11-28-90 Agenda and PacketFile
AGENDA
CIIANHASSEN PI,ANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, NOVEI,IBER 28, L99o, 7:30 P.U.
CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 590 COULTER DRIVE
CALL TO ORDER
PUBLIC HEARTNGS
conditional Use Pernit Amendment amending the fence height
fron the approved I feet to 15 feet in the rear and side yards
on property zoned IOP and located at 7851 Park Drive,
Lakeshore Equipnent, steve wiflette.
2.subdivision ordinance amendEent to anend Section 18-57,
Streets, to reflect current city standards for right-of-way
vidths, driverrays, etc. and roodify the Urban Service Area
references .
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BU SINESS
APPROVAL OF UINUTES
CITY COIJNCIL UPDATE
ONGOING ITEIT{S
ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS
OPEN DISCUSSION
ALTOURN}{ENT
INTERVIEW PIANNING COI,IUTSSTON CANDIDATES
walter Thompson
cathy Piha Huffnan
Joseph G. scott
Gary Devaan
Andrew K. olson
l,lark o. Senn
David J. KoubskyJeff Farnakes
Stephen S. l[orse
1
:30
:40
:50
:00
:10
220
:30
:40
:50
II
8
9
9
9
9
9
9
P.u.
P.U.
P.!{.
P.U.
P.U.
P.Ir{.
P.t{.
P.U.
P.U.
EHINHISSE[I
STAFF REPORT
PC DATE: LL/28/9O
cc DATE: L2/1-o/eo
CASE #: 88-17 cUPBy: A1-Jaff/v
Fz
()
=L(L
ko
tdho
7851 Park Drive - Lot 2t Block 3, chanhassen Lakes
Business Park
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:Steve Willette - Lakeshore Equipnent
7851- Park Drive
Chanhassen, llN 55317
IoP, Industrial office Park
4.1 acres
N - TOP,
S - IOP,
E - IOP,
W - IOP,
WATER AND SEWER:Availab1e to the site
PHYSICAL CIARACTER. :The site slopes to the south and southeast.
2OOO I,AND USE PI,AN:fndustrial
CITY OF
Conditional Use Pernit Amendnent amending the FenceHeight fron Approved 8 Feet to 15 Feet in the Rear and
Side Yard
PRESENT ZONING:
ACREAGE:
DENSITY:
ADJACENT ZONTNG AND
I,AND USE:
RS
.RD
A2
BG
LA&E
F.Ru
\
2
9a
to
\
\.R1
R'
FO AO
'rcF
UTT
rr
PRoPosau
C)NDrtloNftL qa€
ER.u tr kueNoHaJT'
)o
^-
1.ocLJ PI.JD-R
a
I I
d
e
LA'(E AII'I
R4
D
]}
€
R12
s]
.l
;i+
Lakeshore Equipnent
November 28 , 7,990
Page 2
On October 1-9, L99O, the City Building Inspector was to conduct afinal inspection on the fence. He requested that he be accompaniedby a staff nember from the Planning Department because he suspectedthat the fence was higher than 8 feet. Staff concluded that thefence reaches as high as 15 feet in some areas. The applicant wascontacted and advised to either cut the fence down to 8 feet orapply for an arnendrnent to his conditional use perrnit. Theapplicant chose to apply for the anendment.
ANALYSTS
The conditional use pernit was approved on the condition that alloutdoor storage must be totaLLy screened by an I foot wooden fence.
The fence is Located on an area with an elevation of 930'. Highway5 has an elevation of 952 r. The topography of the land does notpernit the equiprnent stored outdoors to be screened by an I foothigh fence from sone views from Hwy. 5 (Attachnent #4). However,it appears as though much of this problem stens fron the fact that
BACKGROUND
on october 'l 9, 1988, the planning Commission recomnended approvalof the conditional use pernit for Lakeshore Equipnent (attalhnent#1). One of the issues that was discussed at ahal meeting was the
99tao9-r storage fencing. The applicant had stated at th5 meetingthat the fence rrould be 8 feet high.
on october 24, L988, the city Council approved the conditional useperrnit (Attachnent #2). Again, the issue of the fence wasdiscussed. The city Council reconnended that the fence be 8 feetin height. The condition stated that alL itens stored in theoutdoor storage area must be totally screened by an 8 foot woodenfence and no stored items shall project over the fence.
on January 23, 1990, staff rras conducting a conditional use permitrevi.ew for the Lakeshore Eguipnent sife and discovered dn.t .portion of the fence had coJ.lapsed. The owner of the site was sent
a
_
letter asking him to restore the fence. The applicant compliedwith staff ts request i'nnediately.
On JuIy 7 , L99O, Chanhassen experienced a wind storn which resultedin the destruction of a large portion of the fence. The applicantapplied for a building permit which was received by the DlanningDepartnent on July 13, 1990. Staff contacted the applicant andnade hin aware that the fence may not exceed 8 feet in height. Acopy of the city Council ninutes and conditions of approval of theconditional use permit were sent to the applicant. It was alsonoted on the survey subrnitted for the fence pernit that the fence
may not exceed I feet in height (Attachnent #3).
Lakeshore Equipnent
November 28, 7990
Paqe 3
effective screening is rnade difficult by the applicants decision to
stack naterials in excess of the approved 8 foot height.
The fence that has been installed by the applicant, in our opinion,is hideous. It appears as though sections from two different typeof fencing were stacked together in a conpletely unrestrained
manner. The jagged building Line of the fence makes it appear evennore implausible. staff cannot support the fence as currently
designed since we believe it is inconsistent with the goal i.n
rnaintainingr reasonabl,e architectural standards in our community.
We believe that if a screen fence of this height rras to have been
required in the first p1ace, the question should reasonably have
been asked whether or not outdoor storage of this nature wasacceptable. If it was deerned to be acceptable, at the very Least,a masonry wal1 consistent with the exterior of the building and
supplied with extensive landscaping should have been required. Inrequiring that the fence be rebuilt to an I foot height, we do notdesire to expose the storaqe area to off-site v5,ews, however, as weindicated earlier, a good part of this probLen is of theapplicant's own nraking. Materials enclosed within the yard shouldnot be stacked to the excessive heights they are at the present.
The fact that the fence has aLready been erected should have no
bearing on this applicati.on. The applicant was placed on notice bystaff that an 8 foot high fence was all that rras approved on thissite and in spite of this notification, he went and constructed thepresent fence. Therefore, if, in requiring the removal of thisfence, there is an investment in naterial and tine that is lost,this is the applicant's doing and not the Cityts responsibility.
Based upon the argunents presented above, and the fact that hrebelieve that allowing the fence to renain as currently built wouldestablish a poor precedent of future developnent in the conmunity,we are recommending that the reguest to anend the conditional useperurit approval be denied.
RECOMII'IENDATION
Staff recommends that the request to anend Conditional Use pernit
#88-17 be denied and the applicant required to reconstruct theoriginally approved fence to an 8 foot height for the followingreasons :
1. Theacti previous
2
current fence was constructed in disregard ofons by the Planning Corarnission and City -Council .
The current fence was constructed in disregard of lequirementsplaced on the fence pernit application by city staaf.
The current fence visually detracts from the high qualitydesign standards of the surrounding business park.
3.
Lakeshore Equipnent
Novenber 2A, 1990
Page 4
incentive is to continue to exist.
4. The presumed need to erect a 15 foot high fence to screenoutdoor storage is a result of the applicantrs decisions withregard to managing his operation.
5. IIad the City been aware of the requirement to construct a 15foot high screen fence at the outset, this site plan lrouldhave likeIy either been substantially different or may haveeven been rej ected by the city.
ATTACHI,IENTS
Planning Commission ninutes dated October 19, L988.City Council. ninutes dated October 24, LgBg.Building perrnit appl ication.
Topography map.Staff report dated October 19, 1988.
Manaserrs Connent: A special assessnent reduction agreement urasapproved by the Housing and Redevelopnent Authority contingent onthe same presentation nade to the planning Commission, i.e. youwill not see anything, an 8 foot fence and berns wiII be instal-1edto visually reduce the 8 foot fence, etc. Although I have askedtle City Attorney to review this, I an positive that his opinionwill be that Mr. Witlette nust neet the HRArs conditions if tne
1
2
3
5
Planning Commission ttee t i ng
October 19, 1988 - Page 26
PUBLIC HEARING:
LAKESHORE EQUIPMENT, PROPERTY ZONED IOP, INDUSTRIAT OFFICE PARK, LOCATED
ON PARI( DRIVE APPROXIHATELY I/2 TNILE SOUTH OF HWY. 5:
A. CONDITIONAL USE PERI-TIT FOR OUTDOOR STORAGE ON 4.19 ACRES.
Public Present:
Steve WiIIet Appl ican t
\lLo.ahrnenl # L
Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report.
Chairman Conrad called the pubLic hearing to order.
steve willet: Good evening. I'm Steve WiIIet and Irm the president of
Lakeshore Equipment Company. What ere are proposing is an outside storagearea for docks and boat lifts. We currently have outside storage on ourlocation over on Monterey Drive which is nothing like what this one isgoing to be. This is all going to be cedar fence. I came to you 2 years
ago when we moved into town when we got an outside storage permit. Istarted working on the fence and the l,tayor, Tom Hamilton and a few of the -
council members decided rdell, donrt cut down anymore trees and put up any
more fences. Leave the trees to make a natural screen so thatrs the
reason for the condition that the outside storage in existence is thisarea in which I'm proposing. I am going to own the land, the building andeverything and we have a very strong vesteil interest in it. I had picked
up the fencing report. The fence is going to be an I foot high fence and -some of the stuff that werve got in our storage yard now, apparentJ.y we'vegrown up so Large, vre stacked tttem rather large in height this spring.This storage area is now 5 times what we've got so ire wonrt have to see itstacked so high so you wonrt ever see anything above the fence as well as -I have designed in berms going around the entire fence to try to drop theheight of that I foot high fence as well. On our property line, if youillnote along the north edge of our property therers an existing berm alreaily-going onto the next piece so that even brings it down a little further soyou're not going to see this big high fence but we,re stil1 going to beable to achieve our screeneil storage. we have in the total landscapeplan, right now therers I tree on our entire lot which is. about the sizeof your thumb. I put 8g soure odd trees on our lot at the cost toLakeshore Equiptnent of almost $l4,ggS.SS. I am coNritted to try to stayin Chanhassen if I can. Irve spent a lot of advertising dollari. We'rethe largest in the mid$est of our kind and we are doing very, very rell.
We bring in a lot of trade to the community and this is a nlcessity forour business. The fence is all going to be cedar. Ful1y stained lo earth _tone color to seal it and let it blend with the rest of the land. I guessthatrs basically it. Weire just dealing with the fenceil area right noir?
Planning Commission Meeting
October 19, 1988 - Page 27
Conrad: Yes, j ust
to the site plan.
fence . Thanks , and rre | 1Iother public comments?
call on you when vre getthe
Any
Batzli moved, El l sonfavor and the motion
to close the publ ic
The public hear ing
hearing. All voted in
was closed.
sec onded
carried.
Erhart: The outdoor, that is included in the ordinance asuse? Is there any restrictions on how close the fence can
Property line? In this case itrs not right at the edge.
an
be
acceptable
to the
Steve Willet: ...lfe have plenty of
Erhart: The area that you can see,landscaping Jo Ann?
Olsen: The fence does. ..
Iand behind it.
you rrere asking for some more
Erhart: And therers trees aII around the fence?
Olsen: Yes, there is.
&runings: we're only doing the conditional use permit, right?
Conrad: Yes.
Emmings: The onty thing I would do again is, number one says that alliterns wilL be totally screened anil I lrould just add to that, and l,ve
added this in whenever werve looked at nini-storage with eraLls on it.Again, just add to number t that no stored items may project over theof the fence. Again, so it,s just clear. He's said thatrs not going
happen and Irm sure itrs not but just so thatrs clear.
Steve Willet: It didDrt happen
maybe a week or two.
very ofter even over at our other one.
toP
to
Emnings: Irm not directing this at
rith fences around them, I've tried
Steve WiIIet: That rras in our last
you. Whenever r,eiveto put that condi tion
one .
Iooked at
in.things
Emmings: Butpipe sticking
get anythingthe back?
you
in
do
up
where you have just like a mast, just a
Ellson: It looks fine to me.
BatzIi: To get totally technical and
anyft in the second condition I wouldit.
somewhat legal here, afterinsert the words nand allf the word
That I s
Wildermuth: I donrt have anything.
Planning Commission Meeting
October 19, 1988 - Page 28
BatzIi noved, Enmings seconded that the Planning Commission reconmend
approval of Conditional Use Permit 188-17 as shoern on the site plan dated
September 26, L9gg vrith the following conditions:
AII items stored in the outdoor storage area must be totally screeneilI
no stored items shall project over the fence.
The conditional use permit must meet any and aII conditions of thesite plan approval for Site PLan *88-16.
A11 voted in favor and the motion carried.
1
2
B. SITE PLAN REVIEW EOR AN OFF ICEIWAREHOUS E FACILITY, PROPER?Y
INDUSTRIAL OFE'ICE PARK, LOCATED ON PARK DRIVE APPROXII.IATELY 1,/2
OE HWY. 5, LAKESHORE EQUIPMENT.
ZONED IOP,
MILE SOUTH
Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report.
Conrad: Steve, do you rrant to react to the conditions that the staff hasIaid out?
Steve willet: As far as the additional trees in the front, if I could Iwould like the opportunity to move a couple from someplace else because Ialready spent $I5,0gg.gg on landscaping and I think itis substantial . Icane in.with a plan thinking that Iim going to do it up right and tflefirst time werll get it through, werII get done and thErei 3 not going tobe anyplace to pur a few more trees when I already spent gl5rggg.gg. I,dlike to move I ot 2 of those from along that parking lot area. If you'llnotice, on that plan that you have on the board there, it.s a littladifferent frotn the photocopied plan that r revised because of the bermthat we had to put around the parking area and the pine trees that rre puton the berm to screen the parking lot area from the road. I found outIater on that it was just because of headlights but werre going to screenthem a little bit more so you donrt have to took at the paiXing tot. I,dlike the opportunity to move a maple tree or two and mayle put-a couplepines trees out front. You'11 notice there are some pine tiees on thecorner around the parking area. Maybe if I could just respace them. Ihate to spend any more money.
Conrad: I have nothing. Is there a motion?
BatzIi: I move the Planning Conmission recommends approval of Conditional
Use Permit *88-17 as shown on the Site PIan dated September 26, 1988.. iriththe following conditions. The first condition reading as staff prepared
it lrith the amendment that the period by a semicolon and that the phrase,
no storeil items shatL project over the fence, be inserted. Anal the secontl
condition, that the words rrand allrr after the rrord nany" be insertedl .
Emmings: second.
94
'City Courcil tEeting - Ocl,oer 21, LgAg
!{a}ror ttmilton:
finished.
Did 1ou harre anlthirg else Bill? I didn,t kno,, if you r€re
t-Oo',Eilman Bott: t€11, !'es. I do have nore. I rculd argrue. tj,at tlre boati:rtl.H_fl1; s9_ttire is certainly a nice .hins to h.d-io;the cilrunityam ,r's certainly an i[provq*lt over Frtting it tnrough the trees ,.hich ed]].(!have been the other arterrEtive but ,tpn re'r6 tar.king i*ri-oga-*,pioG",rerre talking about heavy use on.city parks. tc've g5t " d;;i;G;t iere thatr. think rE're arl-haIf,!, to have in 6tiir. r think tr,it tr,"v-"t "fr-i-il.t t*tley can_be cutributing nore to tie crsts that E rr."e in'"peiiting-il*parks. I rpuld like to seer.is there anlore frcm Rosenount ir"..z 6f"i, r guessrhat I'd ll.ke to see happen is, since loir,re going tg haye 30t of pur propertycovered si th sdE sort of hard anrfacel wtrich'is 6asically ,ait-y"i;* i iri t"a!o,.iq r erould iuragine your re going to be graaing a good bit or'$,"t piop.rty.rs that a reasonable assurptioni what r'd iik" to have a c.cnmihent to is thatEi_ry:l* doing that, pu'rt u,ita scnre balrfieras out trreie.- i[i"!ti:.r *trqErvroulr surtacE so !'ou get tl'e greenqnce credit anr the cqlumity ard 10uremployees get some fierds to play on. riat rcurtt sesn rike . i".*"iui.approach.
Rossrpunt Epresentative: t{3 alproach all of ou! sites...
Courcilman Boyt: So you,d be open to puttirg those in r*tren 1ou developed?
Rosgnount nepresentative3 yes.
Ma]ror Hanilton: AnythiDg else Bill?
CounciLnan Boyt: il1.L
I 'rltlF,
-.n -',.!
'_Lto
courcilnan llcrn moved, lEyor thrilton secorrled to a[prove Rossnount rnc., o,trotA a!4 fot 1, Block 1, Chanhassen laks Brsiness pari- third addition:- li1Eeliminary Plat to s:bdivide 87.3 acres into 5 industriar office :.ots'arra tspoutrots i ard (2) FirEl prat pursuant to the city lrarEger r s rec.cnlErdations.All voted in favor arrt the rrction carried
c*P(t0 srlE Ptall RwrE{ AID @ilDrrrolAL usE PERMTT RDQUEST, FoR oEFrcE^BREHc[rsEEncrLrry AND curDooR grpRAGE, ctD,NassEN taKEs BUsrNEss pARK, ralesnbns
EUIIiIEITT.
courcitnan Bott: -r just haq.oge .m!!: rtreyr ve discr:ssed Fttirrg in a 8 foott'podeo ferre but in our corditions re didn.t rlfererre to that. !€ iust said
;r.rE- in an opaqr:e fence. Ihere's a_lot of opaqr.re fencing I nouldn. i 6"-t pgfrith so r rculd like to see us, urder courcil rectnrnerditio* * pug"-r'ot th"staff mtes, add ttEt the fence urder it€m l rtrere it says, ,*t i"-LLffyscreened ni t}| an I foot rFoden ferre. I.d like to see ttnt aAaea.
l€)ror lEnirton: rive seeo rrcoden fences tbat aren.g rearry as attretive as alot of other tlpes of ferres. Ttrey terd to fall atErt.
CourEilnan Bolt: t€II, itts going to have to be maintained.E
4
Abtachnne nt # 2
ef,
1-
.rty courcil tbeting j .iaoU". 24; LgBg
ltrerers no question about that. IE have inspectors now to do!{ayor }lami I ton :
that.
L
courEiLrEn Boyt: creat. rheyt ve inlicated they burd rike to builit it. t'djust like to see it in writing.
Ma]ror Hadlton: rrn nErely c.curenting sr lpur cffitt. rtrat tbere are fencesthat are better than nood ferres.
Counci lrrr n BoyE: Tcm, if 1ou,d like to suggest orn, IrlI c*unge ttris.
ral'or tlanilton: rrm not an exlErt on ferres. r gr.Ess r didnrt knor, you $ereeither but r do tfiink there are fences better tlan mod fences. t{ood is not trEatxir€r. You donrt like to cut doEt trees but I'on rant eve4rthing to be rrcod.Itrs aazing. It's kind of hard to do.
@urrciLrnan Bolt: f$uld you actept r,ood ferre or better?
l'lalDr lhailton: sure. r think opaque ferr.e anseErs rdlat rprre attempting todo. To screeD the storage froE site.
counci lran Boyt: Htrat r donrt mnt is an intenpven chain linked fence.
!{a}or Hanilton: r rDurdnr t accept that either because you can see right throughtlrgn. they are not o1Eque in my opinion.
courciLrnan Boyt: r guess r€ can shorten this rrp. r tould move that r€ anerdpoint 1 urder staif reccmrerdations for t}le .oniitionur *" p.*it-io incLr.lde anI foot rrcoden fence.
courcilnan Johnson: rrlr secord it. r think therer s another [Dint lihere, a rotof tinEs *= tark in our zoning ordinance about erhat tlpe of t.i"" * ,o"t "rasrhatever. r*ren r€'re ts*iry about opaqring, if rn ii"t to protiuit'int .*u*chain-linked ferE-e, r€r shourd-have rt iigit in trre orain"r.= -trrat those "reconsidered adequate for screening prrpod".
CourciLuran Geving: I,d agree wi th you on that Jay.
coqciunal Boyt rpved, ourEilIrlan Johnson secorded to alprove the site planRevis anil cordirional use permit request for officelua;;h."; f""iiiay-;outdoor storage, Chanhassen takes Bsiness park, lakestrore Bq.iF"rr[-#$ .na*r,lnent to cordition 1of the corditional use to include ari g iooi roodenfence. AII voted in favor ard the rnotion carriea.
(r) Atm{oRrzATrON To rAKE BrDs, ErRE DEpARnlElrr AERTAL raDDB rRrx.
Cowrilnan Boyt:_.I just have a question t}tat Ird 1ike to c).ear r4l. Is there
I :lft lIT the Eire EpalurEnt here tonight? Okay, 1ou can probably artseEr
I :li: question f9t,i. rtrs.my inrpression that fien pu're taiirq UE Uia onL :Ills-trtJck, that errre getting a truck that goes thror:gh the dowrtoun, rukes allrne turns arld you can set it l4) doi,n there. Is that correct?
5
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BUILDINq PERMII APPL ICAT IONGENERAL INFORHAT ON
Date:
Si te
/Single Fsoily:_Hultipie Owelling:_ No. o. Units:
res
0wner:
Address:
c/e h/,
Contractoa:
Address:
4.^./a
Subdivisioo:
Jrd Floor: 4L
-Iectric:
s:_ No. of F
P
: Iotal.
L.,^\ko
Lot No:
Parcel ldentification No:
Estimated Conpletion Date:
iIELL INC
Valua t ion Excludinq Land:
Square Footage:
No. of Fireplaces:
&5.-r ?ooitQcti.on*o,la N*: t4: Zonino District!
lst f loor:_ 2nd Fl
Heating Syste0: oil: _ Gas:
Air Cooditioning: yes No
No. of i 8aths._No. of 1/4 ths:_ No. of Bedroofis:U
pe - tlasoory:_ Hetal 0
Easement Finishe Explaio:
Garage:ached Detached Tuck-under Dimensions
variance requ ired: Yes No If so, has variance been approvedt Yes
in.ished:
Nor****+rrr**rrrT*-I;Irr=;**
Value of Improve t, S-c,o.'oC,
Expla in:
Nelv:_ Alter:_ Repair:_ Additionl
E*,n,,'Srr".,>i2Q Saar<..41,,..?e Feet:Dimensions:
TOTAL
THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A EUILDII{G PERMIT AND NOT TO BE HISUNDERSTOOO AS THE ACIUAL EUILDING PERHIT.
THE UNDERSIGNED HEREEY AGREES IO DO ALL
AND THE RULINCS OT I8E BUILDING DEPART}IE
IIORK IN ACCORDANCE I{ITH THE ORDII{ANCES OF IHE CITY OF CHANHASSEN
N
Applicant,s Nane( prin
Applicsntis Signatu.e
APPR VALS:
ut rn9 f cra
'/F**".".r):
Telephone l{o.h -o
?
FEES: ,
-Pernrit
Fee
Pl6n Check Fee
State Fee
sAc
se*er Surcharge
Park Dedication FeeTrail oedication Fee
Water Unit
sere. Unit
Interest
tlater Heter
e -tCJ
tngi oeering D epartoent
I ase
Da te
a
L,
v Snner
As sessment C.I eak Dste
At[a.ch(€r^f#3
P ark snd Recaeation DaLe
)'Fenca Tne\ not excePl Srex,| in ktxl+
RESIOENTIAL DTIELLINC
r___Gg>__
Eloct lo: 3
MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEHENTS, EIC.
Forced Air: Hot later:
r--rs-€d-
EI
tl
o
0
\
I6
{'I
3 $
IDr
g
s
.t
c
ot
,.1 o.,-.a't-
$. i.. -.,,,.... ,'t' ,'.t.. .t, t i-
ol
$li?i
t{
I,:
0
ts
6.
-
n
q
I\y
l^
I
'(r_9
4r.+tlro'.
F:-',.j..-:-.I
I
i
i
.a:'
i
Il-Flzt>-tt
_rl 'irt\l
!lolttl
I
I
I
I
I
',,i :
a\
l.
\-rJ
4..r^;..
f
i
I
T
li
I
-'t
E
*
EI,
lf,
fiE
4
//,
"i!\h'
fli
,*r
'1.
8-
$..'i-
W
f seerl
t-
'aro
gv
l
r'iucrI
i,':.
cl-I
€t
94D ;2;<E:T)-;-r.
-.IEG( tl-:-
{(
.*.
I
i
tr ;q
,}
"o,V
,,,.,,I
{
#+
-icff fI
?d
(-
=r I
nr\
I
JITY OF
EHINHASSE}I
STAFF REPORT
fc. oare: o"t. rs+ha'
Fz
C)
=(L
(L
k(o
lrJF
V'
Site Plan Review for an Office Warehouse Building anConditional Use Permit for Screened Outdoor Storige
LoL 2, Block 3, Chanhassen Lakes Business park
PROPOSAI,:
LOCAIION:
itiii.-, - .
D"r.--|91r/tf
Da. s--
e t€/Mr. Steve t{i 11et
Lakeshore Equipment
7904 Uonterey Drive
Chanhassen, l,!N 55317
PRESENT ZONING:
ACREAGE:
DENSIIY:
ADJACENT ZONING
AND ITAND USB:
WATAR AND SEIIBR:
IOP, Industrial Office Park
4.19 acres
IOP;
IOP,
IOP;
IOP;
N-
s-
E-
w-
future office warehouse facility
office narehouse facility
Victory Envelope
IIC
Water and sewer ia available
The site contains
south/southeast .
Eteep slopes to the
2OOO LAIID USE PI,AN:Indus tr ia I
C.C. DAIB: Oct. 24, 1988
CASE NO: 88-16 Site plan
88-]7 cuPPrepared by: Olsen,/v
APPLICANT:
PEYSICAL CEARAC.:
I v-\l;
LAKE LUCY
RD
trJ
LI
a
\
t
\
t
*JE:*_/
rfl-
R;l&
lt
\'
e
aRlt
L
{
roP
BG
,
LAKFRS
@
II
U I f I
LAKE AIIII
ii
RD
\
€
iI
Lo*rwc? e(C?xt ,
CoHDffl*lbVVbE rup1flrhfrtd'O eA'^Q.
mh.
.RSF
G
RU
i
.
':t"
s
?,
&'A-!
..t'.'*: .
-* 1'-' l'r ''.' '-it, "'"..t
1!'
jil
!.-:.i
9*-:.
,.'
I
:
R12
R12
R8
Lakeshore Eguipment
October 19, I988
Page 2
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Section 20-8L2 pernits rarehouse and office as a permitted use inthe IOP District.
Screened outdoor storage is a conditional use in the IOp District.
Section .20-LL25 requires for warehouse one parking space for each
11000 sguare feet of gross floor area up to 101000 and one addi-tional space for each adclitional 2,000 aquare feet, p).us onespace for each company vehicle for office it reguires 3 spaeesper 1,000 sguare feet.
(Attachment *1)
REFERRAT AGENCIES
Attachment l2
Attachment l3
Attachment t4
Attachnent l5
The applicantr s business is currently located on llonterey Drive
near doerntown Chanhassen. The applicantis current facility con-tains an office warehouse facility and a screened outdoor storagearea. The applicant is expanding his business and is proposingto relocate to the industrial office park.
Retail sales of merchandise stored or manufactured on site is apermitted accessory use if it does not exceed 208 of floor area.
Section 20-815 alLows a maxir[um lot coverage of 70$. a front yard
setback of 30 feet, a rear yard setback of 10 feet and a sideyard setback of 10 feet. This section also allows a maximumheight of 50 feet for the prinicipal structure.
Section 20-1191 reguires a I0 foot strip of land between abuttingright-of-way and vehicular use areas including one tree per 40feet and a hedge walI or berm of at least 2 teet.
Section 20-1192 requires inte!ior ploperty lines to be landscapedvrith one tree per 40 feet.
Section 20-121I requires interior landscaping for vehicular use
a reas .
Asst. City Engineer
Building Departnent
Fire Inspector
Watershed District
ANALYSIS
Lakeshore Eguipmen
October 19, 1988
Page 3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for screened
outaloor storage. The applicant is proposing the outdoor storage to
be located behind the proposed buildling and parking area. lhe out-door storage is approximately 24,000 square feet in size and will
have a gravel surface. The outdoor storage area siII be accessedfron the parking area and will be surrounded by an 8 foot high woodfence. The types of equipment to be stored in the storage area will
be docks and boat lifts and there will be no equipment atored abovethe 8 foot hi.gh fence.
There are no specific conditions for outdoor screened stolage andthe proposal meets thepermit. Since a1l of
by the fence and it isbuilding, thele should
L2
the
Io
be
general conditions of the conditional use
storage in the area will be totally screeneal
cated to the rear of parking and proposed
no impacts to the surrounding sites.
1
2
RECOMMENDATfON - Conditional Use Permit
Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the
following motion:
'The Planning Commission recommends approval of Conilitional UsePernit *88-17 as shown on the site plan dated Septenber 26, 1988rrith the following conditions:
All items stored in the outdoor storage area Dust be totally
screened.
The conditionaL use permit must meet any conditions of thesite plan approval for Site Plan *88-15.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the conditional
use permit i,ith the following changes to staffrs conditions:
1. All items stored in the outdoor storage area Dust be totally
screeneil anil no stored itens shal1 project over the fence.
2. The conditional use permit nust meet any and afl conditionsof the site plan approval for Site Ptan 188-16.
CITY COUNCIL RECOUIT{ENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council approve Conditional Use PerBit
Request *88-17 as shown on the site plan dated Septenber 26,
1988, with the following conditions:
1. AII items stored in the outdoor storage area must be totally
screened and no stored items shal1 project over the fence.
2. The conditional use permit must meet any and all conditions
of the site plan approval for Site plan lgg-16.
The applicant is proposing an office warehouse facility rrith asmall portion of the facility being used for retail sa.Les. Theproposed building is 7,332 square feet and is located in thenorthwest corner of the site adjacent to the outdoor storage andparking area. fhe proposed site plan is meeting a1l of therequireil setbacks for the IOp District and is also maintaining aninpervious surface of less than 70t.
Lakeshore Equipment
October L9, 1988
Page 4
The applicant is providing
Iandscaping plan is shown oThere is a,copy of the siteto the site plan which desibeing provided. Ihe applicoutdoor storage area and isbuilding area. Staff i
ilscaping be provided just to Park Driver rrhich ster opacity anil to meett. The applicant is proitionally screen the pare Inspector has recommenated ah,ay from the build
Gradinq, Dr ainaq e and Utilities
SITE PLAN REVIEW
adequate parking. The proposedn the first page of the site plan.plan underneath the letter attachedgnates rrhat types of landscaping isant is providing evergreens arounil theproviding maples around the parking
and
lan
cen
win
fee
addFir
1oc
srts
hou
the
vid
ecommentling that additionalouth of the proposed sign and adja-ld include evergreens to provide
reguirements of one tree per 40ing the required berming which willking area fron Park Drive. The Cityded that the trash receptacle being.
The IOP District al1ows retail sales of pfactured on the site provided that no norspace is used for retail aales. The applhave a showroom area which wouLcl involveducts stored and manufactured on site. Tshown on page 3 and is approximately 20tarea. The major use of the facility remastorage of docks and boat Lifts.
roducts stored or manu-e than 20t of the flooricant is proposing toretail sales of the pro-
he approximate area isof the building floorins as manufacturing and
In Attachment *2r the Assistant Engineer reviews grading,drainage and utilities for the site plan. The site is located
1985 the citlity south o
iras locatedsite receive
approved a sithe subject sIy 70 feet fr
Watershed Dis
adjacent toDistrict anilmaintain L00for a total
the 200 footthe site to
Obermeyer ) .reguirement.
rnaintain a 2not clear wh
site and dev
ch is protected by the Watershed
lopment adjacent to the creek mustpace from the centerline of the creekt of open space around the creek. Inte plan for the office/warehouse faci-ite (Attachment *6). The parking area
om the centerline of the creek. ?hetrict approval on the condition thatmaintained with the development ofect site) (see letter from Bob
owned by Opus and Opus agreed to thise development of the subject site mustpace setback along Riley creek. It iss located in relation to the proposedthe south to determine vrhether or not
1ey Creek whi
he DNR. Deveeet of open s
ea of 200 fee
reen space bee north ( subjoth lots wereTherefore, thfoot green se the creek i
oped site to
Ritf
ar
vf
on
d
g
rh
B
00
er
e1
Lakeshore Equipment
october 19, 1988
Page 5
the required separation is being maintained. Staff is recom-
arending that an amended site plan be submitted showing the loca-tion of the creek centerline and site to the south to determineif the required 200 green space is being naintained. It appealsthat the outdoor storage area may be infringing on the setback
from Riley Creek.
