question is, how do we, what I'm hopeful of is you, out of those
meetings you have a sense for, are we just being foolish in this request.
Although I think most people here believe that wha! you're carrying
forward, l Has aiways more agressive in terms of the numbers. I knour that
and I felt lhose were conservative numbers. So I think the City and we are
ccmfortable with them buL if you can't get a feeling for their
receptiveness to flowing or increasing, then I lhink we have some stralegy
to figure out here. Do we present to the community our plan or do ule
present Lo thern two different plans? one Lhat the Het Council wi]1 accept
and c,ne that we want to go after and you know, the last time we did this,
Lhe Met Ccuncil didn't, we presented two plans and they took lheirs and ne
lost -
Planning Commission
Sepler.rber 5, I99O -
Erhart: [,Jha! are
north cf the |.1USA
Krauss: UeIl it sounds Iike that would bethese are absurd positions lhat their staffcertainly don't hrant Lo assist them in that
Meet i ng
Page 44
we going to do, close 35 down to 2 lanes for anyLhingIine going up to Duluth?
being 4 larres up to Chaska but iL's going to end aL CR 41 because out theother side of Chaska it would promote development where they don't uan| it.
And Chaska'e saying wel.I LhaL's absurb. You're going !o dump a]l lhesetrips down through our downtourn. Their position is, if that's what you're -
9oin9 to do, don't build a highway
conforming to their policy andis forced to take and I guess I
conrad:tJe]},we,re9o.in9toneedyourguidanceaSareSu]tofthat
meeting. I want to cha.].Ienge you PauI to really get a feeling for, you I
knour jf jt was a corporation, The corporation wi]] dictate numbers lhatthey're going to per-form to. I Iiken il to that. They'II teII every -tc,perating deparlment where they expect to be in lhe coming 5 years. Then
Ithose operating departments have to come back and teII the corporation howthey're going to get there. We're doing lhe boltoms up approach andsaying, and we don't have Lhe corporaLe goal, urhatever and so it's a little-bit djfferent from the corporation world and it's not necessarily in syncwhich is obviously what you're finding. f guess I'm nervous that you'regoing tc corne back and say we're recommending 2,OOO and we're going to hold-,ta public hearing and we'r'e going to hold that public hearing yet lJe have a I
rea.L good chance at really missing the mark and therefore telling the Cityof Chanhassen that aII these public hearings, we're not even close to theballpark that's goins to be accepted. That bothers me a little bit. IThat's just not a posiLion I t4ant to be in. I uould hope ule could mass;ge
numbers a little bit but not be Lhat far off after going Lhrough our pubLichearing. I'm not Iooking forward to going through our public hearings and "]
then to be tota).iy u.rith a plan !ha!'s not acceptable. I want to have a I
real good feeling that we're going to win when t^re go in to the Het Council.
Ernmi.ngs: f dcrr 't look at it that way number one. On the other hand,think maybe you're right. See I would not approach this problem thatat aII. I urould say we have to draft, we're required Lo draft acomprehensive plan and in the plan r^re've got to give them our numbersour growth.
I
,yJaY
on
Conrad: And they don't agree.
Emmings: And we've done a.ll of that speedwork and it leads us t.o theseconclusions, Here's the plan you asked us to produce. you tell us urherewe're wrong on our assumptions, if we are. you teLl us where wenre wrongin our rnath because this plan is risht,
Conrad: But you know it's a] I wrong because the numbers should have beenagreed. If the process is r^ror ked right, you agree on the numbers and thenit's our job !o figure out hon. AII Lhe plannins stuff. After thoseprojections are agreed to, then you can do al-I the stuff that ule've been
doins, .but see, all Lhe stuff we've been doing is invalidated if they
-disagree urith Lhose up front numbers which we did a year and a half, how
many years ago did we do lhose numbers? Year or turo or Nhalever.
PIanni ng
Sept ember
Comm issi on5, 1990 -
Mee! i ng
Pase 45
m not suggesting that we change the plan. I'm suggesting
Pr ocess .