The applicant is proposing to drain a portion of the sitedirectly from the outdoor storage area overland into the creek
and ponding area located southeast of the property. The
Watershed District has stated that a stormwater managenent planis required to shoer how the runoff is directed from the site.
Should the applicant provide storm sewer directly to the creek a
DNR permit would be reguired. The Assistant City Engineerrs nemoprovides further detail on the drainage issue.
RECOMITIENDATION - Site Plan Review
Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt thefollowing motion s
'The Planning Commission recornmends approvals o
*88-16 as shown on the plan tlated September 26,to the following conditions:
f Site Plan Review
1988 and subject
1. The applicant provide additional landscaping in the form of
evelgreens along Park Drive in front of the proposeA
building.
2. The retail sales proposed for the site sha1l not exceed 20tof the floor area of the building.
3. The trash receptacle shall be moved away from the building
and must be totally screened.
4. A11 rooftop equipment sha1l be screened.
5. The applicant must meet the reguirenents of the Building
Departnent.
6. fhe plans shall be revised to inilicate the exact location ofRiley Creek and the normal water line (NwL) for the
s edimentation,/retention pond located on the northeast cornerof the parcel .
The plans shall be revised such that aalong Riley Creek is naintained.
20O-foot green space
The plans shall be revised to provide a storm sewer system
which directs the site runoff to Riley Creek or the existing
sedimentation basin located on the property prior to final
review.
7
8
9. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all conditions ofthe Department of Natural Resources pernit.
10. The applicant sha11 obtain and conrply with a1l conditions ofthe Watelsheil District pernit.
Il. The_applicant shall submit a reviged grading plan which pro-perly addresses erosion control.
12. ?he applicant shall notify rhe City 4any construction which has a potentia 8hIt
13. The site plan must meet the conditionspermit for the outdoor storage area.
PLANNING COIIIIIIISSION ACTIoN
The Planning Conmission recommended approval ofrequest with staffrs recommended conditions andchanges:
ours in ailvance ofo impact Park Drive.
of the conilitional use
the site planthe following
1
7
The applicant sha1l work rrith staff to ensule that adequatelandscaping is provided on the site.
The plans shall be consistent with the watershed Districtreguirements providing a 200 foot green space along Riley
Creek .
CITY COUNCIL RECOMII{ENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council approve Site plan Review *gg-16as shown on the plan dated September 2G. LggB and subject to thefollowing conditions:
l. the applicant shall work with staff to ensure that adeguatelandscaping is provided on the site.
2. The retail sales proposed for the site sha11 not exceed 20*of the floor area of the building.
3. lhe trash receptacle Bha1l be noveit away from the buildingand must be totally screeneil.
4. All rooftop eguipment shall be screened.
5. The applicant must meet the requirenents of the BuildingDega!tment.
6.
Lakeshore Equipnent
October 19, 1988
Page 6
The plans shall be revised to indicate the exact location ofRiley Creek and the normal water line (NwL) for thesedimentation,/retent ion pond located on the northeast cornerof the parcel .
Lakeshore Equipment
October 19, 198 8
Page 7
7 The plans shall be consistent eith the watershed District
requirements providing a 200 foot green space along Riley
Creek.
8. The plans shall be revised to p
which directs the site runoff t
sedimentation basin located on
revi ew.
ide a storm sener systemiley Creek or the existingploperty prior to final
rov
OR
the
9. fhe applicant shall obtain and courply with aI1 conditions ofthe Departrnent of Natural Resources permit.
10. The applicant shaI1 obtain and comply with all conditions ofthe Watershed District permi t.
11. The applicant sha1l submit a revised grading plan rhich pro-perly addresses erosion control.
12. The applicant shall notify the City 48 hours in advance of
any construction which has a potential to impact Park Drive.
13. The site plan must meet the conditsions of the conditional usepermit for the outdoor storage area.
ATTACHMENTS
I
2
3
4
5
6
?
Excerpts from City Code .
Memo from Assistant City Engineer dated October 12, 1988.
Memo fron Building Depaltment dated October 5, 1988.
Iriemo from Fire Inspector dated October 5, 1988.Letter from watershed District dated Octobe! 12, I988 and
Decembe! {, 1985.
Planning Conmission minutes dated October 19, 1988.Site plan for Chan Lakes Business Center II.
-(
(
ZONING $ 20€14
ARTICLE XXII. *IOP" INDUSTRIALOFI.ICE PARK DISTRICT
Sec. 2G8ll. Iatcat.
The intent of the "IOP" Ilistriet iB to provide an area identified for large ecale light
indwtrial and commercial plaaned development.
(N. No.80, Art. V, ! 16(t16-1), 12-15€6)
8ec. q!8f2. Pernittcd useg.
Ite followiag usee ore pelaitted in an 'IOP' IIstrich
(1) Ofhceg.
(2) Warehouses.
(3) Lightmanufacturing.
(4) Ttade ehops.
(6) Health sericeg.
(6) kinters.
O) Indoor health and recreatioa clubs.
(8) Body shops.
(9) Utility Bervices.
(10) R€cording studios.
(If ) Off-premiaee parkiag l,ots.
(12) Conferencer/conventiou ceDtcn.
(H. No.80, Art. v, ! r6(t16-2), 12-1546)
Sec. 2G819. Permitted accccaory urcs.
lbe following are permitted acceasorry uses in aa'IOP" Iliatrict:
(1) Parking lots 8trd raDps.
O) SigDs.
(3) Retail sales of producte stored or mauufactured ou tte cite provided uo more than
tnenty (20) perceat of t,he floor rpace ie used for letail Bales.
(N. No.80, Art. V, I 16(5-r6€L 12-16€6)
Sec. ZL8l.l. C;oadidoaal urer.
The followiag are couilitional uses in aa "IOP' District:
(1) Coaercte nirirrg plaats.
(2) CommuaicationtraDamissioutowen.
LAn
-"- ::-li...r<il,.,i
j...
)
$ 20€14 CHANHASSEN CTTY CODE
(3) Public buildinga.
(4) Motor freight terainals.
(5) Outdoor health aud recreation clubs. .
(6) Screeaed outdoor atorage.
O) Beseerchlaboratories.
(8) Contracting yar&
(9) Lumber yards.
(10) Home improvement tradeg.
(11) Hotcls aad motels.
(12) Food proccssing.
(ffi. No. 80, Art. V, 0 16(5-164), 12-15€6)
Satc law refereEce-Conditional use8, M.S. ! 462.3595.
Sec. 2GEf5. Lot requiremeuts and eetbacks.
The following minimum requiremeats shall be observed Digtrict subject toadditional requiremeuts, erceptions and modifications set forth in rLir chaptcr:
(r)
e)
(3)
(4)
(5)
. a. For front yar&, thirty (30) feet.b. For rear yards, t€n G0) feet.c. For side yards, ten (10) feet.
(6) The maximum height is as follows:
a. For tbe principal structure, four (4) storiesfifty (S0) feet.b. For accessory struetures, one 0) 8tory.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, 5 16(5.16-5), 12-rE€6)
(_
The minimum lot area is one G) acre-
The minimum lot fronrage is one hunclred fifty 050) feet, except that lots fronting on
a cul-de-sac shall have a minimum frontage of sixty (60) feet.
The minimum lot depth is two hundred (200) feet.
The maximu.m lot coverage is seventy (20) percent.
off-street parking areas shall comply with all yard requirements of thi6 section,
except that no rear yard parking setback shall be required for lots directly abuttingrailroad trackage; aud, no side yard shal, be required when adjoiniug coumerciJ
uses establish joint off'street parking facirities, as provided in section 2o-!r22, erceptthat no parking areas shall be permitted iu aay required side Btreet side yard. Iheminimum rear yard sha, be frfty (50) feet for lots directry abutting
"oy ,""i+oti"tdistrict. Side street side yards shall be a ninimum of tweuty-five (2S) feet in alldistricts. Other setbacks are as follows:
c
e
t228
_ .. - in-.. .-
-j,-i-.-L-4f..
I
I
CITY OF
EHINHISSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE ' P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
T{EMORA}IDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROIi: L,arry Brolrn r Staff Engineer
DATE: October 12, 1988
v,
SUBJ: Preliminary Site PIan Review for Lot 2, Block 3
Chanhassen Lakes Business park
Planning File No. 88-15, Lakeshore Equipment
This site is located on the east siile of park D
500 feet south of State Bighway 5. This site i
open field which drains to the east to the exis
pond located on the northeast corner of the sub
sedimentation basin rflas constructed as part of
Lakes Business Park project.
rive approximatelys compri sed of anting sedinentat ionject parcel . Thi sthe Chanhassen
Municipal sanitary sewer is available to the site be the existing10-inch tliameter sanitary sewer nain which has been extendedalong Palk Drive. A sanitary seirer service has been providecl forthis parcel at the property boundary.
watermain
Municipal water service is also available to the site by theexisting I0-inch ductile iron pipe (DIP) which has been extendedalong Park Drive. A wate! service has also been extended to theproperty boundary to service thi8 parcel.
Sanitary Sewer
Acces s
The plans propoEe a 3o-foot witle driveway rrhich ig to access park
Drive. The City's standard concrete driveway apron sha]l beinstalled at this driveway (refer to Attachment No. 1).
The bituminous wear course has been plaie on Park Drive. Theinstallation of the concrete cross gutter Bhall be done withoutdisturbing the driving surface of Park Drive. The applicantsha1l notify the City tl8 hours in advance prior to the installa-tion of the cross gutters.
Grading and Drainage
At present, the entire site drains to the southeast and into
Riley Creek and ultimately to the sedimentat ion,/retent ion pond
located on the northeast corner of the site.
Tbe plans indicate that the proposed grailing for the site will
encroach beyond the 130-foot setback requireil by the Departnentof Natural Resources and the watershed District for Riley creek.
The plans should be revised to reflect the exact location of
Riley Creek and the existing Eedimentation Ponds.
The drainage pattern for the site proposes to outlet the drainage
through the granular surface located immetliately to the east of
the building, down the proposed slope and ultimately to Riley
Creek. In discussing this application with the watersheilDist!ict, the District Engineer, Robert Oberneyer, has indicated
that a storm sewer system in all probability would be necessary
to direct drainage to Riley Creek or the sedimentation basin.
The tlischarge of the storm rrater runoff to Riley Creek will
require a Department of Natural Resources permit. These calcula-
tions should be provided prior to final site plan approval.
The plans would suggest that there will be a ponding problem
within the most southeasterly corner of the pa.rking 1ot. With
the proposed curbing the bituminous parking lot has no outlet.
fhe plans should be revised to accommodate this drainage in a
manner that will not create an erosion problem.
Erosion Control
The plans do not address erosion control. Revised plans rhich
show the location and type of erosion control sha1l be submittedprior to final site plan review. The plans should reflect to
ahow the City's standard for Type II erosion control (staked hay
bales and snow fence).
Recommentled Contlit ions
The plans sha1l be reviseil to indicate the exact location ofRiley Creek and the normal nater line (NwL) for the
sedimentat ionlretent ion pond located on the northeast cornerof the par cel.
The plans shall be revised auch that the 130-foot setback
from Riley Creek is maintained.
lhe plans sball be revised to provitle a atorm aewer aysten
which directs the site runoff to Riley creek or the exiEting
sedimentation basin located on the property prior to final
review.
1
2
3
Planning Commi ssion
October 12, 1988
Page 2
Planning Commission
october 12, 1988
Page 3
4 The applicant shall obtain and comply with all conditions ofthe Department of Natural Resources permit.
5. The applicant shal1 obtain and eomply with a1I conditions ofthe Watershed District permit.
6. The applicant shaLl submit a revised grading plan which pro-perly addresses erosion con t ro1.
7 The applicant shalI notify the City
any construction which has a potenti 48
a1 to impact Park Drive.
hours in advance of
UEI,TORANDUM
TO: iroAnn o]sen, Assistant City Planner
FROIi: Steve A. Kirchman, Buildling Inspector
DATE: October 5, 1988
6eo couLrER DRIVE. t" t?J;iL;-cIfNHAssEN' MTNNESoTA ss317
CITY OF
EHINHISSEN
\cu..
SUBJ: Planning Case 88-17 CUP e 88-15 Site Plan (Lakeshore
Equipment )
The buililing must be sprinklered.
Ihe building must comply with all the requirements of the hand-
icap code.
a
CITY OF
EHINHISSEI{
690 COULTER DRIVE ' P.O,8OX 147 ' CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
I,IEUORANDUM
TO: iIo Ann Olsen, Assistant City planner
FROM: Itark Littfin, Fire Inspector
DATE: October 5, 1988
SUBJ: Site Plan Review, takeshore Equipnent,88-16 Site PIan
Planning Case
f have revieweil the site plan for the proposed off ice/warehousebuilding for Lake Shore Equipment and ieel that considerationshould be given to the dumpster area. possibly it should bemoved away from the building in the event of a fire started inthe dumpster and then spread to the building.
ii:
F n,iE . u:
LA
0
Riley-Purgatory- B luff Creek Watershed District
EogirEering Advixrr: Brrr Eoginccring Co.
7801 Ghnro, R6d
Mimcrp< ir, MN 55435
l:D0555
t}
B-
lrgrl Advilot: ltphrn" thif. gnmtrrict lt xrfrtrln
33@ Pipct Irdrey Torcr
Minreapolis, MN 55402
333.{t00
Nrs. JoAnnc O1!on
Clty Planne r
ClEy of Chanhassen
590 Coulter Drlrrs
P.O. Eox 147
Chanhassen, Ulnnesoea 55317
Re: Lekeshore Equlpnent: Chantresren
Dear l{rs. Olson:
\_..-;{
.-,aT IJ'EE 1.1 :{l EFFi Et!'iit.lEERIt.l,3
Octob.r 12. 1988
The englneerlng advlgors ro rhe Eoard of t{m.gers of Ehe
Rl ley - Pur8atory -Bluff C!!rk lJetarsh.d Dtstrlct hlt rarrlewcd thc proliolnaryplans as subDitEsd to th. Dlstrlct for tb. bkeehorr Equtpucnt D.w.:,opE.ntin the Charrtrassan Lekes Buslners ?ark ln Chatrhasten. Tha Dlstrlct. Ln
December 1985, rcviessd and .pprov.d e gradlng rnd lr$d .lt.ratton prroltfor the Charhassen Lakes Bualneaa Center II. ftrls proJecc lg loclBeitdlrectly oouth of thc lrkeshorc Egutp6eaE rlr.. Borh palccls of proparty
rere undcr Jolnt ouner3hlp and for dcvelopocot to procecd on Ehe ChsDtrasscn
LAkes Business Cent.r sit., r.stalcElo rGtl]rdlng floodplaln cncroachscntand setback frou Riley Grrek yarc pLcrd on thlr propelty f t.lr 2, 81ock 3,
Chanhaasen Lakes Eusinees Park. A copy of thc Dlstricc,. corrcspondcncc
suuoarizlng these requl.rcnentr k aEErched for your rcfcrcnce, Dcvelopnenton l.ot 2, Block 3, Lrtcghore Egulpoent altc, Efirst conforn ytch theraquir€E.nts as outllncd ln thtr corrcipondaacc.
Therefore, ttrs folloutng pollctcr and crlterla of rhe ller.rlhcdDl3trlcE arc appllcabl,e ro thlc proJ.ct.
1. In eccor&nce ylth ScctLon E (2) of thG D1.Erlct,. ravt3ad Rul.s
and Regulatione, e gradlng rnd lend rltrratlon pa:.!rlt lust be
obtelned fron the Dlscrlcc for cbls prolecc. Accoqanylng the
pernlc application, a dctallcd g'rading plen :honlng froth cxlttlng
and ptoposcd conEoura aurt be rubmlt!.d to tbe Dlatalct for
ravlcw.
llrs. JoAnne olson october 12, 1988
Slnccrcly.
Robert C. Oberrlcyer
EARR ENGINEERING CO.
EngLnccrs for the D13tr1ct
Pagc 2
2 A aletalleat croglon control plen outllntng hor, ,edlEenE 1s to b€conrrolled both durtng .nd afE.r conscruirion oust b. ruU"ftcca iJche Distrlct for rcvle\, and rpproval.
The requircuents and aGrtrlctron aa au,tr.rrzcd ln the ,r't!lct,iDeceober.4,. 1985 correspondencc rcgardlng developaant on thtr rlr.are appllcable and nust bc cornplled rlth.
A detail.d atoruvetar !.n tcDant plan rhovt ng how ju5fj4e sjgssrunoff froo rhe rtrc ir so bc haallaa nrrt 5r rubulttod t" tfr"Dlsrrict for revies and approval. It fu unclaer at thl,, ttE 8,to rehethor or aot .urfrcc runoff fro! tha rltc lg to b. "or*.r"1in a iEhecr-frort condrrlon or if storn ..rar' i" -."-u"--r""I"iili.
the grading plan rndlcaces !h.r rutroff i. Go be dir.crrd rorrrdsthe souEheaat corner of the 3ltc. It6 Distrlct ls concerned niththe porentlal of an crosr.on problcn occulrtnt at chlo locctlon andlepacts on Rl1ey creok l0gated tmedletery e;uth. The lnforaattongubeitted. a6 part of, the on-alcc stornuatir nanatencnc plan nustsddread chl! l3sue.
l-
a
. Thank _you for chc opporrunicy ro conDcnt on thlr proJect !t an .rrlyda-t:. If you have any quesrlon; regardlng the Dtrtrictl. "*.r.rl pi..""call us .r 830-0555.
RCO,Ilsfc: l{r. .Frcderlck Rlchardsl{r. Frcdellck R.hr
JOLTR /330 , 0
I
I
4.
J CITYtT
TH[I-IHISSE[I
December 9 19 85
690 COULTER DRIVE ' P.O. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
I
Ur. Bob Worthington
Opus Corporation
P.O. Box I50
Uinneapolis, UN 55 {40
Dear Mr. Worthington !
This is to confirm that on December 2, L985, the City Councilapproved your site plan for the Chanhassen Lakes Buslness Centerfwo,' dated October 3l , 1985, with the following conditions:
?hat additional landscaping be planted between the AustrianPine and Sumnit Ash on the center island adjacent to park
Road.
The applicant must receive the lequired pernits,/variances
from the Watershed District and DNR.
3. Concrete aprons incluiling gutters be constructed at eachaccess to Eaintain the flow of runoff in the streets.
4. The most easterly section of the storn seirers nust be RCp (inplace of plastic) with a flared end section and rip-rap.
5. Restabili.zation of all disturbed areas outside the construc-tion linits as soon as possible following initial grading.
6. All bituminous areas be lined with concrete curb.
7. Silt fence shaLl be installed along the north and southproperty lines to protect creek and pond fron erosion duringconstruct ion .
2
)z;-ti CVrxl
Jo Ann OlsenAssistant City planner
JO:v
il€
Should you have any questions, please call le.
Sincerely,
n
Riley- Purgatory- B luff Creek Watershed District
EDgiEcrriq Advison Blrr EogiBecrillg Co.
5t00 Francc Avc.
Edinr, MN 55435
92046s5
IrC Advisoc Poplql Hll Schoobricb, Kru&Bra & Dory
4344 IDS Ccntcr
Mino.lpolis, MN 55402
3 3 3-{800
!'lr. Robert llorthiogton
Opus Corporatio!
9900 Brea Road Ees t
P.0. Box 150
Iinneapol is, Uioaesota 55440
Re: Chanhassen Lakes Bueioest CeDter II: Cbaohassea
Dear t'lr. Uorihiugtoa:
The Board of [anagers of the Rilcy-Pulgat ory-B luff Creek fatershed Dis-tricr has reviewed the plane and gradiag aad land alteration peruit apptica-tioD as subnirred ro rhe Disrric! for site gradiug and utility installacionfor the chanhassen Lakes Business center rr project ia the chsnhassen IrkesBusiness Center in Chanhas 8 en.
With this noted, the l{anagers rpprove theperoit subject to the folloriag conditions:
grading and laad al teration
A11 erosion control Eeesur€B shorro on the plaas lust be installedprior to correoceErn! of gradiog operationa and be naintained untilall areas altered on lhe site have been restored.
The Districr noles rhat parkiog for rhis project is to be located sithinI00 feet of rhe centerlioe of Riley creek. @E8tructioD fo.r the futurebuilding on Lot 2, Block 3, Chanhassen Lakes Buaiaegs park (the property tothe Dorth of this site) ' hoeever, is ro be located so that a 200 iooi green-belt is being provided patalleling the creek. rhe provisioa of this grc-obelt(200 foot) ig consistenr uirh tbt gatershed Dietrict criteria.
fhe District also trotea thst .n encroectuent iato the 100-year frequeacyfloodplain of Riley creek is proposed. our calcularions indiciteit tt.i tti"encroachneot is iu accordance rith the District'e floodplaiu encroachaentcriteria, horrever, no furthcr fill or encroacboent o! thig site and oo Lot 2,Block 3, Chanhasseo Lakes Bugiaese Park for that shoyo on the plaos det.d
October 22, 1985, revised Noveober 22, 1985, rrill be p€roitted for future
deve I oFetrt .
I
L
o
bP F
(
Deccober 4, 1985
A11 areas altered ouat be restored rrith sced and dicced uulch, rod
sood fiber blaoketr or be herd eurfaced eithio 2 rrccka after ccnple-
tion of construction or no later thaa SePteober l5r 1985.
2.
Page 2
Deceober 4, 1985
4.
. Robert Worthi ngt g
,L/ )el .
cp.
3 Prior to conEenceoeDt -of coDstructioB, an appropriete conveoant!!usr be erecured and placed ." ;;;;;'ii-ti. .ppropriate Carvercounty Records office iadicatiug th.a;o-i;;;er fill or eucroech_oent uill be slloued on thie sit-e 8nd ". f..i-2, Block 3, CbanhaacenLakes Businegs parL fro th-8_r st_r?!g on the-pians d.r
"d
- O;;;;;;- ii;1985 and revised Nov@ber ZZ, lggi fi.-'i"a'*. develoFenr. Thiacoveaent aus t be suhitted to the District,a legal-raviro.-iilrevies and approval.
Jl:-Disrric: vi-ll r-equire that s8 develo[Erenr to the aorrh of rhealte proceeds, Lot 2, Block 3, Chaohassea Lakea Busiues" p.rk; ;il
:,.T:::": and parkiag on this area Eus r be aet back a a"tf iiieitclsEa'cc aa a horr' on tbe pla83 drted october 22 aad revirerl xovcobei22, 1985, ro provide a 200-foot greea srrip;ong Riley Creek.
At the outlels of .the
-atotr .errer syst€Es dischargiag ioto thestoEtreter det eu tion/sedinentation basin located oo tU" east aiJeof. the. site, riprap 8rd sand filter, in accordancc aith t{aDo?criteria, aust be iustal.led to disaipaie ."*r. Thie rill niai_nize the poteutial of an erosioa proUf., frm'occurriag.
The Districr nugt be notified ia writiag a uiniqra of 4g hours priorto c@eDc€ment of coEs tructioD .
y,ou have aay ques tions _regardiag the cooditio's o! the District'8please call us at 830{555 -
6
If
peroit;
RCo/111
c: Hr.
}{r.
si ncerely,
'i-twu,I
Robe r t , C. Obe:aey
BARR E NGIMERING
Frederick Richards
Frederick Rahr
Bi l1 Moak
Dis tri ct
Approved by the Board of t{aaegera
RILEY-PTIRC.ATOBY-BLI'F8 CBEEK
Pres ident
-)
I
l
5.
I{AIERIIEED DISTRI CD/t, ... . ,.:
Engineera for the
Date3 --')'
I
t
{;
I
rI
rI
F
r'llE ITI..INfitsER
r
fi
5
FEIEEFF]:
E (EEtAr(:
OLINN.PARK COUFIT
ld4lal q
&o,*F.r WA
@d\@
. . .. ,t:i.
- .._r_:J- .4-,e,|._ i--idili+.
':-'*::'+T1lE
ErcEFnon t'='::
. _i.
.le'
. --ad.
rrrmo.,arur,re .r;ff
' -::i ]'i,;'
&
ACSES
r,
R?IF rc
P
OUTLOT F
I6.94 ACRES
5(,1i acEE;
I
lt r.
1t
L
A@
2
45 ACBES _-,- -i
!r r'.--
. 2....
1-*.ilr7 n.,.
'il
Zfi
ElqYCO
@NCREIE
COMPANY2
2.O8
I
251 rcHES
I231
3
CHANHASSEN
ES BUSINESS
CENTEF
ENERGY
rNC
MACHINES'\A.,FPHY
AU-
P
NiPrl*rrea*1
HIGHWAY
':, E
s'r'dlAffi
3.34 ACRES
2
INND DEVEIOPITENI APPIJCATION
CITT OF CEAIIEASSEN
690 Coulter Drive
ChaDbasseD, !{N 55317(512) 937-1900
APPLICANT:ESA1RE **l &.
OL D
ADDRESS Tqot rnopa
rrt.53311
codeys{4/2-?3
rp
/-l fELEPBoNE 4Z:Z/e t
O{NER,5re e u{'r\\
o
el er/ n1t). €-t
1p Cocle
- 1.7t;o fut'J.
lIDDRESS
d
(
z
TELEPHONE (Daytime )
REQUEST:
v
c\1
Zoning District Change
ioning Appeal
Zoning Variance
Zoning Text Anendlnent
Land Use PIan Amendnent
Conditional Use Permit
Site PIan Reviert
Sketch Plan
-
rreliminary PlanFinal PIan
Subdivision
_ Platting
uetes anal Bounds
Street/Easenent Vacation
Wetlands Pernit
o4 e" z^tc ,PROJECT NAME ,kesHoAe
PRESENT IAND USA PLAN DESIGNATION
REOIJESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION
REQUES?ED ZONING
USES PROPOSED
15
4. tt a
L Lf
SIZE OF PROPERTY
LOCATION lr+n_r )ei".<
REASONS FOR THIS REQTJEST e-*'
LEGAL, DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary)
Planned Unit Development
PRESENT ZONING
f Chanhassen
evelopment Application
FILIN G INSTRU CT IONS:
FIII NG CE RT TFICA TTON:
pres enta ti v
Signed By
'* signed By
E ee ornei
cir
Lan
Pag
yo
dDe2
t'
The undersilned rethat he is fami liaapplicable City Or
:_gf the applicanr hereby certifiesprocedural requirements of afi-----
The undersigned hereby_ certi f ies . that the_ applicant has been:::::iiff: to make ttris appiii.iion-ioi".be property berein
Dat e
Dat e
Date Application Received
Application Fee paid
City Receipt No.
'i. _,
r This Application will bBoard of Adjustnents anneeting.|il.il" Plannins corunission,/onsidered
ppeals at
tna
ecdA
t-
This application nust be conpleted in full and hc ir,^^,-_!t^
*ifttrt*i+#iggi'tu.'l;ltrttrt*}tusf, t['t:$i
I
\/
Planning Commj.ssion Meeting
October 19, 1988 - Page 1
PubIic Present:
Steve Wi 11et Applicant
steve willet: Good evening. I'm steve willet and Iim the presialent of
Lakeshore Eguipment Company. What we are proposing is an outside storage
area for docks and boat Iifts. we currently have outside stolage on ourlocation over on Monterey Drive which is nothing like what this one isgoing to be. This is aII going to be cedar fence. f came to you 2 years
ago when we moved into toi{n when we got an outside storage pernit. Istarted working on the fence and the l,layor, Tom Hanilton and a few of thecouncil members decided well, don't cut doi{n anymore trees and put up any
more fences. Leave the trees to make a natural scleen'so thatis the
reason for the condition that the outside storage in existence is thj s
area in which I'm proposing. I am going to otn the land, the building and
everything and we have a very strong vested interest in it. I had picked
up the fencing report. The fence is going to be an I foot high fence and
some of the stuff that werve got in our storage yard now, apparently werve
grown up so large1 we stacked them rather large in height this spring.
This storage area is non 5 times what werve got so rre won't have to see it
stacked so high so you tonrt ever see anything above the fence as welL asI have designed in berms going around the entire fence to try to drop theheight of that I foot high fence as well. On our property line, if yourll
note along the north edge of our property therers an existing berm alreadygoing onto the next piece so that even brings it down a little further soyourre not going to see this big high fence but eetre still going to beable to achieve our screened storage. We have in the total landscape
PIan, right noi{ therers l tree on our entire lot which is about the sizeof your thumb. I put 8g sone odd trees on our lot at the cost to
Lakeshore Equipnent of almost $l4,ggg.gg. I am committed to try to stayin Chanhassen if I can. Irve spent a lot of advertising dollars. Weirethe largest in the rnidwest of our kind and se are doing very, very rrell.
We bring in a lot of trade to the community and this is a necessity for
our business. The fence is all going to be cedar. Fully Btained to earthtone color to seal it and let it blend with the rest of the land. I guessthat's basically it. Werre just dealing with the fenced area right now?
PUBLIC HEARING:
LAKESHORE EOUIPI,IENT, PROPERTY ZONED IOP, INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK, LOCATED
ON PARK DRIVE APPROXIMATELY 1/2 ITILE SOUTH OF TIWY. 5:
A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTDOOR STORAGE ON 4.19 ACRES.
Jo.Ann OIsen presented the staff report.
Chairman Conrad calIed the public hearing to order.
Planning Commission tteeting
October 19, f988 - Page 2
Conrad: Yes, j ustto the site plan.fence. Thanks, and werllother public comnents?
call on you when rre getthe
Any
Batzli moved, El l sonfavor and the motion
to close the publ i c
The public hearing
hearing.. A1I voted in
was closed.
second ed
carr ied.
Erhart: The outdoor, that is included in the ordinance asuse? Is there any restrictions on how close the fence canproperty line? In this case it's not right at the edge.
an
be
acceptabl eto the
Steve Willet: ...We have plenty of land behind it.
Erhart: The area that you can see, you were ask_ing for some moreIandscaping Jo Ann?
Olsen: The fence does. ..
Erhart: And therers trees all around the fence?
Olsen: Yes, there is.
Enmings: Weire only doing the conditional use permit, right?
Conrad: Yes.
Enmings:- - The only thing I would do again is, number one says that aIIitems will be totally acreened and r iourd just add to thatl and r.veadded this in rrrhenever nerve rooked at minilstorage with wairs on it.Again, just add to_number r tbat no atored items nay project over the topof the fence. Again, so it's just clear. He.s saii -thaf 's not going tohappen and Irn aure itrs not but just so that.s clear.
steve wirlet: rt didnrt happen very ofter even over at our other one.naybe a week or two.
Enmings: rtm not directing, this at you. I{henever werve looked at thingsyith fences around then, I.Ve tried Lo put that condition in.
Steve Willet: That uas in our last one.
ETnings: . But do you get_ anything ehere you have just like a mast, just aPrPe sticking up in the back?
Ellson: It looks fine to me.
Batzli ! To get totatly technical and somewhat legar here, after the rordnanyn in the second condition r sould inEert the iords nand alrn. that.6ir.
wildermuth: I donrt have aoything.
Conrad: I have nothing. Is there a motion?
Batzli: I move the Planning Commission recommends approval of Conditional
Use Permit 188-17 as shoirn on the Site Plan dated Septenber 26, 1988 with -the following conditions. The first condition reading as staff prepared
it t{ith the anendment that the period by a semicolon and that the phrase,
no stored items sha1l project over the fence, be inserted. And the secontl -condition, that the oords rancl alln after the sord "anyt be inserted.
Emnings: Second.
B. SITE PtAN REVIEW FOR AN OFF ICE,/WAREHOUSE FACILITY, PROPERTY
INDUSTRIAL OFE'ICE PARK, LOCATED ON PARK DRIVE APPROXIMATELY 1,/2
OE HWY. 5, LAKESHORE EQUI PI'IENT.
zoNED roP, _
I.IILE SOUTH
Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report.
Conrad: Steye, do you rrant to react to the conditions that the staff has
laid out?
Steve Willet: As far as the additional trees in the front, if I could I
would like the opportunity to move a couple from someplace else because Ialready spent 915r0gA.gg on landscaping and I think itrs substantial. I
came in with a plan thinking that I'n going to do it up right and thefirst time werII get it through, rre'll get done and there:s not going to
be 'anyplace to pur a few nore trees when I alreaaly spent gl5rggg.gS. I'dlike to nove I ot 2 of those fron along that parking lot area. If yourlLnotice, on that plan that you have on the board there, itrs a littledifferent from the photocopied plan that I revised because of the berm
that we had to put arounil the parking area and the pine trees that $e put
on the berm to screen the parking lot area from the road. I found outlater on that it sas just because of headlights but werre 9oin9 to screen
them a little bit more so you don't have to look at the parking lot. IrdIike the opportunity to move a maple tree or two anal naybe put a couplepines trees out front. youtIl notice there are some pine trees on the
corner around the parking area. l,laybe if I could just respace them. Ihate to spend any more money.
Pl.anning Conmission l,leeting
October 19, 1988 - Page 3
Batzli moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommentl
approval of Conditional Use Permit 188-17 as shown on the site plan dated -
September 26, 1988 with the following conditions:
1. All. items stored in the outdoor storage area must be totally screened; -no stored items shall project over the fence.
2. The conditional use permit nust meet any and all conditions of thesite plan approval for Site Plan *88-16.
Al.l voted in favor and the motion carried.
Planning Conmission I'teeting
October 19, 1988 - Page 4
Jo Ann, irhat do you comment back?
Thatrs fine because in other areas he is exceeding. So thatrs
Steve Willet: In ansrrer to, I donrt knos if Irn answering my oirnguestions or maybe you can run back through them.
conrad: r just want to make sure that yourve read the staff report and wehear what your couments are. So if you dontt have any conments.
steve willet: r do as- far as Ritey creek. Riley creek is right in here.This is the Rirey creek area. youill notice theie.s the 2ga ioot is shownright on opusr prot map and this is ny lot right here to the right. 2qsfoot, thatrs the 2gg foot easement to the noritr of Rirey creek. r did notbuy any part of that easement. I just bought the lot. !,!y legaldescription is that so if that answers any question about the 2go foot tothe nor th.
Olsen: The creek meanders through there. What this lightglltf o! that the City has retained a drainage easement overThat doesn't necessarily provide the Zgg f6ot separate. Ithat that I s 2gO feet.
blue is anthe creek area.donrt bel ieve
Erhart: Where does the 2gAexisting ord inance?
feet come from? Is that an ordinance? An
Steve Wi Ilet: That I s
OIsen: Yes.
Erhart:
Conrad :
OI sen :
Steve Willet: There.s Do probLeE rithget that close to it anysay.
Olsen: It comes from
Olsen: It lookedit looked like itof development ofcondition between
the watershed Di str i ct.
frotn the center of the creek?
For creeks but not for wetlands? Creeks?
I guess itrs just a plain fact yourve got to be 2gg
He has to maintain a 2gg foot green space along the
that an jrrray. There r s
feet back.
creek.
no ray I can
like shen we were reviewing with the Watershealwas pretty close but [hat rre're saying is thatthe site to the south thatrs taking...that was
Opus and the Watershed District.
Steve WiLlet: Herers the blue area. This is where the blue areaThis is my property line. There,s over a 100 foot blue area. Iftalking from the ceDter of the creek Bo herers the property lineeerve got to go aII thia distance here. we can nealuri thlt outnow -
District,
beca u se
a
starts.
you I re
anal tben
r ight
conrad:
Ol sen :fine.
Planning Commission ltee t i ng
October 19, 1988 - Page 5
Conrad3 Yourre comfortable that your re going to meet that and I thinkstaff is pointing ttlat out that we want to make sure that you do. Theydonrt have the evidence documented right now that you do so. It soundslike you can. Itts not a big problern.
Batzl,i: We may r,ant to change the wording because we.re saying he has torevise the plan. If it can be denonstrated to the staff that it already
does meet that, perhaps there is better rording.
Steve Willet: Irn also asking if I can show you, without getting into a
whole bunch of survey costs. The lot is already subdivided and the creek
is drawn in there. AII Iim asking is that we can use the scale, existingplat map and show you that therer s 2gA foot from shere we're talking
about.
Olsen: Staff is just pointing it out that it's something that the
Watershed District is going to require.
Conrad: Itrs not even us. Yourve got to satisfy them.
Olsen: We make it clear that rre want it.
Batzli: And if we are imposing it as a condition, nake it clear, then I
think we probably can just say that he sork trith staff and decide.
Steve willet: opus did give me a letter fron Riley cEeek anil the
watershed District just before I dici ny purchase agreerDent vith them and
they did state that there rdas a setback from the creek and that we would
have to comply with that.
Conrad: Who is steve working with on this? when yourre worried about
setback from the creek.
Olsen: The actual setback from the creek will have to be, nerve always
enforced that along the river. we've always had them show that ttrat site
plan can meet that setback because otherwj.se they'll have to corne back and -do a new site plan.
Conrad: So show us, the City?
Olsen: Because that it is going to be enforced. In working with the
Watersheal District on this site, it Looks like therers the possibility
that that setback is being encroached. It's rrith the outdoor storage anilthat rrould have to be adjusted. We just would like to say, Iook, meet
that now rather than approving the site plan, it night be changed. If
thatrs minor to you and the site plan is changing, that's okay and thatrsnot necessary but they will have to rDeet that setback to receive the
Watershed District permit which is a condition of approval.
Steve willet: Ird just like to ln closing, as far as an aDswer to the
questions that came up. I ei1l comPly with all city ordinances. vlith all
Watershed District larrs and ue are doing this as a fairly comprehensive
Planning Commission Meet i ng
October 19, 1988 - Page 6
Conrad: Yes, Irm not wild about wood either.
Batzri: r agree vrith Jim. r think z shourd be revised to indicate thatthe applicant wirr somehow work with staff to make sure that the greenspace is naintained. One question I did have on that is, in Larr!,s memohe talked about 139 foot setback. Didn,t it?
olsen: Right. r think that rras the closest that the building courd be.There are areas on the applicant'is site that would have to maintain a r30foot setback. The reason we put in the 2go foot, because the fact thatuerre at a 139 foot setback is and there's only one portion on the northsite that can be 100 feet.
Batzli: I guess I didnrt follow that. Sorry.
Conrad: I didnrt get it either. you said it a couple tirnes.
orsen: You have to have a 2gg foot green space. rn going to the south itwas allowed to be 70 feet. Typically it is lgg feet on either side of thecenter rine. what the liatershedl District wanted was for thetD was to...togo up 3g feet. They have to add the 39 feet. Because we don.t knoeexactly where that is, we said just to maintain the 2gg feet.
Steve willet: I $as aware of the 130. Thatrs rrhy I said, I r,asDrt sureshat the figure was when ue t ere tatking. I did get a letter about the130 foot fron Opus. I was onJ.y aware of a I3g foot eetback, the greenarea. I didnrt know that had to be... I still donit think thereis going
to_ be a probrem if it Has 2gg. rf it coDe8 dorrn to 10 feet or soroethingli ke that nhere...
Batzli: So you were ah,are that you had to 9o LgS feet and now to 130?
p1an. Werre a 3 year old company. Werve groi{n very fast. por us, thisis undertaking a large project for us and it means i 1ot of us. We're ina time frame where I want to tly to get down by January l but weire goingto nake sure we do it right. As far as the drainage area, I,l1 deal-witithe watershed as far as drainage fron the parking rot. r have. talked tothe contractors and therers no problem wtratsoever as far as putting insomething that FiII provide us as far as the drainage. Wer11 hrork irithstaff on that. Thank you very much. , I appreciate your tirne.
wildermuth: I think all the bases are covered here. rid rike to rerrorditem 6. something along the lines that the pran sharl refrect the exactlocation of Rirey creek and that the setback requirements are satisfied.
Batzli: You donrt want to put it in under 7?
wildermuth: under 7 rather. other than that, r realry donrt have nuchelse. I woulil just say that Irm sure the applicant nould like a solidfence for security reasons but I guess f uouta much rather see anevergreen fence alr the way around the storage area rather than a woodenfence.
Planning Commission ltee t i ng
October 19, 1988 - Page 7
Steve willet:so...130 is irhat I was aware of. They gave up 7g feet' before
Conrad: No.
Steve willet! I have to maintain 130?
Conrad: You I re okay.
Steve Willet: We'11 work with the Watershed and do what they eant us to
do.
Batzli: I was confused because they used the 130 and Ithey erere measuring from the center }ine. Thatrs rrhere
Okay, the only other question I have was on condition 8
system whicb directs the site runoff to Riley Creek, doit directly into a thing like that irithout some sort of
sedimentation or skimmer or sone other...
didn I t real i zeI was confused.
The storn sewer
ne normally drain
a catch basin or
OIsen: I I mpart of the
storm rra terjust prov ide
Steve Wi llet:
some kind of a
My eng ineers
catch basin.
sure they'11 have some sort of a catch basin and that would be-
storm sewer plan. The applicant does have the option to do a
management but the engineering department requested that theya storm sewer.
did
We
say that in the storm seererfigured it into the cost of
we would have
Puttlng it in.
Batz1i: So you wouldn't have a
catch bas i n?
problem if we said that rrould include a
Steve Willet: No, i{erre going to $rork rrith staff on that anysays anil that
rcould be part of working i{ith staff on the changes there. We donrt have
any problem with that. It Ehould be done properly and Iive got... Your
engineers brought it up and rrhen tttey did, I rrent back to the contractor
and I talked to him and he said, yes, you could have that so re figured itout and ire are going to put gomething in there...
Batzli: Is that by law or something or is that just common sense?
Conrad: That would be our engineering standarals rrouldnrt it?
Olsen: Yes. PIus they have to get a permit from the DNR which souldrequire it.
Conrads I don't think ne need anything.
Batzli: Okay. Those uere my two questions. Then, I do agree that ue
should amend condition 1to say that he can adjust his trees.
Ellson: I like it. Number 13 has to be in there even though t,e granted
the conditional use permit? You say, by the say, anything in theconditional use permit says you've got to do also. It seems kind of
redunclant that yourve got it in both places. Itra lrhat we always do?
Planning Comrnission Meeting
October 19, 1988 - Page 8
Emnings: Yes.
Ellson: Okay. I like it. No problen.
Eomings: rt looks like a gooct plan to me. r have no additionar comments.
Erhart: I agree.
Conrad: I have no comments. Is there a notion Brian?
BatzLi: r move that the planning comrrission recommends approval of sitePlan Review *88-16 shown on the plan dated September 26r i-Sga subject tothe-following conditioli: -2 through 6 and g lhrough 13 as propos6a uystaff. condition 1I think should read, the appri6ani shali rork withstaff to insure that appropriate randscaping in-ttre form of evergreensalong Park Drive from the proposed building-are...
Conrad: You said exactly rhat the staff report just said.
Batzri: Let me start over. strike that. The applicant shall rrork irithstaff to insure that adequate randscaping is proviaea for the proposedsite pran. .so just re€ him come balk lo stlrr and Eake sure-thit it alrmeets everything we warrt because thatrs what werre basicalry asking. Ha;agoing to start jockeying it around.
wildermuth: Did you sant to say something about park Drive?
Batzl.i: No, because once he starts moving trees, he.s goingmake sure that that,s still okay for that area. I don'f waitabout any location. Just insurL that it meets standarals.
conrad: Do you require an additionar landscaping? ln this case sould youreguire a different landscape plan Jo Ann?
Olsen: He can just d!ae, on the official...had for 7 because I didnrt get that?
Batzli: WetI, I havenrt even made up 7 yet.
Do you t ant to read what you
I did such a poor job on I
to have toto talk
Erha r t
Batzl i :
Erhart:
200 foot
I got that one.
Do you have a suggestion fox 7?
Yes. The plans shall be consistentgreen span along Riley Creek.
uith the Watershed Di str ict I s
Batzli moved, vlirdermuth seconded that the pranning commission recommendapproval of Site plan Reviei, *99-16 as shorrn on the plan dated September25, 1988 and subject to the following conditions:
T
Planning Conunission Meeting
October 19, 1988 - Page 9
4
5
AII rooftop equipnent shall be screened.
The applicant nust meet the requirements of the Building Department.
The plans sha1l be reviseil to indicate the exact location of Riley
Creek and the normal water line (NWL) for the seil inentat i onrlretent ion
pond located on the northeast corner of the parcel .
5.
11. The applicant shall submit a revised grading plan which proPerly
addresses erosion control.
The.applicant shall notify the City 48 hoursconstruction which has a potential to impact
in advance
Park Dr ive
L2.of any
13. The site plan Bust Beet the conditionsfor the outdoor storage area.
of the conditional use permit
AII voted in favor and the Rotion carried.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
)
1. The applicant shall work with staff to insure that adequatelandscaping is provided for the proposed site pIan.
2. The retail sales proposed for the site shall not exceed 20t of thefloor area of the building.
3. The trash receptacle shall be moved away fron the building anil must be-totally screened.
7. The plans shall be consistent with the watershed districtis 2gg foot
green space along RiIey Creek.
8. The plans shall be revised to provide a storm sewer systen whichdirects the site runoff to Riley Creek or the existing sedimentationbasin located on the property prior to final review.
9. The appLi.cant shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the
Department of Natural Resources perroit.
lS. The applicant shall obtain and comply with aII conditions of the
Watershed District permit.
Eamings noved, Ellson secondecl to approve the Hinutes of the Planning
Connrission Beeting dated October 5, 1988 as.presented. AIl voted in favor
and the motion carr ied.
CITY OF
EHINHISSEN
PC DATE:
CC DATE:
LL/28/eo
L2/tO/9o
90-1 SOA
OIsen/k
E #:
By:
cAs
STAFF REPORT
Fz
()
=(L
(L
f
E
lrJt
@
PRESENT ZONING:
Subdivision Ordinance Amendment to Amend section
18-s7 (b) and (n)
PROPOSAL:
APPLICANT:city of chanlrassen
ACREAGE:
DENSITY:
ANACENT ZONING AND
I,AND USE:N-s-E-w-
PHYSICAL CTIARJACTER. :
WATER AND SEWER:
2 O O O I,AND USE PI,AN :
Planning Co'nnission
NoveDber 28, 1990
Page 2
ANALYS IS
currently the subdivision ordinance requires a right-of-way of 50feet for loca1 streets and cu1-de-sac turnaround radius in theurban-residential district. The Engineering Departnent has
requested that the right-of-way be increased from 50 feet to 50feet to further acconnodate pedestrian ways, utilities and snow
rernoval. In recent developr0ent proposals, staff has required the
60 ft. radius and street right-of-way to be provided. To Eake the
subdivision ordinance consistent uith what staff is implenenting,
the design standards of the Subdivision Ordinance should be anended.
Section 18-57 (n) refers to public streets constructed in a
subdivision within and outside of the Metropolitan service Area.
currently the wording states the tryear 2000 Metropolitan Service
Arearr. Since the year of the l.{etropolitan service Area has the
potential to be changed, staff is recounending that reference to a
year be reDoved and that the generic uetropolitan Service Area
iernain in itrs place. This anendment does not change the intent of
the statement.
state statute does not reguire a public hearing or review by the
Planning conmission for an amendment to the Sulrdivision ordinance.
Since the Subdivision ordinance is sonething that the Planning
Cornrnission closely works with and implenents through review of
developnent proposals, staff is holdinq a public hearing in front
of the Planning Conmission to al1ow the Planning cornmission to have
input. The proposed amendments are quite ninor and are consistent
vith what staff has been implenenting.
RECOMMENDATION
staff reconnends that the Planning Connission adopt the following
motion:
The Planning conmission reconmends aPproval of the Subdivision
ordinance aroendment to anend Section L8'57, streets, to
reffect current city standards for right-of-way widths as
follows:
Street Classification
Local street
(urban residential)
CUI-de-Sac, Turnaround
Radius (urban-res idential )
Right-of-way
widths
( feet)
60
Pavementwidth(f t)
28 lo 32
60 42i
Planning Conmission
Novenber 28, l99O
Page 3
and that Section 18-57 (n) be anended to read:
(n) Public streets to be constructed in subdivisions locatedlnside the lFeaf-+ee netr6politan service area 1ine, asidentified in the City Conprehenslve plan shal1 beconstructed to urban standards as prepared by the Cityengineerrs office. Streets to be const-ructed i;subdivisions located outside the j:ea=-+eee netropolitanurban service area shaIl confonn to the ruraL slandardrequlrements as prepared by the City engineerrs office.The construction of private streets are prohibited.
$ 18-41 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE
(e) Upon approval ofthe final plat by the city council, the city ehall aotifr the applicant of
t'he approval and within thirty (30) days thereaftcr, the applicant shall frle the fiaal plat with
the courty recorder and furnish the city evidence of such recording. r'ailure of the applicant to
comply shall be cauae for revoking the city,s approval.(ffi. No. 33-D, ! 4.1,2.25€5)
Sec, f &|2. Same-I)evelopneEt contf,ast.
Before the city eigns a final plat and before the developer constructa any ofthe required
improvements eet forth in sectiou 1&78, the developer shall enter iato a development conkact
with the city. The contract shall delineate the couditions under which approval is given.
(Ord. No. 3S-D, ! 10, 2-25-85)
ARTICLE III. DESIGN STANDARDS
Sec. l&56. Generally.
The proposed subdivision shall conform to ttre compreheasive plan, zoning ordinance and
desiga haudbook. The design features set forth iD thie article are minimum requirements. The
city nay impoee additioual or nore stringent requireDents conceraiug lot size, sbeets aDd
overall design as deemed appropriate considering the property beilg zubdivided.
(Ord. No. 33-D, !S 6.r,6.9,2-25€5)
Sec, 1&57. Stre€ts.
(a) streets shall be dedicated on the plat to the public. The location aad design of sheets
ghall coaeider existing and planned streets, reasonable trafrrc circulatiou, topographic conili-
tions, .rnolf of gtorm water, public conveaieace and safety and the proposed land ures of
property to be s€rved.
G) street rightof-way widtbs shall be coasistent with the coraprehensive plan aad ofti-
cial map' and shall conform to courtJr and state staDdards for trual. highways. If no euch plo',o
or stanalards are applicable, rightof-way widtls ahall not be less th". the followiag:
RAhbof-Wat
widths
(feq
100
80
60
\
Paumcnt
width
(fect)Stea Cbsciftcatbns
Minor arterial
Collector
Local street
(rural residential)
Iad street
(urban residential)
1006
50
Secs. l&,13-l&55, Resenred,
a6t.u
86
24
28 to 32
! 18-57
S tr e et C lr's I ifnatiott s
Local street
(ommerciaUindustrial)
Cul-de-gac, turnaround radius
(urbadresideutial)
Culde-sac, turnaround railius
(rural residential)
Culde-sac, turnaround radius
(commerciaUindustrial)
(c) Insofar as practical, sh€ets shall int€rsect at right augles. In no case shall the angle
formed by the iat€r8ectiotr of two (2) streets be less thaa 8iny (60) degrees. lntersections
having more than four (4) corners are prohibited.
(d) A tangent of at least tlree huaihed (300) feet ehart [g iablduced between reverse
curves oD arterial and collector streets.
(e) When connecting street linea deflect fiom each other at one (1) point by morc than ten(10) degrees they shall be connected by a curve with a radius adequate to ensure a sight
distancc within tbe rightof-way of not less tha.n five hundred (S(X)) feet for arterials, tbree
buntlred (300) feet for collectore, and oue hunrlred 000) feet for all other stre€ts.
(0 Proper desip ehall colsider required tuming radius of vehicles for access points or
entrances to and fr,om a highway rreing den rqnds adryt€d by tle $ate deparhent dbar*ortation
(g) All centerline grades ahall be at Ieast five-tentbs p€rceat and Bhall uot exceed five (5)
perceat, for arterials and seveu o) perceat for all other streets aad alleys. whenever possible,
grades within thirty (30) feet of intereections or railroad cros6iags shall not erceed tbree (3)
p€rcent.
(h) Differeat coruecting street gradss rhrrt be coDnected with vertical curves. Miaimum
length, in feet, of the vertical curves shall be twenty (20) times the algebraic difierence ia the
percentage of grade of the two (2) a{iacent rlopes.
0) Lcal streets shall have a centcrline ofr8et of Dot less thau three hundred (800) feet.
Off8et int€rsectioDs shall be avoided.
Q The aligament ahall iliscourage through trafic.
(k) The ma:im"- length of a sbeet teroiaating ir a 6ut{p-gac elrlr be determiaed as a
fiDction of the erpected development densit5r alorg the stf,eet, Eeaaured from the centerliae
of the rtreet of origin to the ead of the rightof-ray.
0) Where a propoeed guMivision ia a{acent to e tilnited accees highway, arterial or
collector sheet, there ghall be no direct vehicular or pedestriaa access from ildividual lots t
auch highways or streets. To the ertent feasible acceae to arterial streets ahall b€ at intervals
of not less than one-fourth mile and through eristing aad establiahed crossrcads. Acces along
collector streets will be restrieted and controlled on the final plat.
6trpp No. I
1007
RightofVay
Widths
(feer)
60
Pauenent
width
(feet)
36
12
40
48
60
60
60
SUBDTVISIONS
JO
tlr oRDIuaNcE lt{EttDlttc EEcEIox 18-57 0r TEE
CEII'EIA8EX CITI OODE OOTCER}IIf,G ATREETS
S.ctlop 1. sectlon 18-57 of the Chanhassen City Code isauendffiEd:
(n) Public Btreets to be constructed 1n aubdivisions
located inside the ycar :€€o Detropolltan setilrlce area1ine, as identlfied in the City Conprehensive Pfanshall be constructed to urban standards as prepared by
the city englneer's office. streetE to be constructedin subdivisions located outslde the yea=+eeo
Detropolitan urban sernrice area ahall conforn to therural standard reguirernentE as prepared by the city
engineer's office. The construction of private atreets
are prohibited.
(o) Up to four (4) lots rnay be eenred by a private drivewayif the City finds the folloring conditions to exist:
(1) The prevailing developuent pattern makes Itinfeasible or inappropriate to construct a public
atreet. In Daking this deteroination the clty Day
consider the location of existing property lines
and houes, loca1 or geographic condltions and the
existence of uetlands.
(21 After revienlng the surrounding area lt i8
concluded that an exteneLon of the public street
Eysteu is not required to serrre other parcels in
the area, Lnprove accsEa, or to provide a Btreet
Eyster consiatent rith the Conpreheneive PIan.
(3) rhe use of a prlvate drlveuay v1ll peroit enhancedprotection of uetlanda and lature trees.
If the uEe of prlvate drLveuay ls to be al1ored, they6haII be subJect to the follov1nE etandards:
(1) coDnon sections of prlvate driveuays aerrrlng two(2) or uore hones rust be built to a Beven (7) ton
deslgn, paved to a vidth of tuenty (20) feet,utilize a naxinun grade of ten percent (10t), anilprovide a turnaround area acceptable to the fire
Darshal based upon guldelines provided by
r03120 / 90
I CTTY OT CIIA}THASSEN
CARVER AND EEI,MEPIN COINTIES, IIINNESOTA
ORDINAIICE NO. 125
TIIE CITY COIJNCIL OF THE CITY OF CTIANTIASSEN ORDAINS:
CHANHASSEN PLANNING CO}I}IISSION
SPECIAL HEETING
ocToBER 24, 1990
Chairman Conrad called theorder at 7: 15 p.m . .
special meeting of the PIanning Commission to
COi,I},IISSION I{E}IBERS PRESENT: TiM ErhArt, STEVEBatzIi, Jim Hildermuth and Joan Ahrens
Emmings, Ladd Conrad, Brian
COHHf SSION l,tEltBER ABSENT: Annette El Ison
srAFF PRESENT 3 Paul Krauss, Planning oirector; cary t^,arren, city Engineer;sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner 1; and Hark Koegrer, comprehensive plan consurtant
Public Present:
Name Addr ess
VanDeVeire , Betty & LarryMorin, Joe & Gayle
Tichy , Br ianPhiIlips, l.,arren & Ar Ienel.1ielke, Jim & Doris
Olson, Andrew & CheryIScott, Joseph
Song, Charles & Irene
Song, Susan
( Illesible Name )BirI (?)
Foster , Mar kVandervorste, Ben & Greg
Rivki n, EricKlingelhutz, AlReick, B.J.
Davidson, Bret
Barke, Gi niFinstad, Barb & Al len
Sanda, Har k & KathyKlingelhutz, Br ian
Gorczyca, Jack & |,lelanieStellar , MerriII
Hambl.in, Dick
Roos, Roman
Mertz , Craig
Kuder , Har Lin
Schafer , OrIin
Keane, Tim
Smith, Julius C.
Gardner , Rennee & Jiml.liller, BiII
4980 Co. Rd. 10 E, Chaska
1441 Lake Lucy Road, Chanhassen
1471 Lake Lucy Road, Chanhassen
1571 Lake Lucy Road, Chanhassen
1645 Lake Lucy Road, Chanhassen
8290 telest Lake Court, Chanhassen
7O91 Pimlico Lane, Chanhassen
72OO GaIpin Lake Road, Chanhassen
525 University Ave S.E., *4, Hpls.
1851 Lake Lucy, Chanhassen
8105 Dakota Lane, Chanhassen
8O2O Acorn Lane, Chanhassen
8141 Haplewood, Chanhassen
1695 Stellar Court, Excelsior
8600 Great Plains BIvd., ChanhassentJhite Bear Lake, HN 55110
7291 GaIpin aIvd., Excelsior
7071 Shawnee Lane, Chanhassen
170 1 Stellar Court, Excelsior
16aS Stellar Court, Excelsior
2031 Timberwood Orive, Chanhassen
1850 Lake Lucy Road, Excelsior
1931 Crestvieu Circle, Excelsior
34O Sinnen Circle, Chanhassen
10341 Heidi Lane, Chaska
11OO First Bank Place tlest, MpIs, 554C2
6831 Galpin Blvd., Excelsior
Carver County Assessor , Chaska
79OO Xerxes So, Bloomington 55431
6750 France Avenue, l,lpls 55435
3921 Stratford Ridge, Chanhassen
8121 Pi neh,ood , Chanhassen
PUBLIC HEARING:
CITY OF CHANHASSEN CO}IPREHENSIVE PLAN-
Name Addr ess
tlhite, Don & Harsha
Goers, BiII
CarIson, Kent
Shardlow, John t,.
Ahrens, DougAlvey, Gerry & Karla
Cochrane , t'li k€ & Joanne
Janicke, Mar vi n
Smithburs, Robert
Johnson, Duane H/H
Smith, Bob
Carlson, DaIe & Glor ia
tling, Richard
Manci no, Nancy
Longman, Steve
Jacobson, Dennis
WiIliams, l'tar k & Tracy
Mason, Hichael
Oonnay, Richard
Leirdah] , James
Koubsky, David
Johnson, Larry
Stockdale, David
BIanchar, Jon
OIson, Peder
Coey, Ted
Dimler , UrsuIa
Cropsey, Patr ick
Dirlum, Dennis
Qui nn, Gene
8850 Audubon Road, Chanhassen
1601 Lyman Blvd., Chanhassen
P.O. Box 762, UayzaLa 55391
3Oo 1st Avenue No, Hpls 55401
Cha nhasse n
1431 Sunridge Court, Chanhassen
1751 Sunridge court, Chanhassen
7O21 Galpin BIvd., Excelsior
4657 Chan HilIs Drive No., Chanhassen
73!7 HazeILi ne Blvd., Chanhassen
Richfield
6900 Utica Lane, chanhassen
3481 Shore Orive, Excelsior
6520 GaIpin. Excelsior
13539 oak HiIl court, Eden Prairie
6841 Hazeltine BIvd. , Excelsior
1655 Lake Lucy, Chanhassen
833 tloodhi I I , Chanhassen
8109 Oakota Lane , Chanhassen
2350 Timberwood Drive, Chanhassen
1311 Lake Susan HiIIs Drive' Chanhassen
7022 Pina Bay, Chanhassen
7210 calpin BIvd. , Chanhassen
25 Norma Ridge Dr ive
8635 Chan HiIIs Drive No, Chanhassen
13a1 Lake Lucy Road, Chanhassen
7203 Kiowa CircIe, Chanhassen
91Oo t,est Bloomington Swy St. 157
15241 creekside court, Eden Prairie
532 Lyman BIvd. , chanhassen
Conrad: The sole purpose for this meeting is to discuss the ComPrehensive
Plan. IL's a public hearing and what I'd like to do, before we oPen it uP
for public comment is get a Iittle bit of background on the Process uthich
is probably kind of boring but something that we're going to tell you...and
then open it up for our staff to give a report to teII you uhat is
presented and then we'1I open it up for public comments. t'm going to sit
down. I was here 10 years ago when we had a comparable meeting and ule had
two public hearings and 5 p€ople showed up so I think either people are
more involved. tle have more people in the community and I hope those are
the key things for your attendance tonight. The process that we're looking
at is called a comprehensive plan. It's required by the Metropolitan
Council but it forces communities to do some planning and probably without
that process we may not do some planning and we may work on land use and
land development on a year to year basis which, as you knou, even when we
look ahead, as you know uhen you do it on a short term basis it makes a lot
of people nervous and there are tendencies to make fewer good decisions.
In that process we hired a consultant and ole direcled the Planning staff topull out information for us. Present the information to the Planning
Commission and as I said, this process has Iasted for aPProximately 2years. If in that process oe've handled several open meetings. Hany oPen
meetings. tle've invited the public in some of the public forums to come in
Planning Commission l.leeting
October 24, 7990 - Page 2
Planning Commission Heeting
October 24, t99O - Page 3
and teII us what you think before t,e get to a final stage and tonight isreally not a final stage because there,s still more to come but again it,sreally tough to make changes at the last second. It,s Iike it's nice tosee where the community stands on issues before oe put it into manuals.There's an insecurity but once it's in print. it's true and therefore weopen iL up for public comments occasionalry over the last 3 or 4 months toknow what the communitv, r.rhat the residents think about what ule're doing-Based on that input, ure as a commission looked at the issues that wereraised and we either voted or we directed ataff to review those issues.They weren't cast aside and said ue don't Hant to consider that. t"Je lookedat every issue that was brought up and like any kind of commission orcouncil, when you have 7 people you have 7 different opinions but we votedon those and those, along ruith staff input and our consultant's input, wehave formulated something that ue,re getting close to presenting to theCity Council. Tonight's meeting may seem a Iittle bit anti-climaticbecause we have had some public forums and we tend to know where somepeople stand. Yet on the other hand, it is for you to tell us what youthink of what we've got on the board right nour. It's our rule as acommission to decide if we want to further study it. If we,re totallywrong or if tre want to pass it to the city councir. rn arl cases, the cityCouncil makes the final decision. In aII cases. They're using us to tryto develop something that they can react to. And I don,t know if many ofyou have seen it. The plans that we have is relatively thick. f don'tknow if thickness counts. tle took a look at Excelsior's comprehensive pranand it hed 25 pages in it, There's some good neh,s to that. you can readiL quickly- And there's some bad news t.o this. Hopefully this means u,e'vedone some homenork on a lot of different issues. r think you,re all heregoing to talk about uhere, how those rittle maps look but r guess r wouldIike to make one commont that in this plan u,e not only talk about whatthose maps and the rand uses Iook like but we talk about the naLuralresources in Lhe community and how to preserve and protect them. tJe tarkabout employment. We talk about housing, recreation, transportationr s€ur@rand water, capital improvements. It,s a guide for 10 years which wiil bechanged but at least it's a guide and it has a rot of stuff in it that wiIIhopefully guide the community as the community does grow. For tonight'smeeting we're going to open it up r.rith our planning department making somecomments. Our consultant probabLy giving us some input as to how wearrived at certain things and then we'rl open iL up for the pubric for your
comments as to what we have today. The only restrictions that rd rike todo. They may kick us out. They wiII kick us out of this building f knourby 11:OO. I'd sure ]ike to close the meeting by 1O:OO so w6 can comment andset some kind of direction. l.le,re not here to ramrod anything down yourthroat so we'll pay attention and if we can't get all the comments done,ue'II continue the hearing. I would lik€ to though Iimit the commentsfirst 9o ahead to 10 minutes. rf there's anvthing more than 10 minutes,we're going to cut you off and let somebody else have a comment. t,le,llcome back to vou as time permits. The other things that r would rike to dois if there are, r,{e r.rill listen to the sam€ comment. He'd prefer not to.If there are people that believe in what uas just said by somebody duringtheir turn at the microphone, I guess showing your support or a commentjust saying we agree I think uould serve for us the same purpose. l.le'renot going to cut you off however if you do want to make a comment to us.That's not why ue're here. I think t,ith that introduction, the only otherthing afLer ue have our plannins staff talk to us a little bit, when you dohave a comment, if we can get you to our microphone for your name and
Planning Commission Meet i ng
October 24, t99O - Page 4
address for the record and then the comments that you have. If you
represent a group or another Person, again that trould be aPProPriate for
your introduction to yourself and your comments. Paul?