Emrnings: I worry Ladd tha! you're pulting yourself in a position where,it's soundins a liltle bit like you want to know not the results but at]east that you've got a good chance before you take something down to the
sLore and I guess I'm saying, Lo me that's, you wind up being inactive
because you're siltins here guessing about something. Just like the staff
member change last ureek, the Met Council may change in a month before weget our public hearings done. You're putting yourself in just an
impossible guessing situaLion. I think, I guess I trust that Mark and PauI
know the field well enough that they're not going to give us numbers that
are going !o embarrass us. And that we can take those numbers and say
we've done Lhe best job we can. tJe think Ne can back up everything +-hat's
in here and it Ieads us to this result of 2,OoO acres or whatever and lhere
you go. And go down there and support the hell out of it. Now that's Lhe
way I'd go because it feels better Lo me.
conrad: t,Jell you're doing it the rational way. Nhich is the process wayyou krroi^r and we have a plan. t^,e go through publ ic hearings. tJe present it
to Met council. I'm just saying, based on the original reaction that Paulgot, ycu knou: we weren't in the ballpark based on the reaction that he got.
Now maybe with new people on, maybe Ne are and that's not to gay Ne're
wrong because I think we're absoluLely righ!.
Emmi ngs: Ifthe plan.
Conrad:
Lhat r,re
Yeah, I
know the
you think we're absolutely right, Lhen I don't think we change
Em,Trings: I don't think there's anyway you know it. I think a lot of the
stuff r,:irrds up being kind of arbitrary. If they've got policies they have
to support th6t are not rational , we're put in a real funny position trying
to figure out how lhey're going to react. You said something else earlier
too and you said, I don't want to go and ask for 2,ooo acres and hat,e them
teII me il's 4oo. t^te 11, is lhat going to happen? can that happen or are
they just saying no to the 2,ooo? Isn't i! an all or noLhing deal?
Krauss: No , it 's
number .
not. all or noLhing. They can come up with a different
Emmings; Does it get negotiated at that point more or ]ess?
Krauss: To be honest, I don't knour if there's a fail safe mechanism buiLt
into the l',leLr o Council as there is with local government. You knoN, you
make a recommendation. The City Council approves something. ff somebody
feels disenfranchised by that decision and they think they have some
grounds to pursue it, they can take it to court. I don't know that there
is any higher ground with the Metro Council. l",hat their past practice has
been is to r^reigh you doun with this morass of endless meeLings and not
rnaking ciecisions and givj.ng you a ]ittle here and not lhere and nit Picking
and making you sign contracLs for the Lake Ann Interceptor that almostpurritive in some regards, We're trying to put all that behind us and take
a fresh look at this. I think they have some fresh faces there.and that's
a very good sign. I'd be willing to say that as I see it, this change in
staff people is very indicative of their efforts to be more responsive to
local government. They have a serious problem over Lhere r^,ith People Lhat
Planning Comrniss j.on
SepLenrber 5, 199O -
Meet i ng
Page 46
realistj.cally, even if we go. tre get their staff's approvaL,present it then as welI.
true and then they have a subcomittee that reviews it and
urhole Metro Ccuncil that reviews it.
Pa+'l i. 4,,+
they have to
KTaUSS: It'S
Lhen it's the
Conrad: See, that's r^rhat boLhers me. If their sLaff can'! accept it, andthey shculd be literally looking at the numbers. I don't understand. Iguess :t reaLly bothers me Paul that we could have had that turned cioun tobegin wit-h after- we put in a couple years and then they go back and debatethe numbers. It's just like, why didn't Ne get some kind of consensus onthe nunrbers in the first place, And f realize that's not the system.