Kr au
for
Provwithaco
law.
does
PIan
Iine
can'
1002
YeaYthat
gr owrelo
i mpo
comm
some
Comm
comm
sing
comm
the
ce nt
co nt
The
Pres
out I
for
t hat
ouLtos
samediff
thos
wou I
and
Year
AP
ent
MP
ritt.i
S
Ith
cart
unf
un
Ie
unpI
ra
ln
P1
er
vi
un
1
an
ee
s
er
e
d
aI
s
: Thank you. As the Chairman indicated we've been trorking on this
proximately 2 yeays. our current Plan dates back to 1980 and has
to be inadequate Lo resPond Lo the issues of the 199o's or to deal
he growth that's occurred. There's a basic question as to khy we do
rehensive plan and there's basically 3 answers. It is required by
The Hetropolitan Land Planning Act administered by the l'letro Council
equire that you maintain a comPrehensive Plan. Secondly' the ComP
s the only means for relocating the l'tUSA Iine. The urban service
hat. determines u,here h,e can Provide urban services and where we
Chanhassen's rapidly running out of service area. ble exPerienced a
ncrease in population and a 3ooz increase in jobs over the Iast 10
and I can state unequivocally that nobody Probably lrants or foresees
rowth trend continuing at chat rate. That if a reasonable amount of
is to occur in the next 10 to 15 years, the MUSA Iine needs to be
ted to accommodate that. The IasL reason is probably the most
ant one and that is that a comPrehensive PIan is a vision of what the
ity wants to become in the nexL 10 to 15 years. It's used to set
undamental directions for growth. For examPIe, the Planning
sion determined that the ratio of Iand uses that ue have in the
ity today is a good one. That the mix of emPloyment, commercia) ,
family residential and Primarilv a single familv residential
ity is a good one and should be PerPetuated and that became a goaf of -an. Another broad brush goal had to deal trith maintenance of our
I business district and encouraging the central business district to
ue Lo develop and continue Lo be an imPortant Part of our community.
an's also used to promote environmental protection, Iocate and
ve parkland, identifv school sites and recreational facilities'
ne utility and street imProvements and hoPefully lay out a schedule
dertaking those Proiects. I guess I'd digress a little bit to sav
o years ago somebody who was sitting in this chair nould have looked
d said there's a recession coming and that you're Probably not going
a Iot of things happening for a long time. l.le're sitting in the
ituation now. t"le realize that demograPhic trends are somewhat
ent. The baby bubble is now Passing through the svstem- Most of
people have homes. t^le are probably facing a recession. Hooever, I
ask you to keep in mind that this PIan is for 10 to 15 year timeframe
I we need to do is Iook back and see what haPPened in the Previous 10
to see what the possibil.ities are in the future. The 1990's
potentially could be a v€ry exciting decade for the city. In our studies
of surrounding communities we realize that most of the surrounding
communities have either filled up or the attractive land in those
communities is gone. l.le have had a very significant growth in our
employment and that in itself is making the community mor€ desireable and I
think you're all aware of the fact that our access situation, which has
always been fairly difficult, is rapidly being improved. In developing the_
draft comprehensive plan the commission started by reviewing those forces
that are affecting our community and lhen established goals and policies
for each plan element. The Chairman touched on those PIan elements- The
plan elemenL thaL's received the most attention is the Iand use PIan' that -colored map and it is important but we also have spent a lot of time on
natural features, environmental protection, transPortation Plenning element
Planning Commission Meeting
October 24, t99O - Page 5
is guite significant. l.,e've recently completed a study with Carver County.
[.le also have a housing element, a recreation plans are in the comprehensiveplan. Utility extensions. Our sol.id waste management program which thecity administers is also in there as is the capital improvements plan.
PubIic input on the plan was obtained by residents atlending numerous worksession meetings and te,ro well attended informational meetings held thissummer. As a result of these meetings, a number of changes wereincorporated into the plan. The Planning Commission has also received alarge volume of correspondence, petitions, newsletters which wereconsidered. They were aII passed out to the Planning Commission for theirreview. In fact they're contained in an Appendix to the plan for those ofyou who've had an opportunity to have thumb through iL. tle've had a numberof articles placed in the local newspapers. Both the papers have been verycooperative in getting the word out as to r.lhat's 9oin9 on and I think your
attendance here is evidence of that. FinaIIy, people who expressed aninterest in the plan, we've had a running mailing list and anybody who,swritten us about anything or asked to be on a mailing list has receivedspecial notice of meetings and ue do have a sign up sheet in the backtonight and we'd encourage you to sign that and we'Il keep people posted offorthcoming progress on the plan. Tonight,s meeting is the official publichearing that's required by law. The previous meetings have beeninformational and the Planning Commission,s gai.ned a lot out of them butthis is the official meeting that must be undertaken. As the chairmanindicated, the Planning Commission can accepL testimony and pass the planalong to the city councir with their recommendations or they can determinethat additional changes are required and r guess we'Il have to Hait and seeulha! their decision is on that. Ultimately the plan wiII be sent to theCity Council for approval and they can also incorporate additional changes.The City Council wiII probably get the plan for approval by the end of theyear. Depending on uhat happens tonight, ure'll have a better idea on howthat wiII go. After the City Council approves it, it has to be sent to theMetropolitan council and that's a uhole different process. They have at 90days to review the plan. It's a major plan amendment. It's sent out toneighboring communities. tle've been trying to work with the Metro counciland keep the neighboring communities arare of what we're doing but theyarso can require additionar changes in the plan. Final pran adoption willprobably occur by next spring if everything moves along. tlith that I'dlike to have Mark Koegler, who's the City's planning consultant give abrief overview of the plan and the revisions that were incorporated mostrecently this summer. I'd also note that Gary Harren sitting to my right,our City Engineer is present tonight and can respond to questions.FinaIIy, there have been some questions raised on prop€rty valuations andtaxation and Orlin Schafer who's the Carver County Assessgr has beenwilling to attend our meeting and he's here tonight and cin respond to somequestions as weII. t,lith that I'Il pass the meeting over to Hark Koeg]er.
Flark Koegler: Thanks Paul . My comments this evening are going to focusspecifically on the ]and use section. I'lI-touch a Iittle bit ontransportation and I would echo that the Chairman and PauI's comment thatr.le're not trying to omit the other sections of the plan but in a forum liketonight obviously t.le can only focus on so much so any comments thaL any ofyou have on any other of the sections of the plan are certainly still inorder this evening. I uant to really do probably 3 or 4 things. I want toprovide you with some orientation to the land use plan. TaIk a Iittle bitabout some of the land use caLegories and what some of the designations
Planning Commission t'leet i ng
October 24, 1990 - Page 6
that you see on the two boards actually mean. Give you a little bit of an
overview of some of the rationale behind how those designations took Place
and some of the changes that have taken place over the last literally
probably 12 to 18 months as that thing has evolved and then finallv Louch a
little bit on some of the transPortation related issues and how thev'impact
the land use plan. The plan itself, the land use section is driven to a
Iarge degree by some of the demograPhic information that's in the PIan
document that deals uith some of the ProJections on PoPulation' on
households, on employment growth. To give you some idea of what those
benchmarks are, the plan identifies 3 different sets of Proiections and
then goes on to basically highlight what we've targeted as kind of a
midrange set of numbers. APProximately 1a months ago, at that time we were
stiII projecting for 1990, the Plan was Projecting about 4,113 households
with a populaLion count of about 11,1O5. As manv of you know, I'm sure
you've read in the local newsPaPers that the census information is out in
very preliminary form and those numbers very much verify those Projections
that were made a while ago. The census as of Apri] had a poPulation for
the city of about Ll ,7oO with just over 4,OOO housing units so thev were
very close. The plan then goes on to Proiect that by the vear 2ooo the
population wilI rise to aboui L7,7Oo and the total housing count urill be
somewhere in the neighborhood of 6,500 units so it r.rill be uP about 2'5OO
in round numbers from where ue are today. I'm going to move over and
discuss some of the boards a tittle bit. If any of vou are in the back
feel free to stand up and move around or ulhatever so you can see a liLtle
bit better. First of a]l in terms of some orientation. What ue've had to
do for lhe sake of convenience is break i! into two areas. Kind of a north -area and south area. The north one is on the right side, the south is on
the left. common features of both is TH 5 and this area which is doHn kind
of across the center portion with most of the colored area above on this
particular map. I want to walk through very quickly the kind of palate of -
colors that have been used here so in case you haven't had a chance to look
closely, you know what those mean. Many of you have seen ' u,e have a larger
scale map... The colors range from initiallv the lighter yellow color is
residential larie lot urhich is essentiallv 2 L/2 acYe, single familv
residential type of develoPment. on site sewer systems- l'lost of those
b,ere platted prior to 1987. The more canary yellow color is residential
low density catesory. Essentiallv the single family detached . . . 15 '
ooo or
greater square foot lot in terms of the zoning code. The residential
continues then into the orange color uhich is medium densitv. That really
is earmarked more for townhouse tyPe of units...houses r^re're Lalking about -
and then the brown is the higher density categorv uhich uould be more of an
apartment type structure. The red color on the maP which occurs Primarily
only in the downtouln area is commercial . The purPle that you see,particularly south of TH 5 on that exhibiL is the off ice,/i ndustr ia I
category. That is usually your Iight manufacturing, office, warehouse tvPe
of facilities similar to t{hat is now in Place in chanhassen Lakes Business
Park and what's developed in there over the last 10 years Period. Hoving
through the categories, there's ttro colors of green on the maP. A Iishter
color of green represents parks and oPen sPace corrj.dors. The more olive
green represenLs public and semi-public Iand uses. An example urould be the-
Arboretum, churches, schools, things of that nature. There's undeveloPed
land that's just shouln in uhite. The only really occurrence of that is in
the extreme southern portion of the community well outside of the HUSA Iine-
area and I'Il touch on that in a feur minuLes. There's a mixed use category
which. covers both hish densiLy and commercial uses. It's only Iocation is
Planning Commission Meet i ng
October 24, t99O - Page 7
down in this portion of the citv. The HUSA line that r mentioned a momentago, for any of you uho are not up on your acronyms. the MUSA isMetropolitan Urban service Area. r think most of you are aware Lhat that'skind of a Iine, demarktation between the area the essentially can receivesanitar)z sewer service and an areas,.,until after the year 2OOO. The heavyred Iine that appeared on both of these exhibits is the I'iUSA that's beingproposed as part of the comprehensive plan update. It does add land areaas I'm sure most of you are auare to the existing... The existing line ison the map, it's probably very difficult to see if you're much further than5 or 10 feet away. It's the smaller red line. I,ll caII your attentionalso to there's an asterick up in this portion, south of TH 5 and the eastside of Galpin. That's identifving a cooperative effort thus far with theschool district to identify a potentiaL...school site that may bedesignated at. some time in the future. The Iand use pattern that hasevolved out of this entire process has a rot of reflections back to h,haturas compiled in the 1980 comprehensive plan. I think it's parallel Lo thephilosophv. At that time the citv's developed area Has primarily aroundLotus Lake' some of it beginning to extend south of TH s but not to a majoramount with the excePtion of the Chanhassen Estates area and the industrialarea down in chanhassen Lakes Business park. The pattern then has been oneof that development pushing basically southurest and somewhat westward inuhat was Iabeled in 19ao as an organized fashion. The 1980 plan aclualIyshowed it's sewered portion of the pran, where Iikely areas would be in byear increments for sanitary seuer service to be expanded between 1980 andat that time the year 2ooo. The MUSA rine was identified for 1990. rt Baskind of summarilv changed by the Hetropolitan councir a t"rhile laLer to theyear 2OOO and now,..a change in that again. Touching on some of theparLicu!.ar land use patterns, I mentioned it before. The red is thecommerciar area. . .substantial location of commercial is in the downtownarea- That's verv much indicative of Lhe ciLy's philosophy to emphasizedevelopment in that area. As I,m sure you're all aware, tirere's asignificant amount of investment there within the last io to rz years. someof the fruits of that are being seen nob, and the emphasize is on continuingwith that tvpe of pattern. The industrial development that starcedinitiallv over in the...of the county and then. . .chanhassen Business parkis basicallv being continued philosophically down towards chaska. rf thismap L,ere to contain chaska's land use as welr, )zou'd see the purple colorthat basicallv abut this entire area. rf any of you had a chance to lookat the exhibit that's over there, that reflects some of the land useoutside of chanhassen's boundaries that identify that. There ulere a numberof issues that came up during the preparation of the Iand use plan... I'mgoing to touch on some of those briefly. The Timberuood neighborhood urhichis one of the residential Iarge lot designations in this area certainly wasa topic of considerable discussion. It essentially kind of Iies in thecenter of r.rhat r described as the path...connection of industrial down toChaska. After numerous meetings and a great deal of...the planning
commission did decide to make some changes in that area. . . identifits themas single family surrounding that as weII as the medium density closer toTH 5, A very similar occurrence took place in the Sunridge Courtdevelopment down in this area. tthat has happened is what formerlycontained some industrial designations has been turned back over toresidential also. Another change that has taken place in more recenetimes. rn this corner of TH 5 and Galpin...was designated as neighborhoodcommercial site. It u,as approximately 11 acres in size. Based ontestimony and consideration by the planning commission, that bras converted
Planning Commission Meet i ng
october 24, l99o - Page I
over to a residential use. They xere considering the size of the parcel ,it's... Lake Luc), area up in the northern portion of the community is
another area that received consideration attention. It Has the subject of
considerable resident comments as r.lelI. The final decision, at least to
date and for the purpose of bringing it to public hearing tonight was to
leave the I'{USA Iine essentia}ly intact where it uas shown. There was
consideration in taking certain properties out...line around. To date the
commission has elected to leave the line where it is. The final really
change that kind of evolved uas kind of a concePt. Kind of a Planning
concept that occurred and that's t,hat's been labeled buffer area. On this
map there are various designations of buffer areas both on the southern
part of the community and to th€ northern Part. What these are and they're -shown basically as interface areas between a residential land use and some
other type of land use. They're identified as land as an additional buffer
strip ouLside of the normal setbacks. outside the normal landscaPing
requirements. on a land to Iand contact basis, it'd be larger-.- roadtlay
such as along Audubon that may be reduced to somethins like 50 or 75
feet. -.additional street right-of-wav... The intent of those is to provide
some physical and visual seParation between uses. Touching iust for a -moment on some sLatistics and we're not by any means going to get into
detail and bore you with a lot of numbers. I'11 make iust a quick
reference as to urhat some of the tabulations of land would reveal. Inside
the existins i'1USA line which if vou'lI allow me iust generally I've
identified as this area on this map. tlhen you geL over into this map, it's
predominantly an area that comes up this way. Inside of those boundaries
at the presenL time Lhe City has 281 acres of vacant single familv
designated property or Iow density designated ProPerty. 175 acres of
mulLi-famiIy, 118 of commercial and 95 acres of industrial. The change in
the MUSA line for additional area if you will, that occurred betureen where -the Iine Iies now and 4here the line is ProPosed to be as Part of the PIan
obviously brings additional land into the total svstem. Land that
potentially wiII develop over the next 10 year time Period. I urould stress
over the next 10 year period. That's not been identified by any means the -
l99L...aII the properties available. It's very much contingent uPon the
City's ability to provide sanitary seuer service and some of the other
urban utilities to those areas. The numbers reflecting the additional area -on the plan approximately 84O acres of single family, aPProximately 115 of
multi-famiIy, 543 acres of officezindustrial land. The total results
essentially in the residential Portion onlv. The total availability of
Iand between where we are today and the year 2OOO is aPProximately 1,40O
acres. The text portion of the land use Plan contains some dialogue about
some of the projections and some of the methodologies that tre've done but
basically it's set up a patter the City's going to need somewhere between
approximately 1,3OO and 1,9OO acres to satisfv residential demands betuJeen
now and the year 2OOo. So you can see the number that's been identified in
the plan again is someu,hat of a conservalive midrange kind of number
...limits that the MetroPolitan Council e,ould ePProve, the emPhasize bv
the Planning Commission since day one has been to try to...reasonable
document for alI areas. lhe final thing that I want to touch uPon quicklv
is transportation. On this maP there's a series of Iines that are
superimposed on the Iand use colors. Again' lith the room configuration
it's real difficult to see. Perhaps . . . identify some of the neul alignments
and look at those quickly for you. TH 5, there's a new frontage road shown-
along the north side lhat would extend from cR 17 or Pou,ers Blvd. on the
east to TH 41 on the west. There is a eomPatible somer.lhat detached
frontage road to the south of that that stretches from Audubon Road on the€ast over again to TH 41 on the uest taking a rather circuitous route t'oget there, There are turo road segments in the northern portion of the
community. The connection between Galpin 8lvd., which is CR 117 and TH 41 .
One appears north of Lake Harrison and one appears to the south of LakeHarrison. Those will be future collector street locations. The obvious,
and I said this 10 years ago, the obvious transportation. . .TH 212. I'mglad to say it's a little further along than it was when we did this backin 1982. At least the official mapping has occurred. That is showncontinuing on this plan. That then evoked some other transportationimprovements. TH 1O1 is being rerouted south of TH 5 over to MarketBlvd....down to the new interchange location for TH 1O1 . Ultimately thenanother interchange being constructed over to the west along CR 17. Thatreally kind of concludes my overview comments on the plan. I don't knou ifPaul has anything to add to that. If not we'II turn it over to the
Commission.
Conrad: Thank you t'1ark. I guess we're close Lo opening it up for your
comments. I'm just going to reiterate one thing. Our process Has drivenb), some goals in each of these areas. If you're interested in what Lhegoals were, I think that kind of tells you hor.r He got to where we ended upand I'd encourage if you're curious what those goals are in terms oftransportation, land use, housing, to go to City HaIl and get a copy ofthose. They're probably on I or 10 pages in this document but it tells you
uhaL our goals are for development and how we're going to do Ehat and thepolicies that uJould assist in accomplishing that. The only other thingbefore I open it up, just so you're aware, this is a land use plan and it'snot zoning. Zoning could follow later on. Probably will but it is not thesame thing as zoning. Zoning occurs later on when there is appropriateapplication to rezone the property. This is our way of saying l.let Council,residenLs, here's how we think we're going to grow. We've got some blocksout there and this is the direction we're going in. I'm going to open itup for comments. tlho would like to be the first person tonisht?
Gene Quinn: f guess I wi]l. Hy name is Gene Quinn. I live at 532 LymanBIvd.. t^lhen you say this .is not zoning, okay but people Hant to come downto City HalI and see how somethi.ng is going to be used next to me, it's as
much a zoning. Or just about as much. LeL me show you where I,m at. I'vegot 10 acres right here - Right next to it is commercial ... Okay, my houseis about here. The day's going to come uhen...make it into lots. Uhenpeople come out, come dourn to City Hall and they h,ant to see what's going
Lo happen, t^rhat do they see? They see red zoning don't they?
Conradr If they look at the comprehensive plan, they'II certainly thinkthat that's the direction it's going,
Gene Ouinn: I mean it's going to cost me a lot of money. Lots of money.I've got here a handout that was from about 3 years ago, a public hearingfoy \H 2!2. At that time it was commercial on this urhole interchange withhalf the new parcel...mixed use. Okay, he's going to end up selling thaEland for uhat, $3.OO to $5.OO a sguare foot in 5 yeers from now and it'sgoing to end up costing me a lot of money. Is that fair? Thank you.
Conrad: Thanks Gene. PauI , did you have a comment on what?
Planning Commission Heeting
October 24, !99O - Page 9
Planning Commission Meet i ng
October 24, 7990 - Page 10
Krauss: Only, well the commer cia I /mi xed use that's being shown there is
being shown around a highuray interchange between TH 1O1 and TH 212. It's
going to be a high traffic area- It's going to be high visibility area.
There's reason to think that higher intensity uses are aPProPriaLe there.
tle do have to be careful of how we get that interfaced betueen the
commercial and higher density and the residential and I believe ue've
showing, are Ne showing a buffer yard there? Yeah. 1.,e're showing the
buffer yard concepL in there and it is something that's worked out tlhen we
actually have a design. That's about it-
Conrad: Gene, your preference is not for mixed use there I assume?
cene Ouinn: Well, the way I see it is that hle u,ere committed. The Citv
made up this thing. okay, we sPend our time going Lo a public hearing.
that time it was to work with changing the freeway alignment so my next
imporLant thing was the Iand use around it. Okay? tle shotl it as medium
density with two different alternates... I even talked, you know that's
the way I felt so I talked to a local realtor. This ladv is involved in
selling lots and ptatting and she's got a good feel for PeoPle. okav?
People go douJn to City HaII and look at that and see that commercial next
to them and you know what the ansuler's going to be. They're going to run
avray. There are enough Iots to buy in Chanhassen, you don't have to buy
one next to... Some of that, the way she exPlained, is Probably worse
before it's actually develoPed because thev don't know tlhat's going Lo 9o
in there.
At
Conrad: Okay , thanks .
Richard Donnay: Richard Donnay. I'm at 8109 Dakota Lane in Chanhassen in -the Estates. I'm concerned, I'm wondering about the park ProPerty, the
park property around Lake Ann. Between Lake Ann and Lake Lucy. Is that
park area now beLween Lake Ann and Lake Lucy there? Is that what it is
now? It's park and will it continue to be Park indefinitely and do ue have -
parkland aII the way around Lake Ann? I mean is it permissible for a
citizen to walk around Lake Ann now and what are the possibilities of
expanding the park up around the uest side of Lake Lucv. Ihat's reallv
beatiful in there for tresPassers would find that out at this point- I'm
realIy hopeful you can develop a Park around those lakes there.
conrad: Thanks for your comments. Mark' can you handle that?
Koegler: Yes. The Park plan literallv since the 1980 Plan r',as Put
together has strongly advocated that Lake Ann is probabll the only lake in
chanhassen that the city has a reasonable chance to get circulation aII the
way around. I think a lot of us trould like to tell vou tonight that it's
there bu! it's noL at the present time. It is on the south side with Lake
Ann Park. It is on the east side xith the connection uP to Greenwood
Shores Park on kind of the northeast Portion of the lake if you tlill. tlhat
the comprehensive plan shous then is a continuation first of aII of a
slight expansion of the park area between the tuo urater bodies and then
with at }east some kind of a connecting striP around the other side-
tlheLher that's in ownership. trhether Lhat's in easement, that ttould remain
to be seen. The tenacle that you see that kind of stretches uP to the
northuest from there is the Lake Ann IntercePtor sewer alingment that
f ollor.ls up through there and the city's ]ong term hoPe is to see that as a
Conrad: Is the County Assessor here? TheIand valuation r,rith 212 going through.
gentleman was concerned about
Planning Commission Meet i n9
October 24, 7990 - Page 11
trail corridor with a connection from Lake Ann park getting up intoHinnewashta Regional Park. So r.rhat you have on Lhat map is actually amixture of existing conditions and the plan's proposed expansion of public
useage around Lake Ann Park. At the present time I believe there,s atreast one home on the southwest portion kind of on Lake Ann which would beimpacLed or wourd have Lo be dealt with as a part of Lhat acquisition.
Richard Donnay: So the lind between those tpo lakes would have to bepurchased from a privaLe ou,ner at this point?
Koegler: It would. The City presently has title to e very small areabelueen the two rakes in the form of Greenwood shores park which is about a3 acre par k.
Bob Smithburg: My name is Bob.smi.thburg. r'm very new to the area here. rbought a house on 8557 chanhassen Hirls Drive North. r,m concerned aboutrH 2l? and TH 1o1 . could vou terl me, this might be ol.d for everyone elsebut could you teII me the status of the proposils for the highway. tJill itenhance mv propertv value? tli]I it degrade it, r.lhich r feel it probablywiII being an artery into it. witl it be a submerged highway? can yougive me information on this?
[.Jarren: Highway 212's been official]y mapped by the City. The corridorthat's shown on Lhe city,s map is accurate as ule can repiesent it at thatscare of a map. rndications from the Department of Transportation is thatthe Project is funded for construction out to the intersection of Lyman andTH 1O1 probably by the late 90's. I *ould expect !996 to fg9e timing whenthat road would be under construction. Through the chan Hills area,-th;last concepts that ue,ve been provided from the State shows that itis adepressed road section and that it would actually be 9oin9 underneath theexisting at grade intersection so there would be some-bufier to the rocalneighborhood as a result of thaL.
conrad: rf the county Assessor is here, maybe you courd ansurer a rittrebit of your question about value.
Bob Smithburg: Okay, end then one other question. l.till they be puttinguP, you know such as on the county roads in Minneapolis, r,rooden wi-rat do youcalI them? Noise barriers or visual barriers?
l^larren: The State is currently completing the environmental impac!statement for the roadway and they do use as you're aHare, noise walls incertain areas uhere the criteria dictates it. To be honest. r don't knowcomPletelv the road section as far as whether they've actr]aity propo="J inynoise waIls. In areas where there's depressed road section, tybi"ifiy theydon't need it but that wirl be a part of their finar environmental impact.
Bob Smithburg: Okay. I r.tould appreciate it if you have influence in Lhismatter, to really push for this because I know the decibel ratings arequite hish that they judge by and to our normal ears, it'i prettyirr itati ng .
Planning Commission l'leeL i ng
October 24, 7990 - Page 12
conrad: Thank you. olher comments-
craig Harringtonr craig Harrington, 8140 Haplewood Terrace. I iust have a
"orpl" of questions and some of these may be for Gary or for Hark or PauI.
O;-th; highway S, do you know starting from let's say Audubon Road going
west, wheie the new hight^ray,s going to cut? tlhether it's going to cut to
the south or to the noith. I'm watching .as it's going through Eden
prairie. It seems !o be cutting to Lhe s-ouLh right now. Have thev made
any proposals or staked that out yet?
l.larren: From CR 17 Lo TH 41, you're talking about that section?
craig Harrington: Right.
warren: All I can tel] you at this Point in time is that the current
alignment, you can see tire constructi.on going on no* to add the tuo lanes
to lhe bridge are going to be on the north side of TH 5 so ].rhen it comes
tnrough cR i7 it *iff U. on the north side. Not, they flip back and forth
;; t;;'li see on this recent sesment that's under construction depending on
Orlin Schafer: The land values change as ProPerty changes as Plans such as
this take effecL. They're long term and hE's Lalking about that corridor
being there but utilized sometime... It wouldn't be reallv much imPact at
aII as far as land value. If you're a develoPer who's exPecting to
purchase land and subdivide it and develoP it, this is what this is alI
about. It's gearing up, telling you r^rhere you're most likely sites are
available and what is going to imPact those sites. Normallv vou see
highway construction such as this, vou'II see low densitv housing with
large buffer areas. Something like that to Protect the noise or the
economic impact from the highway. By doing that, you're not lowering your
value, you're enhancing the property from the sense that... The imPact to
a value...is minimal... The same thing applies.. -around that Lake Ann
area. tle see that park over there. PeoPIe that ioin a golf course enjoy
the rather large value in their property simply because they're buying the
aesthetics of a visual amenity that...so this works both ways. In some
cases you can tell somebody you made a bad choice. The ProPerty is going
to be impacted... Perhaps other choices say it's to your advantage to own
the property. According to this, uho are going to benefit? You and others
in the area. Referring to what Mr. Lyman was saying about the develoPment
property. t,le don,! necessarily define...shy autay from being neighbors to
industrial sites. Nhat we've seen in Chanhassen and Chaska too and other
areas of the metro area where they're developing light industrial and
commercial property...landscaping and they are enhancing the Picturesque
studies of Lhe building and they're demanding certain things of these
contractors and these develoPers so they are no longer eye sores. They
aren't Ehese 10 story brick warehouse type buildings Lhat are 90in9 uP.
They're doing a very decent job for the most Part of fitting in with the
Iandscaping of the a."a around, I r.lould no! say that you're going to be
""g.ii"!fy-"ffected...rather than the industrial park. l.le have some in the -inJustrial park out there nor,l that actually the homes were built there
first but since the industry Nent uP across the way, PeoPle thought they
were going to be negatively impacted. -. So PeoPle will so to those sites '
I donit think it's going to overly negatively affect it. The other thing
is that... I guess thai's mv Point'. Everything's going to seII'
Every!hing's 9oing. ...
Planning Commission Meet i n9
October 24, 1990 - Page 13
obstacles like the park property and some of these things so there's nogiven alignment yet at this point in time.
Craig Harrington: Okay. The other question I have, Mark on where thepublic or the intermediate school may be going, there's Iike a shadedIs that actually, between the front.age road and the hightaay, is thereto be any developable area in there? Is that just going to be buffervacant land?
Krauss: BisecLing the property. In fact I think it was tlary thatsuggested that we run it as a frontage road section and it made a lotsense to do that. l.lhat we anticipate doing is essentially it uilI befrontage road so you'll have TH 5, you'll have a medi.an strip of someand then you'II have the frontage road and then everyLhing beyond it.only place that would not occur is at Galpin where you need to provide
enough offset from that intersection .for safety so it uiII come doun a
I ittle bit .
area .
9oi ng
Iand,
Krauss: Craig, that's one of the things that has changed in the plan. Ithink you recalI that an earlier version of Lhat plan.
Craig Harrington: Right, we had the frontage road I think further dor^rn.
of
a
sor t
The
Craig Harrington: But even so, r.lilI that stiII, it looks Iike it, is thatgoing to be developable ret's sav between where it comes into Galpin anddrops down a little bit further on the east side there between CR 117betureen that frontage road and TH 5. Is that 9oin9 to be, you know becauseit's just shaded nour. That's alr r see right there and r don't want to seea sas sLation there or something Iike that.
Krauss: No.
Craig Harrington: We are or.
Krauss: Oh, you're proposed to be yeah.
Craig Harrington: l.,le were a donut hole at one time but we all decidedthat's not the way to 9o but I was curious if the assessor would just
comment. r think al] of us in Timberwood area are especially concerned ifour tax value's going to go up simply because of the public sewer and watergoing in at this time. How that's going to impact us once that becomes apart -
Koegler: You're right. The designation on the map bear in mind it's a1'ooo scale map. rc is fairlv generalized. r think that typ€ of decisionNould ultimaterv be made at the time that road goes in and you study theintersection configurations. r can tell you the intent of the pran rightnow for the record, as PauI stated, is to tuck that frontage road up tiTH 5 r.lhere there would not be developable property betr.,een the two areas.
craig Harrington: okay. The other question r have is and is for maybe theCounty Assessor. I t,as just curious about, ue,re nou in the MUSA line forTimberwood as far as I understand right?
Planning Commission Heet i ng
October 24, t99o - Page 14
orlin Schafer: The HUSA line in itself does not increase ProPerty value.