Krauss; Arrd in fact, even though it's not the
why we gave them lhe stuff 9 months ago.
systern, we tried. -l'hat'g
conrad: Yeah, and that's real bothering
downst-ream time assuming that they mishtdon't agree with the numbers.
because we're putting in a lot of -agree with these numbers, If they
Batzli: I guess I've never assumed that
much more fatalistic viewpoint perhaps.
going !o go wrong, it wi]l.
they're agr ee
Hurphy's Law.
with them, I have aff something's
Kraussr One lhing I'm beginning to get concerned with is, we held ourpublic information meetings early in the summer. Now maybe there wouldhave been optimal timing but we had enough public interesL tha! we really
had to do them then and get them out of the way. t^le had hoped to hold thepublic hearings in September and when we do hold public hearings, He,regoing to talk to both papers. Ue'Il get articles in there. t^le'II renotify-everybody we've notified in the past. The Ionger time elapses from thosepublic information meetings until whenever we hold this public hearing,we're losing momentum. fssues t.hat Ne hoped to be resolved, may not bebecause people, I don't know, they had a chance to rethink them but newpeople become involved, t^te've had examples of land changing hands and the
new ouiner urants to do this and that. I'm very Ieery of taking a protracted
amount of time before bJe get back to folks who are Iooking to us for someanswers - I geL calls periodically saying weII, where's it at? I though!you guys were going to do Lhis one way or the other.
have rrever wor ked in the real urorLd. tlho never get out of St. Paul , Whobelieve statistics that are generated that are based on 10 year old dalathat may have been wrong when it was first generated but becomes gospel.
It's refreshing to talk to people like Ann end Rich today r^rho are sayinglook, we've rea]Iy got to deal with Nhat's out there. As I say, I'm realhopeful that it can move forward. But if ue don't and again this is, we'redoing this as, I think it's lhe right way to handle this but this is notthe way most communities have handled it. Again, I don't Hant to prejudice
oursefves unfairly by the fact that Ne've tried !o work this out at a stafflevel. ff He can't, I think there's other mechanisms to pursue it, atIeast at the Metro Council. Lobbying efforts or whatever and we would notbe unwilling to do that if that's r.rhat you want us to do. So I hope we can
wor k it out .
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 47
E:-hart-: Are you saying that we're waiting because you're ]ooking to get
some agreement on this popuLation estimate?
Conrad: Not at this point in lir:re.
Erhart: I never expected them Lo agreeend, they're going to come back and not
Conrad: But they'rethey're doi ns .
with what we're saying.
agree raith everything.
In the
disagreeing with your up front numbers Tim is wha!
Er har L : tJhc 's d i sagr ee i ng?
just one staff member.
f that, staff mernber, according to Pau.L
Ahr ens;
Batzii:
ground.
Batzli:
Conr-a.i:
Emmi ngs :
plan? I
tJatT!
Lhink
Ue I l
F'l us,
T:wa5
we jus! got our proof from the census. tJe're on stronger
. . .project is
l-l(, "r long hat,e we been wor king on this
think we've just got io get it done.
probably total Iy i,,jr o n9 .
what reasons.
stupid comprehensi ve
my sense.
reason. lre
Now
don't
that's
k nowFor whatever
: They have to teII
r^Je can wait for them
us official Iy Lhat i!'sto unofficially tell us
worng. f mean I don'tit 's r isht .
Ahrens: I don't think any staff rnember is going to agree with us. They
don't have the poHer to do it anyuiay. t^lhatever they say has to go to a
subcc,mmittees and then Iike PauI said, lhere's so many rungs on that
Iadder, they're not going to commit themselves to anything.
Emnings: I bet the staff members can'! evenpredicting what's going to happen Lo it.
do a real good job of
conrad: tjelI lhey can't but they sure what policy is.
Krauss: They can'! bu! they aPparently thought of a new way of handling
Savage. And as their staff member indicated today and as I've concluded
having Iooked at it, we're no different than Savage is and I think we're in
a lot of respects, we're in a better position because we've done. Savage
had a piecemeal plan. Savage didn't even 9o the urhole route of doing a nett
comprehensive plan. [^re're ]arger than they are. They have more room togrou,. So I wilL keep you posted on that but I guess barring my and Hark's
inability to complete the draft in time, we're shooting for that october
loLh meeting which is an off night for us. I think at the verv least we
have to have a clear agenda for a publ.ic hearing, lJha! I wou]d envision
too, is afLer we hold a public hearing, you may want to hold more than one.