That's easy to say in theory but hard to Prove. The resulLs of the
MUSA line opens a lot of area, moving of that line, oPens a lot of area to
be developed... There's several PeoPIe in the audience tonight that I've
had conversations r.rith...that have addressed this Problem and they said'
you've got my property value and here I'm sitting on 6 or 8 acres, you've
got my property value at o7O'OOO.OO of real estate and that's iust
outrageous. I can't use more than an acre and a half of that and therefore
$3o,OOO.OO should be more aPProPriate. The truth of the matter is, when
the MUSA line opens up, if there's some give and take in variances and
zoning and so forth, that Probably can be develoPed so the HUSA line is
giving Lhat individual an oPPorlunity to do something more with his
property and many of these PeoPIe are holding those Pieces of ProPerty in
that light. t,ith Lhe development of that ProPertv in mind. The MUSA line
would not increase the value from a tax point of view- Not, sPecial
assessments for the installation of the utilities. Those sorts of things. -I don't even touch that. I have nothing to do with that - I don't even
want to give anyone the idea that that's the case ' They aPProve
assessments...specials by the advantage it gives to your ProPerty or the
value that it adds to the ProPerty because of the availabilitv of those
utilities. That's something entirelv different. I deal with the value
that those utilities gives Lhe ProPerty... tle talk market - If it adds
some value as a part of the market is concerned. If you're sitting out
there on 2l/2 acyes, you've got your oHn well and your own sePtic system
and you can have the MUSA going right in front of your yard and not hook
on. It really hasn't added anything to your ProPerty unless you're using
it as a selling point to somebody that says hey, we've got t'lusA right here.
If you ever have Lrouble ulith your well, it's right out there in front.
Fine. tJhen it's stubbed in and Ne see vou hooked onto it, ue'll add the
value as far as the markeL from lhe markeL PersPective but iust because the -
line runs in front of you or touches you...that doesn't really add" 'toyour properLy. That's how ure came to the-..portion of t'lho's going to Pay
for the construction. They're going to te]I you eventually you do' You
definitely do at some point in time. You're going Lo hook onto that publi.c
utility. You will use the system at some Point in time. There are certain
protections that you put into place for people that oHn propertx as this
Iine grows, As it expands. There are some agricultural things that we can
do that have been designed, they're in Place now to Protect farm entities
from being swalloh,ed up or forced to develoP...customarily when
development, again there's blocks of ProPerLv...subdivided ' the farmer
that's retaining a piece of ProPerty in an attemPt to farm feels the
pressure and his land value goes right through the roof. t,le have some
property when the...for !E7oo,OOO.OO. tJe had...agricultural land at that
point in time. That's th6 kind of pressure those PeoPle do...being Laxed
off the farm. You've heard that before and you'll continue to hear that'
especially here in the meLro area where there are safeguards that ue use-
They must be used with caution because at some Point in time you're going
to dance or you pay the bank and sometlhere down the road you might have to
pay real fast. For instance green acres is utilized, Payments are
deferred. Taxes are held down and all of a sudden you sell off. You
become ineligible for green acres. You've got 90 days to Pay that and
Scott County is seeing some of that u,here they have some Prime ProPerty
that should be developed and they can't, the people who own it can't afford-
to seII it because all their assessmenls and aII the back taxes wiII come
due in 90 days. They're just scared to death of selling. Thev wouldn't
get any money. They don't feel they uould. So that is, in reference to the
MUSA Iine. The line itself Hon't do anything. It won't do anything withthe value of your individual property until we see... If you have 40 acresout there and the line comes across the bottom of it...subdivide your 40acres, fine. t,e sit on it until t,e see you subdivide that 40 acres andthen we sit on it until we see you sell some Iots so ue're really prettyIaid back. . . Anything else?
Conrad: Thanks .
Craig Harrington: I appreciate that comment and I will hold you to it.I think as you know, we're in a new development and pretty much everybody,sgoing to stay with their own private weII and septic and my concern was,and I agree. It should be based on market value and there's that amenitiesthat we have when the MUSA line comes in but I just didn,t kant the valuesto jump up even though we're not going to take any advantage of that usefor probably many years to come since we've just put in brand new septicand wells. The only other comment, parting comment I have is again, my1on9 standing comment is that I would not Iike to see the commercial/
i ndustr ial go west of t'lcGlynn 's so that ,s my comment .
Beverly VanderVorste: Beverly Vandervorste, A141 MaplewoodI've seen a lot of different things that have gone on aroundli ke r^rhat I see and I h,ant to thank everybody.
in Timberwood.
there and I
conrad: Thank you .but thanks.
That may be the only positive thing ue hear tonight
Planning Commission Heet i n9
October 24, 1990 - Page 15
Al KlingeLhutz: r've been asked to do this by a pretty good friend of mineand it kind of hurts me to do it because I,ve got a friend sitting rishthere that's just as good but Mr. Curry who is Scotland right now asked meto read this letter that he sent to me and uants it put into the record.It really bothers me when you get between a rock and hard place. A good
man sittins here and Jim Curry, a good friend of mine and I agreed to himthat I would read this letter to you. It says, Re: Comprehensive plan
Public Hearing. It says I'm unable to be with you tonight however AIKlingelhutz is representing me. It says my wife and I own 75 acres off of
TH 212/fH 1O1 intersecLion. PauI Krauss has given surveys of this landduring the informal hearings held last summer. The land measures out to 45acres of condemnation land and 30 other acres. Chanhassen city staff andconsultants are recommending that the Iand be shown as mixed use for thecomprehensive pIan. This would include hish density, commercial andfreeway commercial . tle bel.ieve this zoning for the intersection land isvery wise. Above aII the city keeps it's option open as to the ultimateuse of the land. During the 1990's the city of Chanhassen wiII probably
request a master plan for aII the non-highway acres when a request comes infor a use for any of the land. This wiII involve public hearings and give
everyone a chance to be heard. In addition, each land use Lhat comes upwill go through the planning public hearing process. Once again everyoneuilI get a chance to be heard. In this way Chanhassen keeps all theiroptions open and will ultimately have a gatouray spot into the city thatwiII be a real asset to the community. Yes, mixed use is a uisecomprehensive plan designation for this area. It says I wiII be pleased to'expand on this statement or answer if there are any guestions. It saysplease make this sLatement a part of the public record. Thank you.
Sincerely, Jim Curry. And I guess I sat in on most of the meetingspertaining to Lhis comprhensive PIan. In fact several of them and I know
there's a lot of citizens been here and a lot of them had iustifiable
complaints but overall I think the Planning Commission should be
complimented for doing an excellent iob of putting this comPrehensive PIan
together. Thank you.
( Applause ! )
conrad: I don't know how to deal Hith that. Other concerns or comments.
Eric Rivkin: Eric Rivkin, I live in Lake Lucv Highlands and I want to take -about I minutes to explain my comments on the PIan. Even though you
included the petitioned area tlithin MUSA, you did address the underlving
eoncerns of many of the petitioners of which I am grateful . There's always
a compromise to be struck and I think we're headed in the righE direction.
Number one, you honored the original petition to keeP at least Lake Lucy
Highlands classified as large lot for many reasons agreed with in the
petition. It appears you exPect it to remain that u,ay for the 15 year life-
of this plan. I would also like to knou though whv some of the other
petitioners uho did not change their minds did not have their land also
represented as large lot. Number Lwo, in l'lr. Erhart's words in a letter
sent to Planning in resPonse to the Petition, I feel the commission has
"gone out of their way Lo make it clear that it is the policv of the citv
to discourage premature hook-uP of homes with trorking sePtic systems - " and
that is one Lhing I also aPPreciate. It recognizes that many of us were
platted since 1985 with new svstems built to current technologv with
alternate drainfield siles. I would like to see a clarification in the
pLan about the right to use alternate drainfield sites or to rePair any
part of a system for those inside the HUSA. If a repair or rePlacemenL of
a syslem can be done on a large lot ProPerty and environmental Problems
would not become evident, then a single homeouner should have the right to
do so withou! being forced to hook up. This would also require a
MUSA amendment to my knowledge. I feel it's onlv fair that this policy
would apply also to municipal uater . I also agree uith Mr. Erhart that his
comments that the t'letro Council lakes a hyPocriLical sLance trhen they
condemn septic system safety and then allow millions of gallons of rau,
sewage to run inLo Lhe t'lississippi River. The plan recogni.zes that many of
these on-site systems would ]ast Ionger than the life of the p]an, perhaps -30 years, That means our neu, system uJould cerLainly not derive benefit for
the life of the plan. It's also entirelv Possible that it mav never derive
benefit because urith proper care and maintenance, use of the alternate
drain site and use of proven new technologies that could be adoPted are
conceiveably more environmentally sound. Septic systems may never faiI.
The ones ue have for even the life of the home. In the spirit of 'going
out of your way", I believe the plan should reflect LhaL Possibilitv raLher-
than assume that hook-up |,ill always be mandatory. A quick uord about'
there's a couple of inaccuracies about some of the mapping on the Plan.
One is there's a ]ot the DNR owns on the hrest side of Lake Lucy. I'IIpoint it out. It's a 5 acre lot right here and...and I think there's no
reason that could not be designated as Park oPen sPace- The other thing
i.s, contrary to some statements in the Plan, exPanding MUSA boundaries do
drastically increase property values. A case in Point is the Carrico
property boughL recently by the City for Pheasant HiIls Park. That's that
green square that's right above Lake Lucy Highlands on Lake Lucv Road
Planning Commission MeeL i ng
October 24, t99O - Page 16
Planning Commission l''leet i ng
October 24, 1990 - Page 17
there. The ouner vaLued the rau, land at Ii3SO,OOO.OO as if it had full
developmenL potential inside the HUSA yet as an argument !o keep Lhepurchase price dourn to $145,OOO.OO, which is halfway betNeen the !b4O,OOO.OO
or so that the City had an appraisal at and lhe owner's price, iL tras
argued that it did not have that potential because it was outside of the
MUSA. It's not even in the l.tUSA yet and already had the price boosted.
. -.ProPerty values because past history shows that sometimes homeowners are
made to share the cost of installing utilities in adjacent property
developments in many cases when there are many years left on their septicsystems. Pending special assessments on record cause banks to withholdthat money preventing the use of it. tlhen the homeowner's not deriving anybenefit from that utility. In effect the assessment is as good as levied.There's a comment in the Comp Plan about parks. It says that for loca]parks, small neighborhood parks Iike creenwood Shores and some of the oLhersmal} green parks, the dots that you see around the map there. It says thekey ingredient for successful local parks is quick, convenient access. Iflhat's policy is applied to all the local parks, does that mean that
Greenurood Shores should have on street parking? Ho! one but I'm going to
make i! on record now. I'm raising the question. Okay, I don't have anopinion one way or the other - I'm just representing a lake association onthat okay? fn general the plan has many nice thinss to say aboutpreserving the natural amenities that make what the people uant
Chanhassen's character to be. I think the plan should emphasize this moreby recognizing the natural amenities are the very soul of the city and thatthey must be preserved, restored or recreated as development progresses.I believe development from now on should give back more than it Lakes awayin terms of environmental impact end should take forms in both
encouragement programs and formal policy. I think the creative zoningclassificalions such as, I'm going to make one up. RES, ResidentialEnvironmentally Sustaining and abolish aII the other zoning classificationsand more comprehensive aesthetic design guidance by the Comp plan wouldprevent this squeeze every inch you can sprawling suburb that is sounappealing and psychologically and envi r onmental.I y damaging. I don'tthink that return on investment should ever be the only criteria inplanning a deveLopment. I Iike the buffer yard concept that is mentionedin there. To separate residential from industrial buf I think you shouldinsist that they be ]andscaped with natural variations and contour heightsand foliage rather than unsightly straight bunkers and army landscaped halfdead trees. l.lost of them should be required to be landscaped to supportwildlife by planting adequate native cover and prairie grasses. Theyprovide a seLf-sustaining type of Iandscaping and are non-polluting becauseno fertilizers are required and they act as a drainage buffer for nutrientsand sediments which is a stated goal in the Comp PIan and-is a goal bythe }{etropolitan Council to try to reduce non-point source pollution intothe river. This technique should also be applied b€tween and withinresidential developments as you have already mentioned but aIlour Lishterclustering by creative zoning to meintain and manage the rural characterthat Chanhassen residents want. More open Space can be preserved bykeeping farms in certain areas. Non-point source pollution fromagriculture can be avoided by converting to sustainable organic methods nowgaining widespread popularity. The plan should encourage farmers to stayand not seII out because of development pr€ssures. Strict guidelines thatgo beyond inadequate Stete or Federal standards on visual , noise, odor andair pollution have been done elsewhere in creative affordable visuallyappealling developments. In the pioneering spirit of Chanhassen, I would
Planning Commission Meeting
october 24, 7990 - Page 18
expect those kinds of guidelines too - Thank you very much.
conrad: Thank you Eric. I do appreciate all your onergy as h,e've gone
through this. You've challenged us at the right time. Maybe we can
respond to a couple of your thoughts. You could sit if you like or Stand
but you said so many things. I don't knotr really the right Place to start -but I am Like you concerned and like a lot of residents, concerned about
our slandards for sewer hook-uP. Paul , I'm going to ask you to' a lot of
h,hat you said just may not relate directly to the comPrehensive Plan
Really relates a great deal to standards and to things that mav not be in
that plan. It's enforcement and it's the how to's lhat maybe the Plan
doesn't deal with but Gary, I guess you're better. tle'll take PauI off the
hook. Gary, you're the one to really talk about sewer hook-uP standards,
repair. I think a Iot of PeoPIe are nervous that as soon as thaL sewer is
there. that you know they're forced to do some things. Could you relate,
and I guess the issue is, do ue have the standards in Place right notr or is -that something that we have to take a look at given the fact that ure're
moving the MUSA out and we have some ProPerty owners that may have, Iike in
Timberwood case, h,e have adequate sewers there and I think we've reviewed
that and shown that septic systems are equal if not better. tlell, equal .
I won't say the uord better but equal to what He get from our buried ser^rer
system. Gary, can you handle any of those queslions that I laid out there?
t^larren: I'll. cerLainly try. SePtic systems issue, we talk about the nei{
systems. The 2 L/2 acyes where the systems have to verify that they
actually have an alternate treatment site in the event of a failure. I
think the City has done good to try to complv uith Lhe requirements
aclual Iy of the Met Counci I or the l.letropol itan l.raste Control Commission i n
trying to strike some compromise already to allotl us to exist with those
types of systems, The imPression that the City is looking to go out and
blatantly force homeowners off of sePtic systems and onto a PubIic utility
I think is wrong and should not be the understanding around here. They are
very unique. Any of the public imProvement Projects that He do to address
pollution problems of this nature, we iust extended a small extension along
Lake Lucy Road to service the o'Brien/HaYvey ProPerty for examPle where we
had failing syslems there and granted these were older systems where they
didn't have alternales available. Each of lhose become so unique that it's
very difficult to write a comPrehensive Policy saying you shall or you
shall not connect or not connect in this regard- I think the statemenc
that is in the draft plan right now I think is a verv accurate and good
gui.de as to the intentions of the city in not looking to force homeowners
off of their systems if they are accountable and able to maintain those
systems and show that Lhey are not as Eric referenced here, a detriment to
the environment. I think that's what we're all interested in. t"lhether vou
service that by private systems or by a Public utilitv, I guess there is
documentation to show that the Private svstems can sustain themselves if
properly maintained. There is a Potential fallacy in that iust because a
propert), was shown at the time of platting to have alternate sites, that it
t^rill continue to have two alternate sites or an auxilliarv site. tlhat a
homeowner does to the proPerty in modifying the grading can disturb the
alLernaLe site in fact to the poin! where you Uould not have an alternate
site. So I think there's some realities that haPPen here as systems age.
As properties get. sold to other ProPerty owners who Pass it on to other
property oNners and none of the systems ever fail at the same time. l'rere
that the case, you trouldn't have a question abouL it. The Crestview/ tlesL
Planning Commission tleel i ng
October 24, 7990 - Page 19
65th Street issue just west of GaLpin is an exampl.e where we had severalfailing systems. Some that uere new that didn't t.rant to have the seuer inthere and it took a conscientious look through a feasibility study to saywhat's right and what's urong and it realIy is a very unique situation so frea]Iy feel that the comp.plan as it's written now is sympathetic andexpresses well I think the policy in general terms that Lhe City shouldlook to. I think as the systems age we're 9oin9 to have to respondspecifically to each of those cases as they develop.
Eric Rivkin: I do agree with the wording in the plan. I did comment thatiE was, it's at least in my best interest but I do just take issue with you
know one assumption in those words and that's the nord premature. you
assume that somebody wiII, aII septic systems will eventually hook up. Iguess I take issue with that, That's aII. That we have such currentstandards are and the technologies that I use anyL,ay, the SB2 system aresuch tha! I mean Jeff Swedlund my installer said it's sized for anapartment buildins for what was put into my place. I don't plan, f can,tsubdivide - r can't disturb the site number 2. The alternate site, as alot of the people in Lake Lucy Highlands can't do, and so ue,re just
wonder i n9 about the future.
Conrad: Buffer yard standards, we'11 be Iooking at those. Noisestandards, bre are looking aL noise, PauI, what are bre doing urithstandards? tJe've talked about it. Have hre done anything? Is it
uJor k?
noise
on our
Krauss: Not specifically, no. There ras a consideration of a noiseordinance last year. That really didn't reach any kind of fruitition.are regulated of course by state noise standards uhich are stiffer thanFederal noise standards and lhose are in place of course.
Eric Rivkin: Thank you. I think you did a good job.
t^le
the
conrad: Eric, a couple other things. tJhen you said the natural featuresbeing the corner stone. You can see we Hove natural features in realheavily into the plan. As long as I've been around we've found that it'sbetLer to protect what you want raiher than zone against stuff that youdon't uant. so a heavy concentration on protecting the natural amenitiesfor why ue moved here in the first place. you brought that point up as acorner stone comment. If you have wording that you feel strengthens, weplay with wording a whole bunch. you knotJ if you've got any other uordingthat does it' r'd sure appreciate you sending us that and we'd take a ]ookaL it- But it's raced throughou! here and Lhat was one of the intentionsof staff. I think it was of the planning Commission also.
Eric Ri.vkin: rt's just Lhat sometimes strong enough policy doesn,t make itout inLo the how to's as you can see you know. There's straight linebunkers as short as possible with half dead trees on Lhem you knowscattered throughout town and you know, sometimes the council says well ourhands are tied and we can't make the developer do that but it would be niceto try and eliminate and get these things done up front so a developer cantake a look at the comp plan and try to design out those problems beforethey ge! to the Council.
Planning Commission Meet i ng
October 24, t99o - Page 20
Joe Morin: Yeah I do too. For the most part I think what Eric said is
complimentary and I think for the most part the comprehensive plan is urelI
done. There are some exceptions uhere people are still being treated
unfairly but I honestly believe that you people are listening Lo the inputs
that you're getting and I'm hopeful that some of these unfair situations
will be mitigated. So in general I really appreciate.
Conrad: tlhat's your name for the record?
Joe Morin: Ohl My name is Joe Horin. I'm Iivins at 1441 Lake Lucv Road.
tiy genera.I comment is that I aPPreciate your concerns for the environment
in the comprehensive plan. I've scanned through most of it. I like your
statements about open spaces and low density. I lould like to see more, in -
general more property especially around the Lake Lucy area and Lake Ann
area designated as larger lots. So that's a general comment. I think
right now I'd like to thank PauI Krauss for the time lhat he sPentyesterday. He spent an hour and a half r.lith my wife and I helPing us
understand the impact of this comPrehensive Plan on our ProPertv and I
don't think there are many officials in other cities that uould have done
that and I really appreciate it. Now specificallv Lhe area I want to talk
about in the plan that I'm concerned about is in the land use section on
Eage 22 and 23. Particularly on 23. There ure refer to the Lake Lucy
Highlands area and in the PIan we talk about on-site wells and sewage
disposal systems that have been built Lo required standards. tle talk aboul
the fact that this represented a substantiaL investment on the Part of lhe
Iandouners in the Lake Lucy Highlands area and that the city Policy here is -that these areas be given sPecial consideration. The sPecial
considerations are itemized as number 1, they're not required to hook into
cj.ty utilities. Number 2, lhey 're not required to pay utility assessments _until the utility extensions are required to serve them and I think that's
eminently fair- These People have working systems. They have sufficient
Iand to pu! in another system should it fail in the next 30 years which
isn't likely and so I think that's eminently fair. The onlv Problem I have -
with it is that it only applies to the Lake Lucy Highlands area and I think
there's a Io! of other peoPle in the Chanhassen area that are imPacted by
this MUSA line change that are in the same situation and I'm one of them- -[^,e moved into our home in a year and a half ago. In April of 1989 and I
think our systems are probably more recen! than most of the systems around
here includins the Lake Lucy Highlands area and I think that what's fair
for those peo;Ie is also fair for me. The other PeoPIe in the communitv
that are in similar circumstances so what I'd like to see is that that
special , urhat is it a special consideration be more of a general policy
that applies to everyone ulho has working systems. Everyone who has
sufficient Iand to upgrade Lhose sysLems should thev fail in the next 30
years. So I don't u,ant a specific Policv that kind of discriminates
against other people in my sitqation and I'd encourage olher PeoPIe here
who feel the same wa), to sPeak uP and make their concerns known- I don't
think iL would be very difficult to administer something like Lhat - It'd
be simply keeping a list of which PeoPIe meet those requirements. Not'r I'm
not concerned about a couPle hundred dollars or someLhing like that. If a -
util j.ty comes by and I get assessed for it. I'm concerned about major
possible impacts !o my area. And so I have a sPecial concern too that I'd
like to kind of show you on the maP of right about where I am here
Specifically this is where my ProPertv is right here. South of Lake Lucv
Road and it's a 5 acre Parcel . It's mostly wetland- It's a large Pond -
Planning Commission Meet i ng
October 24, L99O - Page 21
Brian Tichey has the parci:I right next to me so the pond kind of, ourproperty is kind of split right down the middle of this pond dividing theproperty. Brian's is a 5 acre parcel ri.ght in line and most of that areais undevelopable as bretlands and so forLh. However, the terrain in thisarea tends to roll downhill. That's r,rhy they have...because the water kindof drains in that direction. PauI uas explaining to me that the sewagetends to roll downhill and so a likely scenario for developing sewer inthis area urould be something that misht connect these areas to che Lake AnnInterceptor and that's a major, major work- Engineering feat if you will.It's about a couple of miles. fiaybe a mile...tlaybe 2 miles through awetland area which would be very expensive to put in. [.le're talking maybea million dollars. More Lhan that and an assessmenL to me for my portionof that would possibly drive that up and I'm very concerned about that...It's also a threat to the people in the Lake Lucy Highlands area ulho aregiven, how are they given special consideration and should that kind of
seu,age line be put. in, they're not required to pay utility assessments andI want to be also included in that special consideration because I don'tplan to ever use that. I don't plan to develop my area. I'm in the samesituation they are. I have a working system that wiII last the next 30years. It wiII last for the Iife of this comprehensive plan and... Thoseare basical ly my comments.
Conrad: Okay, thanks Joe. PauI or Gary, can you respond to that request?
Krauss: One of the concerns that we've had and one of the things Lhatwe've Looked a! was coming up with a HUSA line that made sense. That urasreasonable from the standpoint that, (a) the Metro Council would buy it andthat's not an easv task. rf we wiggle around the ]'1usA line so that we hitand miss lots at the current whim or current wish of the owner, the Metrocouncil's going to throu, out that l,lusA line amendment because it doesn,tpass a reasonable test. But more important for us is that it makes it verydifficult, if not impossibre to extend utilities and streets and provideservices at such time that those are required. rf tre have a checker boardpattern' that may asceed to the wish of th€ individual owners but roadsdon't take checker board patterns and sewer lines don't just end and thenslart again. t^jhat ure've done is, the planning Commission took a ]o! oftestimony and determined Lhat Lake Lucy Highlands, that Timberr.rood, thatSunridge Court, are basica].ly relics of an ordinance that hasn't existedsince 1987. ActualIy Sunridge Court is acLualIy a more recent than tha!but they represent a platling, a type of development that is no longerallowed in the community anywhere wiLhin, weII no Longer allowed in thecommunity. That's by contract with the Metro Council. you now, outsidethe HUSA line you can only develop t home for every 10 acres on grossdensity with a minimum lot size of 21,/Z acres. l.Jhen the planning
Commission looked at these 3 subdivisions, they felt that because theseareas were so concentrated and because from our point of view there is nomore development potenliaI in these subdivision. There's that one housesitting in the middl.e of a 21/2 acye LoL - It has a new on-site sewersystem. It has the road that it's already going to need. Timberwood hasall the roads in place, that ule don't need to look at providing anyservices for those areas. tre can't make that assumption when we Iook upand down a street and we have 3 property ourners that want to do somethingin the nex! 10 years. 2 property owners that don,t. Another one tha!
does - It simply doesn't work efficiently in that manDer _ At the requestof the Planning Commission Ne contacted not only the Metro Council to get
Planning Commission I'1eet i ng
October 24, 7990 - Page 22
their poLicy input on that question but we contacted a number of other
communities that are developing or in the stage of development as we are
and two, everybody said don't under any circumstances allow these
checkerboard patterns to develop because they're impossible to deal with
after the fact. That h,as our recommendation to the Pl.anning Commission and
that was the determination of the Planning Commission in defining the HUSA
Iine r.rhere it was. There was some gross deviations to the HUSA line that
uere considered. Throtring out a large section up near Lake Lucy Highlands.
Hany lots. I believe there lras a petition that was circulated by Mr.
Rivkin and we looked at an alternate land use scenario that would have
brought in a sufficient amount of acreage closer to TH 5. The Planning
Commission had some difficulty uith that alternative but equally
importantly there didn't seem to be any uniform oPinion. There was no real
large block of owners that decided one way or the other. There were a lot
of owners that signed a petition. There were a lot of ou,ners that came to apublic meeting that L,e had lhis summer that said they didn't sign thepetition and lhey xanted the right to do something with their ProPertv.AII things being equal , I think the course of actign the Planning
Commission took was to keep the I'IUSA line where they've shown it and to try
to develop policies that were sensitive to the individual needs of
individual property owners. tle can't, these things are so detailed and
when we're talking about an individual sewer Iine or an individual water
Iine, then we can't really be more specific as to exactly how we wou.Id
treat an individual lot in an individual circumstance excePt to trv to set
a policy tone that says l.,e'll try to be as cooperative as Possible and we
understand that we're not trying to force things to haPPen. That we're not
trying to force the premature retirement of on-site sewer or force
additional expense. And that's Pretty much the PoIicv that's been
incorporated in the comprehensive Plan.
conrad: AIright. Gary, trhat kind of sPecial assessments ..,ould Joe look
forward to in the future if he wanted to keep, in this particular case
I think we made the decision Per PauI's statement, as to how to develoP
that from a seujer standpoint but in terms of sPecial assessments when a
setrer would go in. How would his ProPerty be dealt with?
l.larren: I couldn't give you an exact dollar amount by any means. t,hat I
was going to add Hr. Chairman is thaL whenever the City undertakes a public
improvement process, it has to follow the hearing Process. The feasibility
study process. The whole 9 yards as far as involving the ProPerty owners
who are affected or proposed for assessments. So iust to make sure that
there isn't the impression out there that the City can aII of a sudden go
out and just put in a sanitary sewer intercePt around Lake Lucy and sav
we're going to service all these lots ' it is a very formal Process that
will allow input from the public and on the affected people and bv law
requires us to nocify them of the ProPosals. As
that the details are hammered out as far as who
assessments. t^lho isn't, for uhatever reason and
worked out. It can become very sPecific to the
doesn't have any frontage on a road project but
ais
rh
fac
bec
part of that process,
proposed for
at's reaLly r.rhat's
t that this person
ause he benefits from
we give him an off-line assessment to rccognize that benefit. There isn'
a book written that can address all of the situations. And it does have
stand the test of benefit in a court of law. [",e cannot assess a ProPertv
if we cannot sustain the value of that essessment that the ProPerty'saclualI), increasing by that amount as a minimal .
ir-t
to
Planning Commission |,leet i ng
October 24, 7990 - Page 23
Gerry Alvey: lvly name is Gerry Alvey. I live at 1831 Sunridge Court andI've got some quesLions. I'm a little confused on the issue of the waterservice and the septic fields for some of the large Lot developments that
have rather ner,r services. I understand Lhat they're exempted from tyinginto the city services but also in these large developments, they are new
enough that not aII of the homesites have homes built upon them. If a new
homeowner comes in and purchases after these areas are within the MUSAIine, would that neu homeowner then have to tie into city systems?
Krauss: I can ansr^,er that. You know we didn't deal with that specificallyGerry. I guess we didn't envision it as a problem because ue assumed thatthese developments would continue to build out in the way that they've beenapproved which is with on-site sewer and water.
Gerry Alvey: I guess that was my question. l.,hat I was leading to is ifany of the neur homeowners that purchased after it's r,rithin the HUSA ulererequired to tie into the city systems, then r.,hat h,ould the assessments befor the trunk lines that would have to be run?
Krauss: [^,e never envisioned that .
Gerry Alvey: Okay. Again, for the people that
have a faiLure of their system, does that meanin or can they repair that failure?
have those systems, if theythat they then have to tie
l.Jarren: r think what we're saying as a general policy is that in thesespecific cases where they have lhe new systems uhere they have to have analternate system initially when the site is constructed, that they will. begiven an opportunity to shot4 that Lhey can, ilr they choose to spend the
money in that u,ay, put an alternate site or rehab their existing system.It's also important to keep in mind that ble do not have the ability to justrun an i.solated sewer line !o one specific lot in a subdivision. l.le haveto have the trunk main. You're looking at realIy a comprehensiveconstruction project and if it would come to that, then you're looking atalr the properties being involved in one uay or another. And that is whatprimarily what makes it difficult. Let's say we have one property in
Timberulood Estates that for uhaLever reason, the soils were improperlydiagnosed or they fail for whatever reason and that property is unable toplace an alternate treatment site on it's site. The only option availableto it short of us running a public sewer to it is to put in a holding tankand continue to pump that. You can talk to l.lr. Harvey on Lake Lucy Roadthe expense involved with that so there is a risk I think-that everyproperty ouner who has a private system should know if they don't alreadyand that. is stuff happens and it's not always said that nicely. ...andeven if you have 5 alternate sites, you may not be able to come up with onethat u,iII cualify but we L,iII not be running e se..rer just to service oneiso!ated property because can potentially put a hardship on that property
or.Jner to come up with an alternate means and the most dramatic is to haveto hold aII your seerage and have it pumped every week.Gerry Alvey: Okay, I think that answers my question. So if there is afailure wiLh an existing system and it can be shourn that that failure couldbe repaired, that would be at the homeowner,s option to do so?
lJarren: Yes .
Planning Commission l'leet i ng
october 24, !99o - Page 24
conrad: I think it's real important to note that, it sounds Iike we're
making compromises through here. I think the direction is to maintain thequality of a septic system. From an environmental standpoint, that'sreally quite important but we've shoun the flexibility or we're showing thesensitivity to not force homeowners to do one thing or another in some of
these situations but sLilI to maintain the quality that we aII exPect in
terms of sewage disposal .
Craig Hertz: I'm Craig Mertz. I'm here as attorney for Lakeview Hills
Investment Group. That is the grouP that ouns the Lakeview HiIIs Apartment
complex !o put a location on it. This is the land that lies between Rice
Harsh Lake and Lake Riley. t"le're bounded on the east bv the Eden Prairie
boundary and on the south by the frontage road along Lake Ri]ey and on the
north by Rice Marsh Lake. This Particular Piece of ProPerty has a zoning
history that goes back to the Chanhassen Township days, sPecificallv more
Lhan 27 years. It uias in 1963 that the Chanhassen Township Board aPProved
this site for a 15 buildins apartment site. 525 units. Ultimatelv the
orrners of the property only took out the buildins Permits for 5 of Lhe 15
buildinss but it has had a high density zoning categorv ever since 1953.
The present oe,ners of the ProPerty Prior to their sale did investigate the
situation and were aulare of the zoning history and bought it with the
expectation that this property did have a develoPment history. Notl the map
before you indicates that the north half of tshe site is being transformed
into a potential highway corridor and potential park. Another element that
I don'! know that aII of the commissioners would be a!{are of was i.s that in
1977 Lhe CiLy approached the owners of this ProPerty seeking sewer lines
across the site and at that time the then city engineer assured the owners
that this sewer development uas not going to affect the poLential
development of an additiona.I 35o uni.!s of aPartment buildings on this
parLicular property. Now I didn't bring mv crystal ball along tonighE
and I can't tell you whether Lakeview Hills Investment GrouP would be the
ultimaLe developer of Lhis ProPerty or we would simPlv be holding this for
resale but I can tell you that we believe that this, the adoption of this
map wiII have a negative impact on our ProPerty. Our buyers are going Lo
Iook at this with the idea that they are not going to be able to utilize
the northerly por!ion of this proPertv for development unlike mv clients
when Lhey bough! the ProPerty. tlhat the investment grouP doesn't u,ant to
become is the involuntary and defacto owner of a city park. This comment's
directed more to the City Council. rather than to the commissioners because
I know you folks don't have conlrol over this Particular thing but Lhe
investment group doesn't h,ant to be Put into the Position l.,here hre can
neither fully develop Lhis site yet you folks lake no stePs to acquire it
as parkland or highway corridor so I ask that the city not Put us in that
diLemma-
conrad: Hark, tell us about that Park site. Do you recall?
Krauss: I think I can do this one. This is one park I know. There are
several activities going on at the same time here that affect that
property. It has, it's obviously been developed urith multiPle use for a
number of years and there is a vacant Iot, r.rell there is vacant land to the
Hest that is also in that designation and continues Lo maintain that
Gerry Alvey: okay, Lhank you.
Planning Commission Meet i n9
October 24, t99O - Page 25
designalion. As everybody is abJare, last fall the TH 212 corridor wasofficially mapped. tle nou knou uith a great deal of certainty, we think,exactly where that road is going to 9o. l^le know that a }ot better thanwe've known it for a long time. That highr^ray bisects this properLy. Itcreates two separate parcels. Nou, hre do have a program whereby owners whoare pu! upon by future highway corridor designations can puL their property
up for sale for like, it's basically an early take process to help bufferthe financial impact. So if this highway's not built for 10 years or for Svears' that there is a mechanism in place lrith funds provided by the stateLegislature to acguire that properLy Loday and reduce the financial burden.But wha! the highway does is it bisects most of that site from a highlyattractive natural area bv Rice l.larsh Lake. tJhen we realized what thatarea was, it contains wetlands. It contains a heavy oak forest uithbeauliful views out over the lake, we believe that it should be preservedas recreational land. Now simply putting a designation on a map sayingthat this should be a park doesn,t make it a part. The city is basicaltyput in the position that if we uant to bring that about, if ne b,ant to makethat a park, we're going to have to acguire that. tte'li either have' to - --
acquire it through dedication when additional development is proposed orue're going to have to buy it. If we,re not in a position to do that, theowner is entitl.ed to a reasonable use of the property. So basicaLly theou,ner's in a position to tell us to put up or shut up and at some pointwe're going to have to make good on our commitment or give it up. But wedo believe that that park is a highly attractive site ind blarrants someprotection and it factors into our natural features plan and ourrecreational plans and that,s hotr that came abou!.
Conrad: I think that,s ayou're representing.
great park site but Craig, I also understand what
Craig M€rtz: hle don't dispute thatpark. It's just that uJe don,t u,anL
Conrad: Okay. I think the Cityconsideration.
this might be a terrific
Lo be the owners of. . .
site for a
Council wiII take your comments under
Hark t^lilliams: Mark Hiltiams, 165s Lake Lucy Road. one more little wordabout Lake Lucv Highrands. r do appreciate the large lot designation inthat area and am strongly in favor of it. Also, I iirmly U"ti"r. that urewould not derive any benefit or deserve any assessment from the Lake Annrnterceptor - r also do understand the concerns of people in a similarsituation that are not presently or are not in the Lake t_ucy Xigf,tands buthave simirar acreage and septic systems so r appreciate thal presentdesignation and hope that it stays that uay _ Ti"rank you.
Dennis Dirlum: My name's Dennis Dirlum. r'm one of the partners that oHnsthe propertv around north and east of the Timberwood. r sit here and lookat the plan and it rooks rike the staff and the planning commission havecertainlv done a wonderful job in raving this arl out but there is oneglaring error, mistake and that is that area, my property where we arestuck with a low density housing next to what is soon to'be a four lanehighwav and a frontage road. rf you rook anywhere erse aions rx 5, there,sa definite buffer of some red. Different shades of red oi J.o*n or green.Nowhere else on there is there a place where you have put yelrow or isthere existing velrow. t^,e've certainly taken ttre consiJeraiion trre
PIanni n9 Commission t'1eet ing
October 24, L99O - Page 26
homeowners of Timberwood and wanted to Protect them from any of the bad
zoning and as our assessor has said, that industrial parks aren't
necessarily bad. Peop]e are buying lots next to industrial Par ks and they
aren't having an negative affect. And given the elevation and the
vegelation around Timberwood, there's a very good buffer already existing. -tlha! we're not stuck urith uiLh the wav vou have it here is single family
Lots backing up to a 4Iane road lith no buffer. There's no trees. It'sjust wide open land right next to the highwav. I'm not sure what the
frontage road has done by st,inging the frontage road. If that is Part of
Lhe City's inlent to give those houses a buffer to TH 5, the four lane.
Maybe that makes some sense, If that's the case ' then let's move the
frontage road to the south and put it closer to Timberwood and Lhen Put
some industrial next to the highxay where it belongs. I'm a real estate
developer. I've developed land for the last 12 years in Eden Prairie. one
of the sites that I had an option on about 3 years ago was along TH 5 in
the western part of Eden Prairie along the Chnahassen/Eden Prairie border -
Around the Kerber's sleul . t^le develoPed about 90 lots around that
subdivision and it sold ou! very quickly. It was a very nice area. one of
the last pieces to Pick uP uJas on the very easL side that went down to
TH 5. t^le received city approval. t,\le urent out to the builders to sell the
lots in a moderate price range for homes in the $13o 'ooo.oo to !E18O 'OOO.OOprice range and the builders said no. tle can't or realtors can't seII
Lh""". 6i're not interested in these lots. t,le'd iust blown through the
other 90 lots in a vear and a half but ure can't take those ' Thev wiII not
se]]. People don't want to be next to TH 5. Then we looked at townhouse-
Can we go Lo the townhouse developers? The Lownhouse develoPers r^,eren't
interesied. We did finally find single family builders that were
interested in buying sLarter homes if the lots urere Priced around
iZO,OOO.OO. So if you interperlate that into what the Price of the home is-
going to be, you're Probablv looking at under IEIOO,OOO 'oO ' I don't think
ih.t-thi=, number one is the location for single family homes nor do
Ithinkit'sgoingtodothehomeownersofTimberwoodortheCityof
ihanhassen ani good to have that kind of houses priced in that area. I'd
i"f V"u to go bick and take another look aL this area. Industrial makes
""n"". BeII planned industrial and that's t^,hat ue've alwavs been talkins
about. And you know Lhere is a good buffer between Timberwood now and we
propo"" to put a buffer area betxeen us in addition to it on our Property
and I think that's a good alternative also. Thank you '
conrad: Thank you Dennis. l^,e'll probably come back to that ]ater on
Sam f.tancino: Sam Mancino from 6520 Galpin BIvd. and I recognize that it's
been a Iong proces= i;;a you 've been throush to tty to PIan this and thank -
i", f", your' hele in trying to make it work. I have to sPeak kind of from
a-ieefins level that f Lnint my wife and I sort of feel cheated out of 10
vu"i" O"i.use when !.,e moved in here about 8 years ago we did look through -
i;; ;";;r;hensive plan that u,as in place at that Lime and it looked like
our land would be pretty much rural and secluded for another 10 years into
i999 oy ZOOO. And I believe that development really follows these
"o*pt"fttn"ive land Plans and it becomes zoning and it forces Lhe
tev"lopme.t around us. My problem is that we moved into a ]arge lot area
and right now north of TH 5I don't believe there's any ne!. Iarge lot area
built into the plan and weid like to be able to look around us at more
Iarge loL developmeni. u"t me point this out. Our ProPerLy ls right here.
iou-hare it adioining or right across Galpin BIvd. is from the Highland's
Planning Commission Heet i ng
October 24, 7990 - Page 27
area. Just slightlv south of that is the carrson property r.rhich is...intoa verv large Iot area. There's a very smalr sliver in here that separatestwo pieces that r think...Iarge lot over a rong period of time. Hy fear isChat if you keep it zoned the way it is, lhat we uiII sLart forcing smalllot devel.opment almost immediately to the west here to TH 41 because I knowthat that property has already got stub sewer line into it. So I uouldimagine that will happen almost immediately as soon as the process goesthrough- As a rand owner that's been here for this long, r resent havingto be forced into a position of having to move away from the kind of asituation of Iiving in a rural area and driving and I put up and I enjoythe drive into Minneapolis a harf hour every day but r do that becauser have the land buffer around me and r don't feel like r should have todrive a half an hour to drive into single small rot areas. That isn't uhatr intended to do so r am forced either to move out furLher or to shrug myshouLders and move back into l'linneaporis. r would appreciate if we cou.Idfind a vlay to extend the large Iot useage where there,s alreadypredominantly large loL useage right now. Thank you.
Conrad: Thanks Sam.
Rich Larson: Mv name is Rich Larson and r rive at a141 pineuood circle.m going to agree with the last person and r kind of violently disagreewith the previous person before me. My wife and r rooked at thecomprehensive plan last year when we moved into the area and there was agood deal of residentiaL in the current plan and to have someone say thatpeopre don't mind moving into an area where there is an industrial park isone thing but to move into an area expecting residential io-be part of thepran for some time is totallv different. To change that uould kind ofinterfere Nith a number of peopl.e's plans and intent ror .orlns into theTimberwood area. Enough said on that. r,ve got another concern about thisPludy area. Nobody's really said much about ihat toni'ht. That's kind oikitty corner from where we live right no* and there hale b""n. number ofLhings discussed there. r've got a comment and then. qr""iion for you.Hv comment is, r wourd really not like to see something like r.,rirl,s ireetFarm move into that area. r know thev own the rand uul. -r.rnatz
Mary Harrington: Amen.
Rich Larson: okay. r think that uourd be a disaster to put that (a) rishtnear the Arboretum. Near Lake l.linnor{ashta and to have more commercial/industrial development along TH 5 whereas you knox tre poiniea out thevellour strip arong TH 5 is an abberation but r sav it's i gieat abberationbecause vou drive in from Eden prairie and there'i notrring'uut industrya]ong TH 5. And to space it out uith some green and looking towards thefuture, you tear up the land and put in industry ;i;;-a;;;: you,re never9oin9 to get it back. lre're goins to pave it over ";; b;-;;rry someday.so that's mv comment that |d like to 6ee that kept .i "n"ii"nrentarryintect as it is and not. to see something like a rirr;s ir""i r.... Nyquestion for you is,-r know it's a study area but what "r" you, thougi.rts asto what uiII eventually be done with that? That's my question.
conrad: You've got to be pretty rearistic about what that intersection isgood for. rt's on two major highways and you know, r guess-r have to bereal realistic. Commercial development there is pioUaUtv a pretty good betbut ure're not sure right nou and that's r,rhy it'" " =i"ai'"i.". paul , why
Planning Commission Meet i ng
October 24, 7990 - Page 28
don't you jump in on that and you know, I don't want to deceive PeoPle at
aII. 10 years is a long Hay or 5 years is a long uay. tle don't knotl . We
really don't know exactly hotl we're going to develoP in the next 5 years
but some of that develoPment uill tell us hot,, to use that proPertv a little
bit better. PauI?
Krauss: The study areas came about for a couP]e of reasons- First thing
is Lhat there was a determination made that unlike a lot of communities,
that Chanhassen's Comprehensive Plan would be reasonable in terms of what
He 9o to the Metro Council seeking an exPansion of the MUSA line. There
were a number of communities that have recently in 10 years ago just
platted from fence line to fence line or Planned from fence Iine to fence
iine on the assumption that development would automatically follotr because -
it's on a piece of PaPer. tlell it didn't haPPen and the Metro council has
problems with that and communities have Problems with it. If you bring too
much land into the svstem too quickly, you have growth rates that are
difficult to manage. You have develoPments lhat are difficult to control .
you have developments that's expensive and scaLtershot and difficult to
service and nobody wants to do that so there was a PoLicy statement made
early on that said that only a reasonable amount of land would be in this
proposal to adjust the ].1usA line. That study area rePresents to a greater
or lesser extent, and the line's not cast in concrele exactly tlhere it
needs to be but there's a limit to how much land we can reasonably ask to
bring in and if that entire sLudy area were considered or if the other
study area were considered, there would be too much. l.le couldn't justify
those levels of grouth reasonably nor uould He want to try. The second
thing is that tht City Planning Commission Nas fufly aware of the fact that
HiII's Fleet Farm ou,ns Chat corner but there's an overriding concern lhat
!he Chanhassen Central Business District be allowed to reach fruition
before anything else is considered that might be detrimental to tha!. And -
it's a n"Lionui Problem where you have central business districts that have
beendestroyedbyprematureorwrongheadedshoPPingcenterdevelopmenton
the fringe and that's something that evervbody Nanted to avoid ' Bv
establishing at it as a study area, u,e're essentially PosLPoning a
determination on urhat should be done in there in the hoPe that 5 years from
now who's ever sitting at this table may have more wisdom and more
information than we hive now to make a better choice. Having said that
ir.ro"g6, when ure had our informational meetings during the summer, lhere
h,ere-a number of requests from different residents adjacent or near both
study areas to have some understanding of uhat misht be considered in
there. Not that these areas would be brought into the MUSA early
necessarily but that planning efforts should be undertaken so that PeopIe
can make decisions, people will move into an area knowing ahead of time
what might happen. And the Planning commission is basicall)r accepted.thdt
and has set as a goal I believe the next Process they will embark on is to
attempt to define or ge! a handle on what lhose study areas may be. Not to-
[iing in", into the xusA now but to get an idea so u,e cen show it on a map
.na p"opt. can make more intelligent decisions. That's something that wiII
be embarked upon after this plan is comPlete so hoPefully we'II have some
more informaLion on that in the not loo disLant future
Hary Harrington: Hi gUys. I showed uP. I'm Hary Harrington, Timberwood.
errived a little late tonight. You guys have been hard at work and not too-
U"O. fl"iU, you could solvt some problems, I'm not sure, by moving that
iiontas"'road back up towards TH 5 and cutting it down into this thing and
Ieaving a ]ittle 2 or 3 acre industriar creature over here and that uouldbring these medium density folks without sandwiching them beLween anarterial type road and then TH 5. Having a couple months ago been outdoing some review u,ork, as I'm an appraiser, in Chicago f uas running. downsome of their major highwavs and in the older districts of the town iheyhad some of them where they were just gummed to death urith commercial,zindustrial . rt h,as beautiful buildings but totally sterile, unaestheticjunk and then there was this section on Lhe same highway uhere there wasjust nothing but trees and houses and grass and it Bas extremely pleasantto Iook at visually. Very aesthetic. The other stuff looked very tackyeven though it was neu, construction, chanhassen cannot afford to startlooking like some of Lhese planned tor.lns tha! ue just gum up our highwaystrith the stuff Iike we have between the beginning of chanhassen andchanhassen rndustrial Park. condensers and flat stuff. Ue need the greenspace. t,le need it not to look unaesthetic. I mean our only space isbasically at the present the Arboretum and it's a terrible eye sore to turnour town in just because speculaters are buying property and trying tocapitalize at highest. Pocential doIlar bill useage which would obviously besomething other than residentiaL. There's more to our town than just theinvestor himself. ue aII have to live here and the investor usuallydoesn'! but you might think of maybe moving that thing up there and takinga cut down there. r"Je'd still have the road, you know if that helps anyboJyout or not,
Conrad: Can you turn that this way so we can see what you're doing.
Mary Harrington: ...then take a cut here and leave...That kind of aconcept. That uouLd save these poor guys and somebody mentioned that uedon't urant !r9o,ooo.oo houses in chanhissen. r don't see why not. r meanoeople are entitled to buy a $9O,OOO.OO house and it..n U.' rather nice.r have no complaint about that. Sadden to see that rde have the industriarjumping up next to Carlson's property up here. Someway ,e can shrink thatdown or something? But d also rike Lo see a fe, Iess of it other placesand d reallv wish we would address a rittr.e of the iggi sirav area herebecause it would help us to plan maybe some of this other stuff. nrso, ifthere's any other way you can get some mor€ large lot dcsienations, r;m -'
sure a Iot of us wourd enjoy seeing that but you,ve been rrJra at work guys.
Roman Roos: Good evening. Roman Roos, 10341 Heidi Lane, Chaska. Afterthat presentation I think I'd need a road map t'o get throush my property.r guess having sat on the planning commission for a good nimber Ll v."i! -
and 10 years aso soins through exacely u,hat you,r" gJinJ itriousn, I have alot of empathv but r guess if xe rook at the to yeais ii.i tr.r" passed andue rook at the presen! time and rook at the evorution oi what,s happened inChanhassen on the industrial park and it's expansion ii you wiII westboundthrough t'1cclvnn, the natural Lerrain of TH s and the raiiroaa running tothe southwest along with the Chaska developments, ArUoi-paiX Nortfr, ArborPark tlest which would be the very corner uhite area next to the acieage shewas tarking about. l,laybe r'1r just move over there a second. rt wasmentioned earlier, this is arso industrial park. rhe natuial boundary ofthe northern park area as r xould see it...TH 5 four lane- one of thethings the citv of chanhassen has Lo accept, both on the planningcommission revel and the councir revel is when Timberwood came in, at thatpoint in Lime we didn't know how the evolution...industriar-area would be.I think at this point in time we have to really o*r up to-ine fact that
Planni ng Commission t,leeting
October ?4, 1990 - Page 29
Planning Commission Meet i n9
October 24, 7990 - Page 30
we've created a community, a very nice community so we're going to have to
kind of ask some of the quesLions such as buffering it. Hot4 He can control-
that...to get the natural evolution of...Park to the uestbound area. There
is no clean answers..,but I think uhen you look at and go out co the-
industrial park to the west in Chaska, the ProPosed area here industrial .
This industrial area dotln here along ulith the...station. tlhaL's
happening.. -so far back here, possiblv this should not be industrial.
l"laybe it should be a natural break, natural buffer into the residential
community. So I think it's going to be a tough issue but I guess I want to-
so on record as saying that I think that from the standpoint of evolution
of the community, the natural buffering of TH 5 and the railroad, we're
going to have to find some solution such as the buffering effect for the
Timberwood area , . .
Conrad: Other comments.
steve Longman: Good evening. My name is steve Longman and I'm an owner of
the 137 acres beLween Timberr.lood and TH 5. I'm also a residential building
contractor and have been since 1975 and I'm not going to sPend a lot of
time talking about the marketability of Lhat piece for residential building
contractors. I don,t think anybody would develoP it for that. I'm certain
no builders would purchase any lots on it, You'd be sticking your neck out-
loo far and I don't think I could really sell a house to anybody in this
room on Lhat piece. I will iust leave you uith maybe one thing to think
about, I question on that Piece, if you lrere to Put residential in there'
you could even pass the State's guidelines for the noise ordinance when you-
put a 4]ane highway in there. That might iust kill it right there. It
migh! be somelhing !o look into. Thank vou.
Conrad: Thanks Steve.
Larry VanDeveire: Hel Io . l'ly name is Larry vanDeveire , 4980 Co. Rd . 10 'chaska. I,m tir. pr"p"iii "*n.r of the property on, 13 acres on the corner -
of TH 5 and Galpin Blvd.'. I think you've received my letter. r'm a little
ai.pt.r."J by ti're change in land use. t'le Purchased ProPerty in 1985 to
build on. After spendlng some time out there, the ProPerty is not suited
for residential being on a corner. I lived in Chanhassen in 1965 ' t^lhen we
purchased the properiy I guess I was thinking of Chanhassen in 1955. The
road has considerable amoun! of traffic since then. tte had an oPPortunity -to-Ut.ui the parcel out at the same time Timberwood xas and at the same
cime the other 2 L/2 acre parcels were broke out. chose not to because iL
r.louldn,t be a sood building site, or for.residential anyway. Lundgren
Brothers had sen! out a letter earlier this vear iust stating that thev
were interested in land. I called them just yesterday or the day before
because I couldn't see that proPerty, anyone wanting it as residential use
and called them to f ollor,l up on it. At first I b,asn't concerned urith the
Ietter I guess because I just thought they weren't interested in it. They
had sent a letter to everyone which xas the case. They sent a Ietter to
quite a feu people. tlhen I indicated where the ProPerty uas, they said
that they would not be interested in it for residential use. l'le've heard
iio, p.opf" from Timberwood. I can appreciate their concerns ulith
industrial property moving in around them or suPPosedly moving in around
them bu! aC the same tsime everybody urould like something green along TH 5' -
It could have been me on a hobby farm. I'm slad it isn't right now because
I wouldn't have wanted a 4Iane highway going in there on a hobby farm on
TH 5. Same thing with Mary Harrington there she was saying that the peoplein Chicago, green houses and stuff like that. Everyone Iiving inTimberwood right now urouldn't change places for the people who would own ahouse on those highways. Someone's !iving there but someone's paying thecost. Someon€'s hearing the noise. you knoh, someone,s paying the cost thatLhey're not. As far as Hill's Fleet Farm, I guess I don,t know whereHill.'s Fleet Farm should 9o- I don,t kno* if Chanhassen,s the right areabuL myself, I have animals and I know that something like that is needed onthis southwest corner. I have to drive to Lakeville to get to one.SomeLhing rike thaL's needed on this end of town. Like r say, r don,t knowif that's the right place but I knor^r we as residents do need it andI guess I feel that the property as originally planned, our property asbeing neighborhood commercial I thought was a good prospect for it. EricRivkin had commented that he didn't rike seeing bunker type businessesgoing in and r guess r can appreciate that. r think the property wouldallow for something Iike thaL. That it isn't a flat lot. That youwouldn't have just r ou,r after row of little smalr cubicles or anything Iikethat. Thank you.
Martin Kuder: r'm Martin Kuder - r live at 6831 carpin Blvd.. r havesimilar concerns to other residents that talked aboui special considerationwhen it comes to assessments that might be Ievied. They might not beIevied to the Iarge lot' Iandowners but to others, I,m very-close to Lhatarea and my ser^rer and water systems are all very neuJ. About the same ageas some of their's and r feel r could or should have the same specialconsiderations that they might and also rd tike you to address what kindof assessments might be Ievied should this plan so tl,rough-for the existingLake Ann Interceptor that's already in.
Conrad: Gary, we'II throw that back to you.
was $434.OOprobably be
tJarrenr The existing Lake Ann Interceptor assessment valueroughly I think. It has not been levied yet.. The City r,rilllookj.ng at levying that someLime next year.
tlartin Kuder: Hou uide of an assessment area uould that invorve?
t,arren: That involves the service area for the Lake Ann rnterceptor itselfwhich r don't know the easiest way to describe it from the maps but it,sprett), much, maybe I can try to shoh, it. As Mark had pointed out earlier,the Lake Ann rnterceptor follows the green corridor here and for the mostpart the boundary area of the service area for Lake Ann is within the areathat is shown in the MUSA line. ...but the actual Lake Ann rnterceptor...
Krauss: r think h,e can expand on the Lake Ann rnterceptor for a moment.That is a pipe thac r think as you're aware is in the ground and has beenin the ground for several years. It's a pipe that """-prt in by theMetropolitan t,aste contror commission. rE's a major melropolitanintercepLor. rt's there as a result of vears of effort oi' in" city toprovide for future growth of the community. rt is no! the local rateralsvstem that we would have to build to serve individual rots. rt's a majorinvestment. The City anted up f think half a million dollars for our siareof that pipe. !.lhen ass.ssments Her6 conceived or, r gu""s-it was back in1986 there urere pubric hearings that were held. ito"i prop"rty o*ners ehatuere affected were notified of it at that time and since then anybody who,s
Planning Commission Meeting
October 24, t99O - Page 31
Planning Commission l''leet i ng
october 24, l99O - Page 32
bought property in that area has been informed of that and I believe
typically has money escrowed or Placed in escrow account to cover that.
The policies that we,re talking about in the plan for water and sewer deals-
uith new lines. I think you really have to make a break point there
between the new system and the Lake Ann system which is in the ground and
it's already been paid for
Conrad: East of Galpin on TH 5. A comment xas made not suitable for
residential. can you resPond to that PauI?
Krauss: A ]ot of people use the highest and best acronym to mean that it
should be something like a factory or a shopping cenLer or whatever tshey
happen to feel highest and best is. In making the determination that that -
should be residenLial, I think the Planning commission took a lot into
account. They did look at the detriments, the detrimental affects or
impacts of being close to a highway. I think there's a recognition that if-
you had your druthers you might initially build somePLace else but ]and
iends to be developed over lime and uhen there's a wide variety of sites,
yes, they'11 probably build someplace else. tlhen the availability gets
[.ight"r, I beiieve uJe see that as developing. There was an overriding
,.il onr of the overriding goals of the Planning effort Nas not to maximize
dollar return. It ulas not !o maximize industrial develoPment. It was not
to do a lot of those things. It $,as to develoP a Plan that was in the best-
interest of the community and there's a IoL of give and take in that
pro."... I think the Planning Commission sPent' this is not an
exaggeration, "pprori.aiely 9-months looking at what should be done around -iim6Erwooa. 'I think there's a general recognition that in some eves that
t[e resulting plan is not what would be called the highest and besL use buL
it,s a compromise. if yo, had your druthers, Timberwood might not be where
it is today. I mean Timberwood is something thar had to be designed arouncF
but the fact is that it is there. It's a residential neighborhood and ue
have people living there. tle have to do someLhing about that - t^le're aware
of the fact that a pian was develoPed by a grouP of ProPerty owners on the -hish*", that showed allernate land uses in Lhere ' In fact i'n some of the
".ifi.r versions of ine pIan, the Planning Commission considered other uses
in i6..u. r.lhen all said and done however, aII thaL information digested ' -this was the plan that uas calted out and I think, you know from a staff
vlewpoint, there's a comfort level with it recognizing limitations of thats
site and again, this is a result of a lot of effort on the Part of the
Plannins Commission
conrad: Haybe another thing on TH 5 east of Galpin uhere we are' h,e ra,ere
Iooking for property close to transPortation corridor rr,here w€ could Put
higher density. As you can see h,e've strung out some hisher density units-
onJ,-r.;.. required by law. Not by law buL l,letro Council very stronglv
"n.orr"gu= us to do t'hat to the point where, I don't know Paul if vou'd sav
ii;.-r"irir"J U"t itis-pretty darn close to being required. Plus it's also-
o.""d on some of our goals and Policies. Goals that we set, to Provide
mixed housing opport.riity in Chanhassen and not to be a...exclusive and I
think that's-again one of the reasons we settled there. I think there uere-
.o*" ottt". options for that land but the hisher densitv ProPertv fit the
nature or the character of that land.
John ShardloH: t''tr . Chairman , members of the Commission ' my name is John
ihardlow. I'm a planning consultant r.rith Dalhgren, Shardlow and Uban. I'm
Planning Commission Meet i n9
October 24, 799U^ - Page 33
one of the property owners of the Chaska Gatetray partnership in thesoutheast guandrant of TH 5 and TH 41 . As you knou, r uras here throughpart of the process as a spokesperson for the TH 5 development coaLitionwhich was a grouP of people consisting of ouners of about Zoo acres of Iandand it was our firm that put together the pran that paul referred topreviously. Needless to say there is considerably difference betuleen theplan that's here tonight and the plan that we proposed and so to th6 extentthat there is a differ€nce, r acknowledge that. i want to point out acoupre of what r consider to be key comments that pararlel some of thecomments that have been made regarding the feasibility of single familyresidentiar along TH 5. Just as a point of clarific.tion io, myself, whenh,e presented the pran and the packet of informaLion, it incruded " noi=.studv prepared bv BRH- That indicated that bv the i."r iiso, which is thevear todav, the vast majoritv of that site would be-in violaiion of thestate Noise standard for single family residential. and bi ih. y"., 2o1o theentire parcel all th€ back to the back rot Iines of che iimberuooasubdivision r^rould be in violation of the state Noise Standard. rt was adirective as r heard of the planning commission to stafi io root at hourthat area might be buffered and to come back with some inJications aboutuhat kind of berming and bufferins could be there t" proi""i sinsle famifyresidential . tlte've inquired as to that wor k and f,.rr. y"i-io see it. 6e ,reverv interested in it. r'm the city planning
"on..rli.i.,i
-i"- the city ofRosevilre and if you .\,ant to see what this iooxs lir<e-i; t;. fresh, r woulddirect vou to a portsion of TH 36 just east of vicioiia-iti".t on the southside of TH 35 which has exactry the same.size, €xactrv the-same designlish*ay r.rith exactly rhe same rraffic coday as ahi;-;;.J;;y is projecred tohave in 10 vears- so what you're pranning along TH 5 exists in Rosevirletoday and as we go about our comprehensive planning p."""""-in the city ofRosevirle ' Ne are struggling with how io redeverop that area because ofconcerns that neighbors in that area and property o"n"i=-trJJe regarding theuntenable noise that- they are subjected to. I suggest i" i", that we haveacknowledsed and would be willing ro continue-t;-;;k;;*lJa6. rh"tTimberwood exisrs and rhat rhere is a need ana tnai ii--iI-Iip, op,. i "t.comprehensive planning principle to proLect' those people. i ulould suggestthat forci.ng the area all the ray up to TH S to 9o single familyresidential is going too far in that regard. uith respect to the collectorstreets on the south side, r berieve itis correct to say that we were theones that sugs.sted lhe coIleclor street on the "o"it,-"i.a" ind suggestedthe concept of having a local svstem of colrectoi"-i" pii"rie rocalcirculation and not to put that traffic onto TH S. So to the extent thatthat recommendation has been carried through, r ."r.n"rr"agi it and r saythat I think that that,s a good idea but I would cfariiy-itrat when weshowed that service road, we showed it as a remote service road so that thepeople trho would have to dedicate the right-of-r"i ,""ia 6e able to developboth sides of the road and therefore to do. it "fii"i"n[fy]- No* not on.l.yhas the Iand use changed from a land use which r.rould provide a higherreturn to the Iandor.rner which would assist them in-iel""pins tl,"i,investment but it's ar.so now a singre iiontaee service roidl rd ask youfrom a practical standpoint is the- landowner - goi ng i" ue-ie=ponsibre fordedicating rhe riehr-of-uay for rhat roadway?--A;; i; ;;,'ii.t i. tr,"feasibility of devel.opins that property foi'sinste ;;rii; fesidential anddoins whar vou r.rouldn't do out in a ruial arei itrictr-i=-lr.iJi" fronr Lheroad- There is also what is identified as a middre ""r,"oi"I."rch area on aportion of that property. It,s one of lhe only =".r"t "ia"i r,r. ever seenthat is rimited to a single parcer ana i'a ask vou what the significance of
Planning Commission Heet i n9
October 24, t99O - Page 34
that is to a property oh,ner who's going about the business of trying to
market their proPerty, and I'm not trying to make fun of the Process. f
know that we, as part of our comPrehensive Planning Processes have to look
at Uhere schools should be located but I'd ask vou to Lhink about that as
you carry through with the planning process about r.,hen that decision gets
made and ulhat lhe implications of that designation may be for that ProPertv-
owner. Another comment I offer iust in practical issues. It's nice and
it's good to have lhe happy tlords in the plan about the goals and
objeciives of buffering everybody and 1oo foot wide buffer strips sound
great but who gets to dedicate them? tlhat's the Practical asPect of 1Oo
ioot wide buffer areas in addition to setback areas? t,ho maintains that
Iand? Now it's one thing to sav that PeoPIe have to have extensive
setbacks betr,Jeen industrial or office/industrial Park ProPerty and single
family residential and that it be bermed and that it be landscaPed and that
it be maintained. I think that's a reasonable thing to factor into the
planning and developmenL process. Bu! to simply Paint a bunch of magic
mar ker ireen lines betu,een att of the different designations of ]and use ' r
think cin be a very impractical thing to actually carry Lhrough and
i111pru*unt so r chailenge you to do that. one final comment that r think is-
extremely important as you proceed and move forward in this Process has to
the whole issue of a sanitary sewer feasibility. There has been some
investisation done in the area of sanitary setler invesLigaLion.' Talking
about feasibility. Nhat it's going to cost to extend it. How it's going
to be extended. Alternatives for extending it and so forLh. Those are
"it.tfy imPortant issues with resPect to land use and needs to be
coordinated and needs-io Ui tactoied in uhen vou Iook at the feasibilitv of-
future land use Pattern. Thank you -
Conrad: Thanks John. Oo you want to address any of those issues that John-
broughtuprightnoulintermsoftheschooldesignation?IguessNecan
talk-about that later on. PauI, the dedicated right-of-urav on that
,i.p"ilv-r"rth of Timberwood. John brought that up. -single frontase. Are
those policy issues? Are those issues that we deal with in the
comprehensive PIan?