That's going to be your call, tha! you then reconvene the issue at a
foLlouing meeting and you teII us if there's any changes that you Hant'based upon the lestimony you've heard,
Planni ng Commission
September 5, 1990 -
MeeL i n9
Page 48
Batzli: tic,u.ld Lhat open us up to another public hearing then if we made a
changc?
Krauss: I don't think so. I mean you've held Lhe public hearing. you'vegot the input. Then it's up to you to make Lhe decision. f mean you can
make jt that nisht if you chose but I envision a rather Late meeting andyou're probably going to want to do it when you 're fresh the followins
week.
Emrnings: I hcpe iL doesn't go into November
Ahrens: fs lhere any bigger place to hold it than this?
Conrad: Yeah, that would be the thing to take it out of here arrd have one -
mee t i nj .
Krar-,ss: !... looked at holding it in the schooL and apparently the schoolcharges u! $5C0.OO a night. UelI, r.re have to rent audio,zvisual equipmentfor that place. A: a r.,eeti.'t9 rooiu, it's not the best. you knout it'sdiff icult- fcr peop)-e to see things. This roorn has capacily constraints. _-Ih6t roon has func!jonaI constraints. I don't know. : mean yes, we couldhoLd i-- .ve:- there.
Batzli: The Eck:nkar meetings over there weren't too bad
Ahrens: [,Je can hoid it at Eckankar. They're almost done.
BaLzli: Yeah, how r.rany seats do lhey hold there? 4OO seals?
Er:rmings: f geL the pulpit ,
Ahrens: '!hey cion't have pul.pits . . ,
Conrad: Let's think abou! the process. One or two meetings? tJe alreadypould be bringing everyone together. I think it should just be one. And Ithink we shouLC make our decisions. The Iast tinne we reviewed these, theissues, I think we almost have to t.ake lhe people through Lhe issues, thekey issues that ue've looked at since those informaLional hearings and whowhat's changed or show whal we didn,t change. To address specificallypoint by point address them and flat out tell the people what we didn,tchange and then we have to be prepared to tel.t them ruhy.
Ahrens; No, you wiII Ladd,
Batzli: You will. t"Je'Il just sit there the whole meeLing.
Conrad: There's nothing more frustrating, Iet me telI you folks, there'snothjng more frustrating lhan these people to show up to these nice littLeinformat-ional meetings and then not believe tre considered them. or for usto say we]l I'm not sure why we did that.
Emmings: But that's going to happen.
Conrad: Oh, absoLutely but we should lry not to let that happen. tJe'should try to persuade people that uJe really thought about those issues.
Planning Commission
SepLenrber 5, 1990 -
Heet i ng
Page 49
Emmings: Just tell the truth. l,Je just finally got t.ired of
Right or wrongly, we considered them, Bu! to siL up here and ignore the
issues that they brought up or not know why ure decided to do somethingdefeats their perception. No, j.t reinforces their perception of ho!.,government operates so it's a big deal.
Conrad: It was 11:OO and Steve wanted to go home and we just
more time. And a Iot of the time, you knor.J, it was ]a!e.
Iooking
didn 't
Emmings: You know uhaL you ough! to do is put
they have in the taxi cab on your back dcor.
one of Lhose Iittle thinss
Conrad: But PauI , in preparation for that, I think we need a lisLing againof the issues that hiere raised and how hre directed you Lo respond to those
issues and then every one of us, you can disagree with the direction and fthink you can certainly, every debale, every item we coulci have had a vole
on I Lhink we aII were in consensus on most every. tlell I'm not sure if it
Nas cor\serrsus buL we had a prelly good rnajorily on every issue but you sure
sl-,ould know r"rhy /ou were on one side or the other because they'lI be
Krauss: one reason you may t^lant !o have a final crack ai lhe plan is we've
been retrriLing aII the text and completing sections that you haven'i, seen.
Basica]Ly they're consislent with what you did review in draft form but you
haven't revietred the final language. As Brian had a concern for how we
worded the business fringe stuff. You may want to clarify what we do with
those things.
at .it.
have
Conrad: P,nd uihen do you want us?
Krauss: Tha:'s why I Lhought a follow-up meeLing might be.
BatzLi : t,,tel1 at this meeting, is
are LJe looking at the map because
Lear apart the urhole plan.
the entire text going to be revieaed or
I know Iike Rivkin for instance wanteC to
Ellson: Yep. That wiII be his chance .
real]y is lhe land use part. They see theconrad: But whaL we present
map. In terrns of the copy.
Batzli: But Rivkin is goi.ng to want to discuss the enlire documenL.
Krauss i He
it, f mean
meet i ng .
Conr ad :
review
may have a point there. He Hon't have
u:e're not going to get it Lo you until enough time Lo revier.:
2 uJee ks before the
Krauss: t^le cou.id give loaner copies is whaL we do usual Iy .
And so what are we going !o teII people, Anybody
it can come to Lhe City HaIl and get a copy. For a
who uia nts to
pr i ce?
I don't ulant to hear Eric
about the ordinance isconrad: 9o that has to b
say thaL. I want there !e in
obe
the public
a def i ni te
not i ce -
commen!
Planni ns Commission
September 5, 1990 -
Meet i ng
Page 50
available aL City HaIl and I think we should find a larger sjte than this
PauI.
Kr auss :
some but
I will try and arrange for lhe school . That may change lhe dates
we '11 Lry .
The CiLy Council should be there too. They shouLd be there, They-there.
Conrad:
urill be
Ahrens: tJhat
Krauss: They
abcut the Chanhassen Dinner Theatre?
don't have enough parking.
we need a]l this, does she have to tape all this PauI on theEmmi ngs :
reeord?
Do
Conrad;
Emm i ngs :
co nr aci :
it's been okay.
think so?
Kraugsj
Do you
Yeah.
Can I just touch very briefly on,."
Conrad: Yeah. I have to be home by 9:30
Kr-ause: I responded to, Chaska sent us a copy of a guide plan anendmentupdate that they had- This is parL of the obLigation that tre have torespond to the 9ystens statentent. Chaska is expressing lhe same concer nsHe are. That Lhe Systems statement numbers, regional model numbers for
Chaska significanti), underestimate what's on lhe ground loday and don't
acccmmodate gror,rth in their comrnunity, The magnitude of difference betweenus and therr is, they have a lower magni.tude of difference. But it,s the
same concern. In my response Lo !hem, I said we agree and Ne have similar -concern3. l.le are looking f or , because lhey raised the Chaska ser,Jagetreatment plant issue. That we think that that's an issue that affects notonly Chaska bu! also Chanhassen and we want to be a party to whateverresolution and studies are undertaken with LhaL. We,ve talked to Shirleyabout this in the pas! and their staff and I told Shirl.ey we Lrere golng to
comment in that way and she understood thaL. So unless you have some other
comrnents on what they had, we're just going to pass that a]ong. The lastitem is our response to the t'1etro Transit Commission,s study that FredHoisingLon presented. They were actually looking for a response from us toconvey to their board. Basically trhat I indicated is we support theprogram. [.Je've been invo]ved wilh it. l^re are working with them !o improvepark and ride facilities and urould continue to do Lhat. I did raise someconcerns though with the level of emphasize that Fred, in working for theSouthwest Hetro put into transportation trip management strategies. Those -are very cornp.Lex issues that deal with some community perceplions.
Community values. Development values. Equity issues. One of the
recommendations was lhat you charge for parking or tha! you make developers-pay for, you know Redmond would have paid so many dollars because they,veuant !o build parking instead of park and ride or ride sharing. tJe]I tha!
may be a valid r,ray of limiting Lraffic on TH S and I,ve been a supporter of_that in lhe past and would continue to do so but lhe proper context for
Planning Commission
September 5, 1990 -
HeeLi ng
Page 51
that to be evaluated is not in a recommendation atlached to a transit
report- in my view, It's to set up a joint communiLy efforL, Chaska/Eden
Prairie,/Chanhassen at lhe very least working wilh carver county, HennePin
county. i^lorking with RTB. tJorking with MnDot. tlorking with the business
comnnunity to approach this because this is someLhing that r.JiII have a great
deal of innpact on everybody. And we've conveyed that fact to the SouLhNesL
Hetro that we'd be willing to participate in such a group if it came off
and we'd encourage it doing that. t^le iust didn't u,ant any unilateral
action coirring ouL of Lhe Scuth'.,est study in thaL regard. They're valid
concepts and rae'11 explore them but just not in that context.