Krauss: I think the)z're issues that )zou deal with in the field when vou
".iriiry get a development ProPosal . t^le have ProPosed a number of
;;il;;i;t;, ne* cott!L["i-=tt"Lt=. rhe alienment for those are not cast in
;;;;;;a;. 'on a collector strect vou basicallv want to connect the. two ends-
o"int. and not introduce so many curves that it becomes a disincentive to
use it. So I'd say Lhere's some flexibility in the design and to give
ciedit where credit is due, John's PIan was the first one that shou'ed a
collector street tr.rr"ugrr there and ue'vo not been unwilling to accePt good -
iae"s w6erever they coie from. on€ of the other suggestions that we sot
from that was Mary rairineton spoke before and Hary's suggestlon was thaL
tnit Ue done as a frontagi road. The reason h1hy that made a lot of sense
io-g=-*.= because of -ifre-wav that collector, if it took the-middle path
Ui.""t"J-. neighborhood. Basically you traPPed a striP of land that could
have houses on it. Could have office, whatever, beLween a collector street
,na, q iane highway.--ii iiro=t made it less oPtimal an area to develop' -
iv-r""ing Lhe road turtrrer to the north, you provided greater physicar
=.p.rrii6n from the a I"n" and )zou,ve got that higher traffic street out of
;h:a h;;;i"lly wiII become a residential neighborhood in the future' It
"1"" 6"ip.a to free ,p-inrt potential school site area. The original
;ii;.;";t of rhat t6ing-Ui"etted Lhe site that the school has told us would
Planning Commission Meeting
October 24, 7990 - Page 35
make a good location for a middl.e school . They need a 40 acre chunk ofground to bring that about. Probably about 30 acres of which would bepermanent green space - one of the reasoDs xhy that school site is locatedthere, we did explore 3 sites with the school district, is that it reallyis a benefit to breaking uP that commerciaL/industrial corridor effect ti-ratthe Planning commission wanted to move ar.ray from. They uanted to be ableto bridge TH 5 with residential or residential with current uses and it wasfelt that a school that has 3/4 of the site being open space, permanentlygreen uould be an ideal way of accomplishing that. And the road ulas alsoswung wide as r said to avoid impacting that school site so there were anumber of reasons that b,ent into that.
Conrad: More comments.
Andrew Olson: I'm Andreu, Olson of 8290 l.lest Lakequestion concerning your other 1995 study area asAccording to your large book, it says proposed 42O1O. tJhy are they doing work on that right nownothing to the south of us, it comes to a T rightthis work at this time?
Court and I have afar as Hwy . 17.lane highway by the year
lf it's not foreseen ornor.,. l.lhy are we doi n9
conrad r What
Andrer.r OIson:
are
I
you tal king about, 212?
m talking about Hwy 17 south of TH 5 to CR 1a .
Krauss: There is a project going on on HL,y 1Z north of Lyman B).vd. rightnow that carver county is involved with and that's to prepare a road bed sothat that road can be widened in the future. The actuar pavement is not, rdon't even believe programmed at this point in time but they have anopportunitv to get the dirt and widened it at that point. Ultimately thatroad wiII drop south to new 212 buL nobody is doing any work on thatsection now nor is that programmed or planned in any way. That wouldpresumably be done at such time that the highuay,s extended out past tha!
Poi nt .
Andre.^, olson: Yeah, my question wourd be then if it's goin€r Lo 212, arethe Lwo tied together simultaneouslv? rf r find ouL 2L2 would be goingthrough 6 years from now, wiII CR 17 be built at that time to tie in?
Krauss: CR 17 south of Lyman?
l.rarren: Host I i kely , the current situation analagous to that r.rould be theTH 1O1 uhich ue show and the City has officially mapped. -tre will not beconstructing that rearigned portion of TH 101 doh,n to rH 2L2 until TH 212is anticipated to be atong with construclion and Lhat's the time when thecitv would anticipate pushing forxard with it's project. similarly r knowthe County urould be planning on expanding that road segment at such timethat the 212 corridor is constructed to that intersection.
Andreu Qlson: And u,iII it be 2 lane orthat you know of?
4 lane at that time? Any proposals
Narren: Right now it'd be 4 rane dorln to Lyman. From there south r wourdexpecL it urould be the same. This is a unique opportunity to save moneyactuarLv that the developer's donating the firr. The county is moving it
Planning Commission l.leeL i ng
October 24, t99O - Page 36
and bo
abou!
whichoutrig
t hey 'r
rh
80
ot
hL
e
parties are coming out basically saving a lot of money. There's
,ooo yards of material that are being moved for the future roadway
herwise, if it were done at that time, would have to be paid
and imported so it's just a unique uindow here in time that
taking advantage of.
Andrew olson: Do you have a timeframe in mind when that might be
permanently paved then to 4 Ianes?
Harren: tlell I think we're saying, the City has a Project at 1992. [.le are
planning to upgrade the road section down to the creek area basically, or
Lhere abouts. The County plan for taking it there furLher to the south. I-
can't speak for the County Engineer and the county Commissioners but
they're very much going to be {aLching traffic use Patterns and see if
they, it probably would happen that they would exPand it down to Lvman or
could expand it to Lyman prior to the 212 corridor but to 90 south of Lyman-
Lo 212 I think definitely would wait until the 212 is constructed.
Andrew olson: Thank you.
Conrad: t,lho else?
Tim Keane: Good evening members of the Planning Commission. My name is
Tim Keane with Larkin, Hoffman, oalev, and Lindgren, 79oo xerxes,
Bloomington. I am here on behalf of l'till's Fleet Farm, the ourners of the
property in the northeast corner of trunk highulays 41 and 5. tle have
participated throughout this Process and expressed our intent and desire to
seek guidance for the development of Lhe ProPertv otlned by Mill's FIeet
Farm. ]^le compliment the Planning Commission on their efforts to date but
ue're asking you to 9o a little bit further and noL tlait until 1995 to
study your study areas. Our principle concern with the designation is that
it in effect is a 5 year moralorium on not only the use of the ProPerty but
any potential planning or marketing of the ProPertv. Bv designating that
as a study area without any guide for the ProPerty owner as to it's
potential use to a buyer as it's Potential use, it's rendered virtually
unmarketable. So there's some. concern there. Secondly, I think that the
designation of the study area at this time and waiting 5 years untiL you
plan for the use of that area is going to bring the same Pattern that ure're
dealing with in 1990 and that is, we move in a.neighborhood of constituency-
of opposition to anything hapPening and who knows where that uiII bring us
in a rational planning Process. The area could be planned today. It does
not necessarily have to be within the designated urban service area but the
ultimate use of the property certainly could be Planned and set forth on
the comprehensive plan. And tshat is our request- That you continue your
fine planning efforts and extend them to the areas desigrnted as the 1995
study area. Thank you. very much.
Conrad: Thanks Tim. Additional comments. APPreciate you all sticking
with us. tle've Iost a few.
Terry Forbord: Good evening ladies and gentlemen- My name is Terry
Forbord. I'm Vice President of Lundgren Bros, 935 EasL trayzata Blvd. in
vlayzaLa. Can you hear me from here? Okay. I aPPreciate the oPPortunitv
to speak before you this evening. Probably more than anything f apPreciate
your objectivity throush this whole process and I concur entirely with Mr.
Planning Commission Meeting
October 24, l99O - Page 37
Klingelhutz' Iast statement that h,e're a1r very fortunate that you haveheld these open meelings like you have. rt doesn't work Iike this in aIIcities, as maybe some people in the audience aren't quite as famil.iar. Theprocess occurs but not as openly as this one has so we appreciate it.Recently lre Presented to the City a request for inclusion of approximately90 gross acres of land into the urban service area north of TH 5. There isapproximatelv 70 acres of net developable land. The property is on thenorthern part of the 1995 study area north of TH 5 and r will shor4 you. rtrepresents approximately 57 acres right here and it representsapproximat€Iv 30 acres of this 1oo acre parcer. The reason that, r,II goback. The northern property is owned by Mr. and l.irs. Dwane and ttarleneJohnson. There's a letter in the packet of information that I delivered tovou from them requesting that their property be incruded. The 30 acreparcel is owned bv tlr. Dolejsi and there's also a letter r believe asExhibit c in vour packet. The reason Mr. Dolejsi's property r.ras included inthis is because of the phvsical constraints that exist on ih. propertypertaining to wetlands and slopes and vegetation. That it really fits weLland dovetails well with the development of the Dolejsi property. you wouldnot be able to cross that wetland or it's highly uniikeiy you would be ableto cross that Hetland with a roaduay. So what we are giving you thisevening basicallv is a request onry for inclusion of that property into theurban service area. r've addressed a number of issues in tne proposal tovou of whv we think this is a good idea and rather than pontificaie and goon and on stating what those reasons are, r will answer questions if youhave any and I will go on if you would like me to- If you have anyquestions.
conrad: Anybody with questions of Terry right noul?
Terrv Forbord: okay, thank you very much. r think r did forget to sLatethat we have been developing land in the city of Chanhassen'foraPproximately 10 years now and primarily in the Near ttountain area which isin the northeast corner of chanhassen. That neisnbor hooJ -commu ni tv isclose to being built out and we have been working urittr many of the localrandowners quite we]r. in trving to assemble a raigei ir;;i'of rand toreplace Near t'lounLain so we would sincerely appreiiate your objectivity inthe review of our proposal . Thank you.
Conrad: More comments? Anything?
Eric Rivkin: Is it my turn for a second?
Conrad: Sure.
Eric Rivkin: Just a couple things. I think you could 90 easy on thedevelopers bv not requiring, about this gentleman who sit uack here. verytaII guv. came in late. r don't knou xho he was but r,"-=.ia that bufferswould be hard to maintain. They wouldn't need to be recuii"O to O"maintained at arl. Plantings of course have to be rive'but-tr,"y don't haveto require a mowable grass for instance and if the thrust of the comp pranis to have natural looking things, than rhy have it mowed? It's al.sobetter for the environment not to mow it because trren you'aon't have lhengn-point source pollution from fertilizers and runoff "no-in" ti*.. youalso can be, with creaiive zoning you courd nave irre sam. -nJmue, of unitson less available land. r think he xas eluding to the-iaci that the
Planning Commission l.leeting
October 24, L99O - Page 38
buffers ulould take aNay too much potential land for develoPment. You knoh,
reducing the return on invesLment or something but I don't think that
necessarily has to be the case. Leaving a buffer area worth something
aesthetically and environmentally to the community on both sides of the
buffer I think is uhere I'd like to see thinss headed. l.lhen Joe I'torin
brought out the issue Lhat he deserves the same special considerations on
the special assessments and the sewer hook-up, he Nas not referring to
moving the MUSA back at aII . t e don't rnind where the t'tUSA is ' it's iust
that u,e'd Iike the same protection. He wants the same Protection using the-
same criteria that uas used to determine Lhose sPecial considerations in
the first place. Since he and both of his neighbors on either side of him
qualify for that because same gualifications aPPly to them, that thev feel -they have equa] right to those same considerations. To give you an
example. One of the criteria was that che area, as PauI mentioned' should
have to be sellable to the Het council mav not be Peppered with a lot of
Iarge Iot. You know smaller large Iots PePPered all over the Place. l,,lell ,-
if it were contiguous, tlhich in this case it possibly is because their
properties are just to the east of Lake Lucy Highlands. There's ProPerLies
to the south. Mr. Gutmil]er and Mezzenga and Possiblv the gentleman
sitting back here who got uP and sPoke earlier, are conLiguous t'lith
Lake Lucy l-lighlands. The Rings and the l'lancino's I know. They aII signed
a pelition and as far as I know, they have not changed their minds. So
with this large lot designated properties, we're contiguous. Then it would
not have the detriment of having the peppered look. The other thing is
about Fleet Farm. I personally don't Iike to see a Fleet Farm here. I',ve
seen the one up in Brooklyn Park or up near Anoka, wherever it is and I -
don't like the idea of possibly having a 24 hour business oPen on TH 5 in a
prime residential area wilh truck uPon truck. Additing to the truck
traffic. The noise. The tights of the Parking lot shining up all the
time. I think it uould be an eye sore. I knou the revenue might of course
be tempting but I just don't think that it can be, unless there'd be such
severe restrictions on it that misht jusL completely turn them off to being-
here. That's ,y o*n-p"i=onal opiiion that mavbe the Iand could be
considered as a community center. PerhaPS Purchased by the Yt"tCA. This is
a good location for them. The n€arest one's at Ridgedale and Edina and
maibe consider approaching them to find out if thev'd be urilling to
purchase the land for that. A couple of residents in Timberu,ood that I
Lalked to like that idea and I don't think the City has to give uP anvthing
for that. I,m not sure whether they are exemPt from Paying taxes or not
buE they certainly charge enough for nembership Lhere, I assume they make
enough money to pay the texes so that's my feeling about that. Thank you.
Conrad: Thanks Eric. other comments? Any mor€? Is there a motion to
close the public hear i ngs?
Batzli moved, ltildernuth seconded to close the public hearing- AII voted
in favor and the motion carried- The Public hearing was closed.
Conrad: The public hearing is closed. I thank you for all your comments' -l,.Je're not done though but if you'd like to leave, that's okay. t^le're going
to discuss some of the comments so you're pelcome to .leave and we
appreciate your comments. You're uelcome to stay. Our role right now is
to decide uheLher uJe can send the PIan to the City Council. l.lhether we
Hant to hold it open for more discussion. so again, if you leave I thank
you for attending. Ue're goinE to continue on here and Proceed with some
Planning Commission Meet i ng
October 24, l99O - Page 39
comments. I think generally, I'm not sure what a good format here amongstus commissioners is but I r.rouldn't mind, instead of going round robin andkind of getting confused, if we could deal with the issues that werebrought up that ld rike to have us alr react to one issue at, a time versusone person's comments. Then I'm going to come back and if there's otherstuff thal you Hant to deal with in terms of what was not brought up in thepublic hearing, r.rhat you saw in the plan, I think then there,s a time forthat too. And I'm going to go down sequentially. These are my priorities
and not necessarily, these are the things that I heard. Not necessarilywhat you heard so feel free to jump in. The first issue uith thedevelopment at the intersection of 2L2 and 1o1 . rn terms of the mixed usezoning. Is there anybody concerned uith the comment from Gary Lyman thatthat was not appropriate, especially since it's fronting up hisres idential?
conrad: That's right.
Emmings: Somebody else was calling him Lyman.
Conrad: yeah, that,s uhat it is.anybody like to revisit the issue?
zoni ng?
I'm sorry. Any commentsAre He comfortable with on that?the mixed
t,lou I d
use
Batzl i: As I recall there's a
1OO footErhart: You mean the
Batzli: Yeah. I can't teII by
buffer inbetween there?
bu ffer ?
this map.
buffer betueen the genLleman's property line
Batzli: You know issui was raised and maybe now isn't a good timeabout it but, from who,s property does that evenLually come?
Krauss:
and thi s
Kr auss i
Emm i ngs :
wr i tten
Kr auss :
now is50 feet
t^le did addsite, yes.a 1OO foot
to tal k
lnKrauss: It comes off the developer's property as we envision it, Nowtalkins to the City Attorney uho tells us ule have to modify our zoningordinance to back up the comprehensive pran and we anticipate brinsinsyou a revised zoning ordinance amendment to deal Hith that and parkingsetbacks in general in the next month or two.
Conrad i pould come off the ouner of the mixed use.
toIot
It
The
I have a
mor e intensive use, yeah.
in stone or
guestion on that. On Lhat bufferare r.Je sensitive to the site?
yard, is 1OO feet
We haven't drafted the ordinanc€ y€t. AII we have to go onthe policy direction which says 1OO feet in interior propertyalong roads because the road itself provides some distance.
r ightIines,
Emmi ngs: Gene Ouinn.
Planning Commission Meeti n9
October 24, t99O - Page 40
Emmings: l.lelI, shouldn't there be some flexibility there dePending on the
site? You might want a IiLtIe more, you migh! want a Iot less. tlhatever.
Krauss! If you're saving a
be able to do it in 50 feet,
the ordinance.
stand of oak tre€s for example, you
tte could urite something Iike thatdense
yes .
may
i nto
Emmings: Alright.
Emmings: tJe're not zoning.
Erhart: tlhat are we doing?
Conrad: At this point in time, it's a concePt right now
l.lhen zoning, if we do decide to change that zoning when
application to do such, we can move boundaries- l're can
to so that.
Erhart: I don't want to get into a situation where we
committing Lo a landot"lner the highesL value Per square
commercial/industr ial here.
and we can change.-
there was an
do whatever we brant
conrad: Yet on the other Mnd,
that that's what your intention
favors.
are essential lyfoot urhich is
didn't communicate to neu residents
is, you would not be doing them any
if you
real Iy
Erhart: I understand that but I just want to make sure that it's clear
Lhat we can 90 back later and put some buffer ' even if it includes
rpartment buildings, without getting in a aituation where now we've Iocked
in and oh, Jim Curry comm€rcial . As much as I like Jim, I mean it's
important that we have flexibility to even if we decide later on that 1oo
foot isn't going to be adequate. That it makes more sense to Put in some
apartments, that ue haven't committed to the landowner a commercial value.
That's my concern.
Krauss: Hr. Chairman, we shouldn't forget that buffer yards and screening
and Iandscaping as a concePt is not a new one in Chanhassen. It's embodied-
in our s.ite plan review and we do that typically Hith every Proiect we
review. tlhat the buffer yard concePt does is it exPands uPon the existing
conrad: t,hat'd you just say?
Emmings: f guess the point is, as far as the issue vou brought uP and how
I feel about it is, we have looked at it. tle're going to have to do some
sensitive planning there when h,e Put that in but I for one uouldn't want to
90 back and redo Lhat. I think Ehe PIan is good the wav it is.
Erhart: Hy concern is that uhen we zone Something commercial, essentially
ue're getting iust about at the highest value use that vou can do. If we
come back later on and ue look at that area and Iater on 9,e u,ant to Put in -a buffer which consists of medium density or high density, all of a sudden
we're going to be rebuffed by the Iandowner who now says well you're down
zoning my property. I guess I really, if that line of thinking is correct
so fai, if that's the case then, maybe we ought to be real careful to zone -
something commercial .
controls that $re have but I think that the current dialogue that h,e have onbuffering and screening is certainly going to remain with the emphasizethat it's at to date and be expanded upon so ue would have the opportunity
and lhe flexibility. It's already in the ordinance Lo buffer uniquesituations as we need to.
Conrad: Any other comments on
what was your comment?
this particular parcel? Anything? Mary,
Hary Harrington: ...right now it's like SO feet?
conrad: l.le have a buffer yard concept carred, that in this particular casewould separate the higher density from the residential _
(Hary Harrington made a statement that could not be heard on the tape. )
Conrad: ].le're sa),ing there's an autornatic buffer yard that we arerequiring betr^,een the mixed use commercial. Hixed use deveropment and-
Mary Harrington: Hore than 50 feet?
Krauss: It's an additional requirement.
Hary Harrington: You're just asking for space?
Krauss: No, the ordinance wiII requirespace. That they do berming. That they
somethi ng .
that they do something in thatdo landscapi n9 . l.le '] I preserve
Hary Harrington: That sounds good.
conrad: okay. tle're going to reave that issue unchanged. There was aconcern Nith areas besides Laki Lucy Highlands in t6rms of excruding themfrom the necessity to hook up to a sewer and special assessments. l.ledialogued about that a couple of times. A coupre different individualstonight. Is there a sensiLivity to revisit that issue?
l.lildermuth: r think that page 23 has to definitery be revisited. runderstand how ue can exclude the obligatlon to hook up to a sewer ifhave a viable septic system but r don't see how in the comprehensivewe can be talking about traiving any assessments for a certain selector group of people. r think that's a real mistake to brrite somethingthat in the comprehensive plan.
can
you
plan
class
Iike
Emmings: I have a question. If right nob, we're talking about thesespecial considerations for thes€ rarge lot ouners in this area designatedon the map as Iarge lot but are we only talking about specialconsiderations for them or for any lot that.would rneet the same criteria?
Krauss: Frankry, we're only tarking about those speciar considerations forthose subdivision that Nere plattcd prior to :-9g7 or under the oldordinance that represent concentrations of developed lots that have no moredevelopment potential. Thet conceiveably because of their concentratedlocation h,e can skirt, probably at some extra expense but He can skirt themwith utility projects lhat are designed to serve other lots. r can't
PIanning Commission l.leet i n9
October 24, l99O - Page 41
Planning commission tleet i ng
October 24, t99O - Page 42
emphasize too strongl.y that ue don't have that flexibility uhen we pick and
choose IoLs up and down the street frontage. It simPly doesn'L uork. tJhat-
rr,e can do is try to develop a sensitivity in our policies to how to deal
with these inLervening property owners at such time until they decide that
they L,ant to also take a benefit from the utility but that's another
question. That's not uriting a urhole different status for that
l.larren: If a project t{ere actually und€rtaken, a public improvementproject, the City would be faced with a decision as to do you absolve that
particular parcel from any assessments and thereby th€ cost would be either-
covered by the city's general fund or general revenues so the city at large
would pay or the individual benefitting property owners who are assessed
would proportionally pick up the difference. or the actual assessment is
deferred until such !ime as the ProPerty is ultimately connected into the
system b,hich occurs as a negative or a bad debt against the city- I think
that, if I could offer mv two cents on it' that Lhe Policv. The citv
ordinance currently existing on the books does address a lot of the other
instances where you have isolated cases throughout the City tlhere they have
a system that fails. t^le don't have seh,er that fronts the ProPerty or
witi.rin a 1So feet of the property. They obviously ar€ not required to hook-
in at that time. I think a lot of the individual cases that may be we're
concerned about that, this concern thac th€ city's going to run a public
improvement project out to the intersection of cR 18 and Galpin iust to
pl"f. "p one isolated failins system, I mean that's just imPractical. The
City would never do that.
hlarren: You Nould not be able to commit future city councils on assessment
policy on specific proiects. I think the intent is urritten earlier in the
report here that PauI has here is very close, as strong as you can get
about addressing the problem. Regardless of what is in this document ' not
to minimize it's importance, the city council when it sets assessment
policy, sets assessment policy and uses this as a guide but HiII decide at ..
the time of the sPecifics of the Project how to assess it.
Nildermuth: trell it sounds like the issue of
preLty much done on an ad hoc basis dePending
don't see any reason to Put those statements
assessments in the comPrehensive PIan.
tli Idermuth:or not?
utility assessments has
on Lhe issue at hand so I
on page 23 regardi ng
So you're saying it reallv. doesn't matt€r wheLher it's in here
t\,arren: l.lell I think it's imPortant in fairness to everybody here that
there is a guide here and an intention that I think lhe council ' Iike they
do on any oiher assessment proiect, takes into strong consideration so it
definiteiy uiII have some weight. But you canno! tie the hands of a
future Ciiy Council to an assessment policy in this document. Each
instance is so specific lhat the assessment Policy has to be flexible,
l.Jildermuth: l.lelI, I think for that verv reason
taking th6 assessment verbage out of the plan.I would be in favor of
Ahrens: l.lho picks up the extra exPense on that?
Planning Commission Heet i n9
October 24, t99O - Page 43
Conrad: Philosophically do you agree with it? Do you want to extendother properties contiguous or not contiguous to this? Give Lhem thepriviledges basically that ure are giving, whether it's in here or not,there's got to be a vehicle to conmunicate that to the City Council.
Ahrens: I guess because we don't know how Ne're going to pick up the
expense on the assessments. I mean are uae excluding some people onlyadditional assessments on other Chanhassen residents because they're
lucky enough to be included in that excluded area?
tlildermuth: I think you could argue that point either $ray. Certainly the
same availability for assessment uaiver ought to be extended to other
people in other areas that find themselves in th€ same position or
situation - l,,taybe not as large an area as Lake Lucy Highlands but maybe on
some individual basis. On the other hand, you could argue that why are we
even addressing something like waiving assessments here uhen it's Lhe
problem of the City Council. Public sewer and b,ater are part of the commongood. If ue're going to play games uith assessmenLs, I think we're going
to end up in e lot of trouble.
conrad: Joan, did you have any comments on this?
Hildermuth: But what about Hesse Farm?
it to
same
extrato put
not
conrad: tJeLl, Chanhassen got into this problem itself. The 2 1/2 acres,that's Chanhassen problem.
Ahrens: But it may not be aII of...
Conrad: ...and we went along with it, The Planning Commission never wenL
along with it to my recollection. I always say that but we did grant that
authority or ue did grant that ability to put 2 L/2 acye lots in and Lhose
peopl.e went in and put in sewer and water and I think uhat you're saying or
urhat we can say is hey, so what. You have to Iive by the letter of Lhe lawuhich says you hook up. That's what ue could do and in this case we're
Ahrens: I guess I have a problem with the assessments too and )rou know,philosophically I would like to give everybody Che same right to be
excepted on a large lot if they want to be excepted. I think that inpractical terms it s€ems impossible to do that, I don't know if we should
be addressing the assessments either in this part of the comprehensiveplan- It doesn't make much sense to me. I think that if there's a
contiguous group of parcels along Lake Lucy Road, I don't know if there is,
they should be included too. That is part of a whole area in there that
seems to have the same desire to be excluded from that.
conrad: There is rationale for us to deal with that I think, even thoughwe're not deal.ing totally uith economic issues, in terms of assessments.
Conrad: But what ue do in terms of land use obviously impacts folks and
how we. You know if we didn't feel comfortable providing a special
compensation or regulations for these people, hre may not have zoned it the
way we did. Therefore our zoning inclusion in the HUSA, exclusion could
have changed if we did not grant these particular exclusions or exceptionsto the general rule.
Planning Commission I'leet i ng
October 24, 1.990 - Page 44
saying hey, that doesn't make sense but you're right- Some other Property
ob,ners wiII have to pay for that exclusion.
Ahrens: If that's the route the City Council takes.
conrad: Right. I think city council has a financial, this is a financial -
issue for them. I think it's a question of what signal b,e lrant to send to
the City Council. Oo we agree that this should be done but I think they
really have a vested interest economically in this and the),'re going to
look at it real closely. I guess the question that I bring up tonight is
in our direction to them, do we rrant to say grant this permission or grant
this opportunity to others in Iike situations? PauI Krauss would say there_
aren't any like situations.
Ahrens: tleIl, several property ouners uould disagree uith that.
conrad: They r.lould disagree. Maybe I put words in PauI's mouth. Did
I put words in your mouth?
Krauss: I do disagree. I think that Lake Lucy Highlands and Timberwood
and Sunridge Court are clearly different animals from the standpoint thatthey are for alI intensive purposes fully developed. They have theirroads. They've on site water. They have on site se$er. They're done.
The houses are sitting on 2 7/2 acre lots. They're often sitting in the
middle. It's almost out of the realm of possibility that there's further
development potential on those Iots. Not inconceiveable but it's almost
out of the realm of possibility. Anyplace else you're reduced to aproperty owner telling you, I am telling you today that I don't u,ant to
develop my property and therefore I urant to be treated differently even
though my property has development potential and we've just seen too many
cases ulhere when, nobody uants to caII anybody a buyer. Nobody uants to
make anybody do anything but people get divorced. People get old. Peopleget transferred. An), myriad of reasons cause peoPle to change their mind. -Hr. Rivkin's referring to lots along Lake Lucy Road to the east of
Lake Lucy Highlands. There's about 5 properties in there and I have not
talked to aII the property oh,ners individually. I've talked to several of -the groups but even the groups of people thaL have talked to me have told
me that there's property owners bracketing their lots that Hant to develop.
I think you saw that same situation u,hen Mr. Rivkin presenLed to you apetition h,ith some very blanket statements that these people did not want
to develop and people stood up in Lhe audience 'and said no, that's noL
true. I urould like to have the opportunity to do that. And I also can't
stress too strongly that once you geL this checkerboard pattern in Place, -we've already got a bad enough checkerboard pattern trying to get around
Lhe 2 L/2 acre subdivisions. If you exasperate that, there's going Lo be a
very great difficulty in providing in a cost effective and reasonable
manner street, sewer and water. tle simply wiII not be able to do that.
Emmings: l.re]l, I'd just ]ike to add to that- I think that thedisctinction that PauI makes for these individual neighborhoods is a
reasonable one and especia]ly in light of the background and history that
at the time that we did those ule also comPleLely reurrote the septic system
requirements in the city and they really I think, at least I was convinced .-
at the time that septic sysLems in a lot of ways because they don't add
load to other public facilities. The interceptors and the plants rhere aII
the sewage has to be treated, treating it on site, there,sdistinct advantages to that. The environment. If they,re
and maintained right and I think we put the thing in place
them self sufficient so I think they are kind of a special
Emmings: If
aluays.
some rea I
designed r ightthat will make
case .
Ahrens: Those are bie if 's.
they're insta.Lled and maintained, sure. That's right. That's
Erhart: I need help here. I guess I don't quite understandtlhy would we, urhaL is the circumstances under r.lhich somebodyforced to hook onto the sewer? Is it when the neighbor puts
someone beyond the sewer u{ants to develop and then you havenext to his property and then you're going to assess him forassessment or what? How does that uork?
the problem.
would be
sewer in orto run sewera hish
Erhart: No, I'm not talking about that. Sayacres up there and he wants to subdivide intoaffect Lot B which might be between Lot l and
some fellow in Lot20 lots. How doesthe existing line?
2 has 10that
l.larren: tlelr, if ue have to obviously run sewer up to intercept your 20acres and if there is a deveropment in the middre that is not looking todevelop, then that expense for thaL link of the seuer urhich you can,t getby without, needs to be paid for somehow. Therefore we do. there areexamples that maybe a Hatermain exampre would be a'rittle bit bet.ter urherethe Chan HilIs subdivision did not have water service available to it untilthe citv went ahead and constructed the chan Hirls trunk uratermain whichextended watermain down powers Blvd. and then cross country into thesubdivision. Now in that case, the city assessed hook up charge on an ar€abasis to the area that t.le had shown wouLd ultimately take service from thistrunk main. very similar to the Lake Ann rnterceptor. So there is apotential for an area assessment for major interceptors which is quite
common to assess that benefit.
Erhart3 okav, and that's the rear coneern that peopre here tonight have.Not the guy that's got the failing septic system but the guy who;s going tocome in with a lot in the middle of this group that wants to subdivide.
Krauss: Tha!'s true but it's not an open and shut case. r mean the factthat somebodv L,ants to deverop and thcy're removed from the rine and theintervening property owner's don,t, you know City Council deals uith thesethings in a political forum. Therc,s public hearings. If you have 9property ouners that don,t uant to develop, don't want to pay for theirutilities and the one at the end of the rine does, he's going to have adarn tough time convincing the city council that it's a public improvementthat needs to be born by evervbodv. council's more than Iikely to saydeveroper if you brant it, you can pay for it. oead head the'Iine and ure,llpick up charges for these people...
Planning Commission Heet i n9
October 24, 7990 - Page 45
Warren: tlell there's two things I guess I tried to elude to earlier andLhat is, it is difficulL to imagine that the City would just outrisht 90and try to instarr a major interceptor project to intercept a couple oifailing systems. You don't do that.
PIanning Commission l.,leeL i n9
October 24, 7990 - Page 46
Erhart: So if it's a reasonable thing that you can deal with at the time,
then I don't understand why u,e can't just change this ParagraPh and
eliminate the priviledge given to Lake Lucy Highlands and Timberuood andjust make it more general. Jus! say for lhose areas uith large lots, it is
the policy of the city, or areas with large lots. Large lots with sePtic
sysEems, it is the policy of the city that these subdivisions or whatever. -
l,taybe that's not the correct nord but these areas will not be required to
hook into the City utilities. Period then. Just drop it there because I
have a problem isolating those t1l1o subdivisions when there's not in my mind-
that much difference than they are uith Eric Rivkin's grouP.
Conrad: But there is.
is it?Erhart: t.,ell what
conrad: I think as Paul said, those areas are Pretty much in. They're in -pIace. They've been deve loPed .
Erhart: !^leII so have these other lots.
Emmings: No. They can be developed where lhese can't. These PeoPIe once
inside the HUSA could go down to 15,ooo square foot lots but that's not
going to happen here. That's not going to haPPen in these comPleted large -
lot subdivisions.