Conrad: A lot of response after 11:Oo. Any comments? I liked the staff
report. The Ietters in it. It's fun to see. Anything else? I think one
issue that Tj.m brough! up and Lhat's, it's real valid and I lhink we need
to get in the practice of it. It's amazing how we can get two items on the
agenda and shcot 31l2 hours here bu! reviewing once a month Paul I think,
to review the u:crk, the tasks cutstanding. I think it's just aPProPriate.
Just to see where He 6re and Provide priority. Tim's issue is valid and we
uJant to make suve you're urorking on the righ! stuff based on our minds so
you can sort i+- in with all the other stuff you have to do.
Balzli: Ar-e any of our projects cr:t for the cutting block given Lhe Cit-v's
forecastecl shortfa.l. I i. -r revenues?
Krauss: l,JeI1, the Planning Department's
have nruch L:uclget Lo b,egin ulith. There's
rather fortunate
noLhing lo cut.
anyHay.
No,
tJe don '',
Krauss: The staff car lhaL we never got. I lold Don he could have it
back. No, except to the extent that ule've, Iike I touched on earlier,
we've tried to fund storm waLer management, wetland efforts out of general.
fund revenues. t e t^,e]- e not able to do that last year inasmuch as at the
present time thal fund is !E35O,OOO.OO in lhe hol-e. It's unlikelv that
tre'iI be airle Lo do it next year too, BuL Lha!'s the only neu, Program or
series of programs that we had anticipated.
Erhart: I think that's one of the reasons to keep moving on this comp PIan
thing is that the city is staffed up !o handle a cerLain level of
developmenL. That brings in a lot of money.
Olsen: A car .
Krauss: That's a real valid point.
Erhart; And aII of a sudden nou we're finding ourselves. . .all' of a sudden
we're going to get this dip in there before we get our Plan aPProved and
iL's going to create a lot of hardship. It is now alreadv - t'le don't knot't
how much of an imPact it's going to the economy and how much...
Conrad: Anythins e lse?
Bat-zli moved, Ellson seconded to adjourn
and Lhe motion carried. The meeting was
the meet i ng -
adjourned at
AlL voted
11:05 p.m.
in favor
Prepared by Nann OPhe r rir
Subm i t.t ed by Paul Krauss
Planning D i r ector
\
CITY OF
EH[NH[SSE}I
1
2
690 COULTEB DRIVE. PO. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-s739
At the Septenber 10, 1990, City Council meeting, the following
actions were taken.
An extension of preliminary plat approval for suamit at Near
Mountain for Lundgren Brothers was approved for a period of
one year. The applicants had indicated that due to slower
market conditions, filing and developing of this subdivision
would take longer than anticipated.
The Council approved a Detes and bounds subdivision to divide
a 1.8 acre parcel into two parcels located south of Lake Susanat 8528 Great Plains BouLevard for walter Paulson. The
property is located inmediately south of Lake susan and plans
call for dividing off an existing homestead to create a new
buildable 1ot. Access will be provided by a private drivewayto H\.ry. Lo1. The city Council discussed access provisionsrelative to future improvenent plans for Hwy. L01 and with
regards to the new ordinance pertaining to regrulation ofprivate driveuays. The proposal was sonewhat unusual since
there are already 5 homes using an existing private drivewaythat nou].d run adj acent to the one being proposed currently
and they vould all share a conmon curb cut. Staff had
reconmended approval and ultinately the council did vote to
approve this action.
Prelirninary plat and site plan review for the Frontier Retail
Center for Bloomberg Conpanies. The City Council reviewedplans to expand the Frontier Center Retail Building. As at
the Planning conrnission meeting, discussion of parking j,ssues
were doninated. Staff had carefully reviewed the
reconmendations of the Planning Conmission and had proposed
several further nodifications to the city Council for theirconsideration. Sone of these modifications stenmed fron ner.,
J
I{EUORANDI'U
To: Planning Conmission
FROU: Paul Krauss. Planning Director
DATE: Septenber 13, 1990
SUBI: Report from Planning Director
Planning Director Update
September 13, 1990
Page 2
6.
inforrnation and actions obtained since the Planning Commissionmeeting. Staff had also proposed the reinstatement of twoconditions, the first pertaining to enployee parking, the
second to the prohibition against parking of rental equipnentalong West 78th Street. The City Council ultj-nately approvedthe request subject to the conditions recommended by thePlanning Commission as modified by staff, however, theproposed condition pertaining the parking of rental equipnentuas deleted in a manner sinilar to the planning Conmission,saction based on the City Councilis belief that this could behandled administratively. The city Council did deternine thata requireuent for enpLoyee parking should be maintained.
Conditional use permit for a celluIar telephone facility forMinneapolis SMSA Linited Partnership. Staif brought forwardthe Planning conmissionrs reconmendation of approval for thecellu1ar telephone tower. The City Council discussed it atlength raising Bany of the issues that were heard at thePlanning Conmj.ssion meeting. one neighborhood resident rraspresent to oppose the request. Ultinately, the city councilvoted to approve the touer subject to conditions asreconmended by the Planning Cornrnission.
On Visitor Presentations, Blackie Wangrerin, nho rras theapplicant for the clay excavation penoit approved on theJeurissen Farm, addressed the city councif regardingconditions of approval. The ptanning cornnission nay b6 awar5that. Mr. Wangerin did not attend the planning Connissionneeting nor did he attend the city Council neeting. Utilizingsonewhat foul language, he threatened the City with legaiaction due to the scope of conditions applied to iis appro.ril.After he spoke, the City tilanager indicated to the City bouncilthat since legal action had been threatened that, in thefuture, the .city Attorney would be conmunicating with hinregarding this matter in a confidential way.
comprehensive Plan update. Staff is proceeding with work tocomplete the comprehensive plan elements. We are alsocontinuing our discussions with the li{etro Council and havescheduled a meeting and bus tour with a number of their staffpeople for- Monday, septeDber- 24th. preparing for this neetingis occupying a fairly significant anolunt o-f tine. ft uiliinvolve- a city. toui foi Metropolitan Council staf}, ;h;gelerally have little understanding of our connunity. At thispoint, it is still not clear as to rrhether or not the octoberloth deadline can be reached for a public hearing. failing tomeet this date, staff would suggesl that the neiting be lieldton Wednesday, October Z4th. Staff will be attefpting toclarify these dates and check with the school dis*ict- foravailability of the school cafeteria and rrill report nore t;the Planning Cornmission at the planning conmissioln neeting.
5.
CITY OF
CH[NH[SSE}I
690 COULTEB DRIVE . P.O. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 5531 7
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
}IEI,IORANDI'U
BO:
FRO}T:
DATE:
SUR':
Planning Conmission
PauI Krauss, Planning oj::ectot Sk-
SepteDber 14, 1990
ltetropolitan council Rural DeveloPment Standards
carl ohrn of the l,tetro council staff recently attended a meeting of
the southlrest corDmunities coalltLon of which chanhassen is a
,.rU"i. The topic of discussion *,as the Uetropolita-n Councilrs on-
g"Gq-i""ppraiial of Rural Area Developroent standards ' The neet!ng
ias interllting fron Chanhassenr s standpoint because it deals with
tfr. ir". that is currentLy and wiII continue to be located outside
oi tfr" MUSA line and how tiris nay be alloued to devetop in the tine
;;";;ai;t itls inclusion ,itlrin the liIUsA. Holever, there vas one
iirticufirfy iroportant piece of in-fornation that I vish to convey
io tfre nfainini CoronisLion and that i6 that when the L,ake Ann
agreenent rras ;ntered into, the litetro council insisted on rural
aiea densities exceed no more than one unit per 10 acres on
average, but that Dinhun lot sizes be restricted to 2'5 acres Per
i"t. - our ordinance rras consequently amended accordingly' over
iir", trr&" have been guestionJ abouE the 2.5 acre standard since
ii iJ refatively apparent from actual experience that 2.5 acre lots
oiailea in thii ai6a consume large anounts of land for relativeLy
iow- aenrity housing in a nannLr that tt makes it unusually
aifficult f:or nor:aai city developroent to occur at such time the
fmil fi"" is expandeit. Oie need ;nly 19ok as far as the Sun Ridge
i:""rt- ii"., which was platteal undei tbis revised. regulation, to
""i"-tt" difficulty thit occurg uhen the UUSA line is expanded
."iiti"" to resident concerns with neighboring land. uses'. Itlr ' ohrn
indicated that the uetro council ls rethinking their entire.policy
;;;;;-;"-iititg to this issue. I{hite they are n-ot con-sidering
i a-.p.ri"t" fron ihe 1 per 10 acre averaqe, t]tey hav-e, h-owever,
"fi.iai--ioppea the nin-inum lot size Etandard. Ilhile they are
i"vesiigatii6 app.optiate means of developi-ng these- areas, he
iiiii"it3a-ttit ii tie citv so chose, ue wourd probabrv be in a
p"=iii"" to maintain the i per 10 acre average but decrease lot
A
Planning Conmission
Irlet Council Rural Development Standards
SepteDber 14, 1990
Page 2
size as considered reasonable. For exanple, one acre lots could beconsidered acceptable so long as there were a high degree ofcontrol over the installation and maintenance of on-site utilitles.The Planning CoDnission may uish to consider this Lnfornationrelative to the Couprebensive plan andr/or with regards to thepossibility of anending the Zonlng ordinance.
Amendments to MUSA Boundary Adoption 12rl90
Future Use for Areas
Outside the MUSA Boundary
1995 Study Areas - Work effortto begin after adoption of new
Conp Plan
2
3
Zoninq Code Amendnents
1. Blending ordinance
2. Rezoning BF Dist. to A2
Sign Ordinance(low priority)
Staff directed to developscenarios - low priority
Scheduled Discus s ion/sta ffdirected to draft a potential
new zoning district ordinance -late faLL, 1990
3
4
1
2
Tree ordinance - Mapping ofsignif icant vegetative
areas
Other Itens
Conputerize land use fi1es,pernits, conditions andexpiration dates on aparcel by parcel basis
Reappraisal on wetlandissues, ordinance and
napping in conjunctionnith storn rrater manageDent
and water guality plan
Inactive
Inactive
Schedule futurefalI, 1990
agenda late
Ongoing - CUP's conpleted
staff processing a positionpaper to review wetlandordinance and enforceraent
Budgeted noney for update 2year tineframe or storm wateruti).ity fund
' Novenber 1, 1990
January, 1991
3.
4
Definition of structures
Shoreland Ordinance
Flood Zone ordinance5 November, 1990
REVISED SEPrE!.{BER 14, 1990
ONGOTNG ISSUES STATUS
comprehensive Plan fssues
1. Comprehensive PIan Update Adoption 12190
5. Rezoning 2L Acre I-ots to RRDistrict
6. crading/lilineralExtraction ordinanceadopted
7. Review legislation and
ordinance pertaining to
group homes
winter, 19 91
8. Variance ordinance and
procedures
Adopted by City Council
9. Ordinance revision dealingwith lots accessed byprivate driveways
Approved by CC on 3/26/90
10. ordinance revision dealingwith requirement to post
signs of notice for
developnent
Adopted - sigms to be acquired
11. Zoning Ordinance Amendmentfor satelLites on
Recreational Beachlots
12. Structures below OHIill must
have a pernit.
13. Revision of ordinancespertaining to antenna tolrers