Erhart: t^lhy can'L it haPPen there?
Emmings: tlel I , theoreticallY
planning for that so they Put
whatever.
tli ldermuth: l.,hat haPPens if the house
Erhart: If a guy has 2 l/2 acres right
it can excePt thev haven't build their houses
Lhem in the middle of the ProPertv or
burns down?
in the middle there with 3 acres.
Emmings: It's possible. It's iust.
Krauss: You would have to change the comPrehensiv€ PIan as ueII' The
i"."on Ne came up with this specific designation for that is because
tnev're designated as a completely different animal. It's designated as
i.iilr i"i" "nfy. If they wanted to come in with 15,o9o square foot lots,
thei uould have to rezone the properly. They uould have to change the
comprehensive pIan. They would have to convince their neighbors that
there's a benefit to running utilities dot{n sLreeLs that weren't
anticipated to have these things r.rhich all sum total makes it a virtual
impossibility that those are going to subdivide.
Ahrens: l,laybe it's the length of the table here but we urere talking
earlier about assessments. The assessment language and not reguiring
people to hook up to sewer and whether or not it uas aPProPriate for
inciude the Ianguage regarding excluding these people from utility
assessments - I mean in the comprehensive PIan, weren't we discussing
ear I ier?
us to
that
Batzli: l.Je r.,ere at this end.
Planning Commission Heet i n9
October 24, t99O - Page 47
Ahrens: [.re hrer edivides down the
Ahrens: So Gary,taken out of this
Warren: I guess from me perspective theappropriate to be in.
tlarren: The assessment Procedures can have such significant impacts on thecity financially and there is such a rigorous assessment processestablished in the State Statutes to be followed on every assessmentproject, that to try to muddy the waters with a policy discussion here onassessments I really think is just going to cause more problems uhen theactual assessment process for any public improvement project follouls apubl j.c hearing process. Has to stand the test of shor.ri n9 benefit. On andon and on. To talk about who connects and ulho doesn't and who's requiredand uho isn't, I think they can be two separate issues but I think as paulis saying, you've got some unique situations utith the Lake Lucy Highlandsand such but you start handcuffing the City's abil.ities to service goodproperties if you get too specific as ulell as who you,re going to kick outof the connection area.
at this end. Yeah, right. l,laybe there's a ]ink thatmiddle here.
are you saying that the assessment language shouLd besect i on?
assessment Ianguage isn't totally
Ahrens: I agree.
tlildermuth: RiSht.
Erhart: I agree tith that.
Emmi ngs :
more gener
residentia
say?
Erhart: Just the policyuiII not be required toreference to utilities.
is that they are not forced to, the subdivisionhook into city utilities. period. Drop the
50
alI
urould you go along with the suggestion nhere we just
staCement that th€ Iarge lot, something about largesubdivisions r^rith septic systems i n place what? l.that
make alot
would you
Ahrens: I absolutely agree.
Erhart: Just make it more general..
Ahrens: And drop all this other.
Erhart: Drop the reference to utility.
Krauss: r think you should relrer back to the poricy statement on page 14of the goals and policies because r think that would more accurateiy-emphasize what we were trying to get across. rt's the bold faced one withthe goal to recognize the unique circumstance of the lots. rt describesthe policv direction that ue think is consistent and one that ure can workaround.
l^larren 3 Second paragraph .
PIanning Comm j.ssion l'{eet i ng
October 24, l99o - Page 48
Ahrens: Page 14 of the land use?
Batzli: No, the first section.
Conrad: Paul, are you comfortable uith generalizins this exclusion?
Krauss:
current
notice,
No sir. once rr,e are reduced to developing systems based
uhim or direction of a prop6rLy ouner that can change on a
we can't provide those streets and utilities effectively.
upon the
moment's
have a septic
you don't have to -assessments,
have a septicup? I understood -
Conrad: I'm not comfortable at aIl r.rith broadening the definition. f
don't care if it's in the ]anguage in the land use. In the comPrehensiveplan. I don't care but I'm not comfortable at aII extending thatpriviledge beyond
that PauI said. I
to check.
the areas that were identified for the Particular reasons
think that r"rould just be a major mistake. But we've got
BatzIi: Philosophically from the standPoint that if you
system and it's not failing, I mean their statement thaL
hook into it, I think they eliminated the Part about the
t^lhaL's wrong uith a philosophical statement that if you
system that's working ProPerly, why do they have to hook
that was his amendment.
Ahrens: Right .
be required to
that reads , nor
extensions are
conrad: I'm not concerned with the hooking uP as long as ule have a good
method of moniLoring to teII you the truLh and u,hat ue're doing is
broadening the ability to keep that septic system here or to Put them in.
As long ai we have the control Lo monitor that, thaL's fine but I think the
assessments, it's not the hook-up as much as it is the other assessments
that are in the sLreet that I iust think would be very Prohibitive for
Chanhassen.
Batzl i : If people uleren't
tlildermuth: Yeah, I suPPort that.
Conrad: Did you agree with her Jim?
t,i ldermuth: Yes .
conrad: Joan, would you read it egain? Are you on Page 23 oY Page 22?
Conrad: If people Neren't assessed for them. t
Ahrens: Could ue jus! change the second Sentence on Page 23 to read, it is
the City's position that these subdivisions, Iet's say we're iust talking
about Lake Lucy Highlands and Timberuood, wiII.not be r€quired to hook into-
city utiLities period. Leave out, nor pay local utility assessments until
such time as utility extensions are requir€d to serve them. That's the
Ianguage I have a problem with. Any takers?
It is the City's position Lhat these subdivisions uiII not
hook into city utilities Period and that l,e remove the land
pay local ucility assessments until such time as utilitv
required to serve them. I don't feel comfortable excluding
Planning Commission l.leet i n9October 24, L99O - Page 49
them from utility assessments if ue don't know who's going to pick up thebill for that laLer on.
conrad: Let's
How would thatto 9o in?
Conrad: Okay, Jim are you comfortable with that?
hli ldermuth: RiehL.
conrad: Brian? You're basically not sending any signal . you,re sendingno signal to the City Council although they,re going to, Lhey're obviouslygoing to revisit this issue whenever they get it. But you're not giving
them a direction. Okay. Brian?
Batzli: r have a problem with it because r understand the issue of this 2l/2 acye lot that Chanhassen is stuck uith and ue do have these twoconcentrations so upon my initial reading r thought it made a lot of sensebut when vou start visiting specific situations of extending or skirting atrunk line past the property and then to say that they don't have to payfor it at that Lime and to put a burden on the rest of the community, isthat fair as r.le]l? At this point r would rather wait until the councir hasto wrestle with the problem at that Lime. IL,s kind of like passing thebuck though. tlhat I really like is if ue could come to some sort ofdecision right now but r don't know that ue can. so r would actually, if rhad my druthers, I wouLd leave it in but I don't knou that that's fair tothe remaining residents upstream, downstream or uhat have you.
Conrad: You know that one issue, and it's hard to, we're talkingintangible stuff here and a concern that r ahays have is forcins people tomove out because utilities come in. r've seen that in certain cases. Nota whole Iot but I've seen that in certain cases. Uhen there areassessments that go in, are we talking really huge assessments thatobviously are going to force somebody to sell?
Warren: Typically I guess it aII depends on the income Ievels of theindividuals we're dealing trith and they're usually are like senior citizentype considerations that can be given in the assessment policies but theassessments, I mean you're talking in the t2,OOO.OO to $5,OOO.OO rangetypically for residential type say sanitary scwer assessment.
say there's 5OO feet on the property. 5OO feet frontage.owner be assessed for 5OO feet? per unit that's potentially
l.larren:correct,Typically we assess sanitary sewer on a per unit basis. That'sSimi lar with watermai n .
Conrad: So if it's in the street. If a Natermain's in the street, or thesewer and water's in there, then the city policy and lt's going by toservice. r'm going to take a situation where let's say, end Tim brought itup. Let's say 4 property owners wanted to develop and l didn'L. It'sstill 4 to 1. They might get this done. So one we've got the one that
Batz]i: So you'd leave it for the City Council to decide through theirnormal process at that time urhether they're assessed?
Ahrens: Right.
Planning Commission Heet i ng
october 24, 799a - Page 50
didn't !.,ant to develop and they own
goes by on their property frontage.
10 acres or 15 acres and that sewer
What's going to happen to them?
liLtle bit. Now Joan, you're
assessment language in the comPrhensive-
l,rarren: tlell the assessment policy can be decided by th€ Council Lo say
thaL that particular parcel u,ouId be deferred. The assessment could be
deferred. That's not the preference. Financial advisors nould say that's
a bad debt against the city's records.
conred: In your experience Gary, would that haPpen? In your exPerience
have you seen that happen?
conrad: okay . t^le beat
comfortable taking outplan right nou?
Ahrens:
conrad:
this issue athe sdecific
Yes.
Still relating it back to the tuo dcveloPments- Two or three?
Krauss: Two.
l.larren: Analogy would be on a small scale is the HarveylO'Brien ProPerty
on Lake Lucy Road uhere the Council chose to use the connection Policy in
that l,lr. Harvey's system was faiLing but t'lr. O'Brien's was f in6. l'1r. Harvey
is requiring to hook up to the sanitary seuer. It aluays haPPens' he's the
guy in the upstream end. The guy in the downstream's system is good so
even though u,e uent past Hr. o'Brien's ProPerty, he uas not required to Pay
the connection fee at this time until he either subdivides or his svstem
fails. Nou that's a two ProPerty issue but you knoul , so there was an
example where that was done. More likely if there are ProPerty o..,ners
Iooking to subdivide and develoP, the assessment policv or the Council
would most tikely look to those ProPerty ohrners to bear a Iarge Percentage
of the cost of the Person who maybe doesn't uant to assess. That's tlhere
the developers and the value of ProPerty comes into PIay to see if they can
absorb that exlra exPense. tle're going to be dealing r.rith Lhis. You've
already looked at it t,ith the Klingelhutz' ProPertv where watermain, in
order to serve that is going to have to be extended from the TH 1O1 area uP
in Chan HiIIs most likely and ue're going to have to go through the IH 212
corridor area and then past, tre called him Hr. Lyman. Thae's not correct,
bu! it's past his ProPerty and there's a case where we'II be looking at the-
policy as far as who should be Paying and brhat the policies are. The
feasibility study, the first steP in any of these assessment Projects, the
feasibility study looks so specificallv at those and establishing -guidelines as far as the policies are concerned, it is a very complex thing
and can be and those exceptions, you need Lo have that specific information
to really make sense of it.
conrad: But you're saying there can be sensitivity on the City Council's
part to not force
[^,arren: That's correct and I think there is and I thi.nk that I am, quite
honestly I'm scared of any kind of blanket statement where you say that you
will not make anybody connect. I don't think that's realistic
Planning Commission l,leeLing
October 24, L99O - Page 51
Conrad: Three developments that are in and basically built out.option is to, there's some other options also and that's to apply
The
it beyondthose three.
l.lildermuth: LIeII it looks Iike the City does that anyuay on a selectivebasis using the State guidelines.
Conrad: ft can, yeah.
Wildermuth: Based on brhat Gary sa)rs, I guess it becomes more of a mootpoint to leave it in or take it out. l,lhatever we want to do.
Conrad: Okay. How many would like to nodify that paragraph i{ith Joan'smotion or ulording change or deletion? Jim? Brian?
Batzli: I Iike the policy in our early section but then when it's finetuned in this section, for some reason I don't but I would vote to leave itas it is.
Conrad: Leave the paragraph as is?
Batzl i : As it is .
Conrad: Me too.
Emmings: I guess I've been convinced that the assessment action is onethat's probably more appropriate uith the City Council and out of theplanning realm and into the fiscal realm and ouEht to be considered thererather than here. So I guess I'd go along with the amendment.
conrad: okay, did you 9o along with the amendment Jim? Did you say yes?
tli ldermuth: Yes.
Erhart: I'm r.rith Joan.
Ahrens: fhe table's not too long after aII .
Conrad: Okay. Paul , we're deleting.
Krauss: Is it pulling out that line or the whole?
Conrad: Just the essessment line. The Lakevlew Hills and the park issue,anybody have som€ comments on uhat Craig Hertz said about Lakeview HiIIsand the park? I don't know that there's anything that w6 need to rcact toon that one.
Conrad: Let's ta] k about
Lhe oulners. t,le heard some
Timberwood and the area to the north-of the residents talk about Timberwood
[^le heard
a nd urhat
tlildermuth: The park betwaen Rice tlarsh and Lake Riley?
Conrad: Yeah.
Ahrens: No comment.
Planning Commission l'lee t i n9
October 24. 1990 - Page 52
they'd ]ike and I think re've done a fair amount of buffering around them.
The owners of the land to the north obviously want industrial . Bringing up-
several points aII of which are vaLid in their own right. Any movement to
change uhat we see there?
Ahrens: You know
northeast parcel?I, who's the property owner that
Northeast of Timberuood wasn't
tal ked about their?
Batzli: There rdas one that talked about that.
Ahrens:
parcel .
Someone talked about the area northeast of Timberwood. That big
Krauss: l,lr. Dirlum here is one.
oennis Dirlum: North and east.
Ahrens: North and east, okay. I guess I n€ver quite understood why we
moved that frontage road so far north anyuay. I think I was opposed to
that from the very beginning. I thought that the frontage road should run
closer to Timberwood and if it did, it uould provide a corner on that in
the very northeast parcel to be developed into industrial/office uhich I
think is much more appropriate Lhan residential. I mean I never liked that-
from the beginning. It brasn't something that I went along with. I think
thaL we're creating a parcel of land here that's undevelopable for a whole
lot of reasons. I would like to see that re-evaluated by the commission. -If a school does not go in there, we've created a situation that I think
that we, you know we don't want to live r^rith. I don't think it's
appropriate at aII for single family housing wiLh a four Iane highway
conr ad : l.lhat wou I d you do f or buf f er i n9?
Ahrens: I think there is,
Timber wood?
I mean first of aII, you mean to the norLh of
conrad: Yeah.
Ahrens: tJell there is buffering there now. I mean how much buffering are
we required to?
It's just typical planning betuleen differentConr ad : l.le 'r e not
uses, Iand uses we
required .
buffer .
Ahrens: I mean what I would like to see is a school there which is not our
decision to make. It's the school board's decision !o make and then to
have the parcel to the east of that be offi celi ndustr ial . I think that's a-
very natural area for office/industrial Lhere and move the frontage road
further south.
conrad: PauI, the reason we moved the frontage road to the north, what was-
the motivation?
Krauss: r.rell, if you'II recall r.,e hrent through a variety of Plans
looked originally at industrial/office up there. Then there was a
medium density near the highway h,ith single family near Timberwood
that
mix of
divided
Krauss:
Ahrens:
Planning Commission Meet i ng
October 24, t99O - Page 53
by the street. Then there ruas an option that had a corner near McGlynn's
on the west side of the creek. That was office because office ulas viewedas being somewhat more conducive to being near residential than pure
industrial uses. In a Iot of Lhose plans and if you recall, l.lar k did up
some detail plans about how that area might be ]aid out, the strip of landnorth of Timberuood, between Timberwood and TH 5 is not Lerribly deep.
l.lhen you put in a collector street and then divide up the property that waywith something north of that and something south of that, you wind up with
someurhat constrained parcels.
Ahrens: But it is more developable for the landowners to have offlce/industrial up there isn't it?
tlell uhat do you mean by more developable?
idea.It's easier to sell that
Ahrens: I'm afraid we're creating
to be able to sell their land.
a situation where somebody's not going
Conrad: Jim , hor.r are you?
t,ildermuth: tJell I think the arguments presented tonight against trying to
zone that anything residential were pretty compelling. tle heard from a
number of different property owners and the fellow adjacent along TH 5 that
said that a developer that had contacted him via letter, that he in turned
responded to had told him that they had absolutely no interest in anything
along there. From a residential standpoint. It kind of indicates that I
don't know that we have to make a decision tonight but I think that that
section north of Timberuood ought to be revisited all the u,ay across. And
I do think something should be done with the frontage road. I xould favor
seeing the frontage road probably adjacent to the Timberwood Iots. The
northern Timberwood lots maybe *ith a requirement of a fence or something
Iike Lhat .
Conrad: Remember the original intent, and there were several intents but
as we moved away from i ndustr ia l/commerc ia I that ue had there in the
beginning, the thought hias to buffer. The thought uras to change the variety
of visual impacts on TH 5.
tlildermuth: If you recall, I think I uas one of
making Lhat residential and I favored continuing
office park or Iimited to office Park.
few that.voted aga i nstto see it industrial
Ahrens3 I would 90 along with office park too.
Conrad: Br ian?
Batzli: f was
we're going to
thought we had
initially convinced that it could be residential . obviouslyget conflicting testimony based in part on the landowner. I
some pr€tty neutral people saying it could be developed
Krauss: Presumably thaL's the case, yeah.
!^lildermuth: Create the similar classification and require office.
Planning Commission t''leet i ng
october 24, 7990 - Page 54
residential and obviously the people who own the ProPerty don't feel that
uay! or at Ieast that that would bring in Lhe highest dollar invesLment on -their land- But as far as the road goes, I think if in fact a school
locaLes there, I think thaL's where you want it and I think we evaluated a
bunch of different scenarios urhich that aPpeared to me at the time to be
the best. So if r^re decided to rezone or Potential land use should no! be
residential , then I think the road has to be revisited but as far as the
residential , through a residential section, I think that's the best place
for it to go. At thiE point, unless we have I guess some comPelling
argument that residential won't. go in there and it's just a question of how
much money are h,e going to get on the land which we bought for investment
purposes, I don't knor,r that from a planning perspective that it should be
changed. I think the visual impact as well as basically a strip zone all
the way along the corridor. I don't think that's good planning so I would
not be in favor of revisiting it unless we had some sort of compelling
lestimony that says this thing is not going to go residential at all.
Emmings: I think I essentially agree with uhat Brian said. The fact thatthe road is drawn on the map here doesn't mean that that's r^,here the road
will go. If I could be the person who determines Hhat goes north of
Timberwood, I'd r.rant to see t.he school go in on the parcel that's marked
for the school and I would take that northeast corner and make it officeindustrial . Thar seems to me to be, make a lot of sense with everythingthat's around it. But for now you knou, I guess my position would be that
ure've looked at all kinds of alternatives and we're really beaten it !o
death and I don't Hant to do it anymore. I'm content urith r.,hat's here. Ithink if we study iL for anoLher 6 months ue'II probably uind up back here
anyway. That road will either stay where it is on here or it will be
changed when a specific proposal comes in to develop the property and we'lI-just have to wait and see.
Erhart: I guess I don't disagree with Joan that when it comes to reality
and that is the time when a proposal comes in, at that point we wiII sayyeah, this is a nice deveJ.opment for industrial or office or something andiL makes sense and it fits with lhe existing buffer that exists with the
Timberwood area and we'11 change it and accept thet. I think my general
feeling is in an area where r.re don't know today is that e,,e ought to put itin the comp plan as the Iowest intensity us6 that seems reasonable andthat's r,rhat we have it at. tle have it at single family residential . tle
can always increase it's intensity uhen we see some specific proposals.
l^lith Lhat I'm comfortable at leaving it Lhe way it is today. But I agree,it's a big problem and I think it's going to change when we start seeing
development proposals. I think ue're going to, r.re'lI be forced to revisitit at that time. I don't think ure have a problem just by Ieaving it the
way it is today and anticipate Lhat
conrad: If you really felt there xas a better use for it though, the timeto communicate that is right now.
Erhar!: I couldn't teII you what it is.
Conradr Okay. I'm comforLable leavins it the way it is. I've struggledwith this and I think we started out xith industrial use. I think the
neighbors obviously stress their buffering concerns and I think that's why
I urent along with r.rhat we've got. I believe if I saw a buffer j.ng
Planning Commission Heet i ng
October 24, 7990 - Page 55
opportunity and I've always thought this, I think ue've got a couplethings. I'm not really concerned with gredn space, visual impact on TH S.To a degree I'm concerned with residential access, neighborhood typeconcept off of TH 5 however. Not going through an industrial park or abusiness section- I think neighbors had some real valid points to that.
Houever, I still think if I would have seen some ability to buffer to lhetune of hundreds of feet to the north. Not a hundred but hundreds, I thinkI would have kept industrial there but we haven't addressed that issue. t^tehaven't talked about that and I think that's almost beyond our ability todo. I think thI'm saying woul
we're going toprobablv thinkgot to stay witbest use of tha
ed
dm
mak
the
hbTI
evelopers as they come in with proposals, I think what
ake Timberwood residents, and maybe what ure are saying,e Timberuood residents a little bit nervous. Theyy've fought this thing and it's one of the issues you've
ecaus€ there's obviously a disagreement here as to the
and and I think it's probably not over based on the
comprehensive plan. ft won't be over until there's zoning there and Ithink that gives the developer still the opportunity to propose somethingthat probably the local residents feel is better than much louler housingvalue properties to their north. You're going to, f,m not sure that theresidents uere clear visioncd uhen they looked at this but on the oLherhand I am committed to buffering the residents that are here. I think wecan do that and I'm in agreement u,ith what ue have on Lhe plan. If I
counted noses it's probably 4 Lo 2. It stays. ].le had extended large lot
useage comment.
Emmings: Mancino's?
Conrad: Yeah. Is there anyone that lrants to run with that thought?
Ahrens: tlith r.,hat?
Conrad: Extend the large lot concept to other areas.
Emmings: To the west of Galpin basically is uhat came utr I think.
t^lildermuth: AII we've done is create problems uith the existing large lotprogram. t,lhy do He r.,ant to extend it?
Emmings: ...extending it to the east and then w€'re talking aboutextending it to the u,est.
Erhart: I thought l,e just covered that didn't we?
Conrad: Yeah. The study areas. Anybody interested in taking the studyareas out of the study area concept and zoning it? Not zoning it. l.,e'renot doing zoning but sqggesting a different land.
Emmings: Are you talking about the Lundgren proposal now?
Conrad: No. I'm talking about the TH 41 and TH 5 study area. Not Lundgrenat this time.
Batzli: I guess I'd like to hear Paul's reaction to Tim Keane,s commentthat they're basically going to freeze the land use in those areas for thenext 5 years.
Planning Commission Heet i ng
October 24, t99O - Page 56
Krauss: I would agree that it effectively does that.
something of a non-event because that was the goal in That 's probably
essence.
Emmings: Are ue on solid ground doing that?
Krauss: I believe we are. You know Tim is an attorney. He may have adifferent opinion but I believe u,e are. You knou you Iook at our currentplan right now and you have a big blank spot because there's nothing outthere. It just assumes it's going to be farmland so in designating it as
something that we have committed to study by 1995, ue probably acceleratedthe process over what's there right now. In addition, you've alreadydirected us that the next thing you r,rant to do is after this plan's inplace is 9o into an analysis of what those study areas might be so you've
already committed to doing it so I think 1.1r. Keane's goal is probabi.y going
to be met. It's doesn't appear as though it's going to wind up r.lith aFleet Farm on thaL corner in the near future but it's not out of the realm -of possibil.ity and it's still something that's going to be studied andyou've committed to do that.
Emmings: tJe've got F]eet Farmthe north end. Do we have anythe south?
on the corner and
simi lar pressures this Lundgren proposal
on the 1995 study area
on
to
Krauss: No, and that's quite different. There's a physical constraint inthe sLudy area to the south. tle physically can't serve it. There's no way
we can provide access to the sanitary sewer system at this point in time.
Emmings: So we study the nor thcan
be
one
the
first.
fringe business distr ict?Conrad: That'd after b,e studi ed
Conrad: So you're talking r.,est of ?
BatzIi: Yeah
Erhart: Are you looking for comments on this? It sounds a littlerevolutionary but I guess in thinking this whole thing over the last few
weeks, and again in listening tonighL I guess I would propose and supportthat we actually extend the 1995 study area to include aII the property
west of Galpin BIvd. and south of TH 5 for a number of reasons. One isthat I think, I have a sense that we're just a little.blt too ambitious inthe amount of land we're trying to put in the MUSA line today. I know the -
numbers aII add up and the projections and everything but I sense h,e'rejust a little bit too ambitious. Two is that we don't have any idea howue're going to serve that with seuer. It's a long uays from the Lake AnnInterceptor and we've got 1,OOO ecres Hhich is closer to the existing Lake
Ann Interceptor that r.,e can use the next 10 years figuring out how to servethat with seurer. I just don't know why we're concerning ourselves withthat area down there at this point uhen it makes more sense to throw it inwith the 1995 study area. It seems to align itself with that area. Lastlyis that I don't know, I'm not sure u,e know trhat that area is bes! servedat. It may be that commercial is a better use for the southeast section of-that intersection of TH 41 and TH 5. So that's my feelings about thaL. Ithink I expressed Lhat one Lime early on in this process that I felt thatthat part of it ought to be Ieft out too
Planning Commission l,,leet i n9
October 24, t99O - Page 57
Erhart: tlest of Galpin, south of TH 5. The other areas are logica] to me.
Here you've got a large residential that €ssentially is served urith gravity
flow. Although I do agree that the Highland or Lundgren thing ought to beconsidered. That makes some good sense. So u,e have a general area ofresidential that could be served Nith gravity flow and you have your
industrial uhich follows the railroad tracks and merges with the industrialpark in Chaska. To me this part is still so far out from the existing
seu,er system and it's not clear to me that we have Lo add that much land inat this time.
Emmi ngs :
ar eas .
But it's industrial to the south and to the ulest of a]l those
Erhart: I'm not
tlhat are
saying it won't
the potentia I?
be i ndustr ial .
Paul, do you uant to respond Co that atConrad:
alI?
Krauss: Okay. As I indicated earlier, Ne're proposing to bring 2,600acres inlo the l.tUSA line. tlhen you eliminate the existing Timbert^rood typesituations. t^lhen you eliminate Carlson and Prince under the assumptionthey're not going to be available. tlhen you eliminate lakes and wetlandsand future park acquisitions, you're down to 1,5OO acres of ground that,spotentially developable if individual property owners make the decision inthat timeframe to do that and |re can't, we obviously don'L believe thatthat's going to happen uniformily. From a residential standpoint, we,re
convinced that we've undervalued or undershot the amount of residentialIand that probably could justifiably be made available in the next 10years. If you take our 4.75 growth rate and bring that back to how manyacres we need, I forget the exact number but we're shorting ourselves. If
we drop the area west of Galpin, south of TH 5 from the plan, moreimportantly you're eliminating probably about 602 of Lhe additionaI
IOP ]and which we're currently out of in the community and that was one ofthe goals Has to provide for a reasonable amount of growth in employment
and that chunk of land is approximately 2OO acres? I think Mr. Shardlow's
company owns 160 and I think there's another 40 across the way by theArboretum. It's a significant amount of grhat we had allocated for the next10 to 15 years of industrial office grouth. thirdly, and I don't say thisas a sort of a threat lurking there in the background but it can't be
denied that some of these property owners have already apparently talked tothe City of Chaska about annexation should they be able to serve thesepropert.ies and we not. [.le've already lost one parcel over there based onthat rationale. To the best of my knowledge I've been led to believe that
some of the property ohrners that Here here tonighL have already madeinquiries to the City of Chaska along those lines. I guess I'II leave youtlith those items.
Emmings: I'm not.
BatzIi: No.
Conrad: Anybody interested in supporting Tim's, not a motion but Tim'srequest to broaden that study area?
Planning Commission l.leet i n9
October 24, 1990 - Page 58
tJi Idermuth:
was .
Conrad: It Has, as we understood it, it was basically to take thatfrontage road. l.,lhere you see the school? Okay, and route Lhat fronLageroad, keep the frontage road north es it goes to the wesL. Keep it west
and then bring it down gradually to the souLh and it would carve out aparcel that she said could be industrial or commercial .
Conrad: I don't think it realIy serves any purpose right now. Planning
wise or property uise. Anybody else on that issue? Lets's go to theintersection of Galpin and TH 5 to the east. Comments on not residentialbut more commercial use. Anybody sensitive to revisiting that issue?
Kr auss :
that .
1.,,e I I I can only indicate what I thought your direction uras on
Erhart: It !,as my idea right?
Krauss: I don't recall who's it was but ue believed
neighborhood commercial site sj.nce it was physically
to the north. There's a line of trees and I believe
how many acres was that?
that it was a good
removed from the areaa lou area and l.lar k ,
Koegler: l.tell the total is somewhere around 13 I believe but bearthere's the park...to divide in there and there would be frontage
carving through here so the net is going to be smaller than that.
in mind
r oad
conrad: tlho directed that?
Erhart: Let's hang him.
conrad: I'm tr),ing to think of the situation. It was Emmi ngs .
someone coming in and saying thatEmmings: No it wasn't. I remember
because it was ]ow.
Conrad: l.le neither. Hary Harrington brought up some issues. I think the
one that ue paid attention Lo, or at l€ast I did, rerouting the access road-a little bit to the northwest to create a pocket of land for commercial orindustrial use. Anybody r,rant to follow that up?
I guess I didn't foll.ow, I don't understand nhat that proposal-
Emmings: That's very similar to Joan's, Hy response would be similar to
my response to Joan's to move this further south. This is real fine tuning-
and then I think it would be better done r.rith, I don't need you here. Idon't think we ought to do that. That fine tuning can be done withspecific plans and I think the plan we've got is alright
Erhart: l.,hy did we take it, we had it commercial at one time. tlhy did we -
move it?
Krauss: Yeah. There's probably stiIL a viable site left. tlhen you
directed us to remove that I believe you uere reacting to a lot of inputthat you had gotten that there uas a desire not to have commercial intrude
into residential neighborhoods and xe were directed to remove it.
Planning Commission Meeting
October 24, 7990 - Page 59
Krauss:said itIt's at
There ulas the fellow from the Arboretum t,as one of theuas a low, wet site as I recall but you know, frankly itthe grade of the highuray adjacent to the intersection.
people uhois not.
Conrad: So you haveto put it back in?
taken Lhe commercial out, designation. Anybody wanL
Erhart: Is
commercia I ?
it staff's continued recommendation to make that corner
Kraussr You know there's so much in the comp plan and things that we feelstrongly about and things Lhat we feel are a good idea but don't feelstrongrv about. r guess this farls into the rater category. l.te originallyProposed it as a neighborhood commercial site. tle think it's reasonable tothink rhat neighborhood scare services belong someplace betNeen downtownand victoria. That seemed to be a good place to do it where it would bebuffered from adjoining neighborhoods. On the other hand, you know it'snot a Iife and death issue.
conrad: Any takers on that?
t^Jildermuth: I agree with paul . I mean it's r.rhat, rightIarger study area. Just leave it the Nay it is.adjacent to the
put it back or leave it the way it is?
is.
Conrad:
Krauss:
Conrad:
Leave it?
By I eave
No, Ieave
it do you mean
it the way it
Emmings: Leave it orange.
conrad: r think that's an area ue sure could be sensitive to in the futurehowever. If there's a need. The Lundgren proposal as part of the 1995studv area. Paur you felt that there's some rationale for consideringthat .
Krauss: Yes sir r do. As r say, h,e bJent into this process knor.ring, welru,e come out of this process knoL,ing t.hat we're probably shorting ourselveson residential land for the next, for the duration of the pran. As timegoes on we become more and more convinced that at least if we take whatpeople are telring us on face varue, a rot of the land that h,e're assumingis potentiallv available for development uron't be. rt,s hard to envisionthe i'lancino's having their property developed in the next'10 years arthoughthat's in that categorv of potentially viable land. r think ue can justiiyan increment to the residential cLassification of the nagnitude thatthev're requesting. r also think that having seen the layout that theyprepared, that it seemed emminently reasonable_ The dividins line therefranklv r.ias not given a whole lot of thousht because that,s where the 19goplan had it and it was originallv the 1990 MUSA and it's now the year 2ooo,tJe didn'E pay a uhole lot of attention as to uhat was actually on Lheground there. trhen you look at the Lundgren p1an, it makes sense from twostandpoints. rt uses the wetrand which is realty the effective barrierthat shourd separate whatever happens with TH 5 from the residentiar area_rt also provides us r.rit.h the potential of building that street through
PIanning Commission M€et i ng
October 24, ].99O - Page 50
there that we believe we need to
of discussions trith the properEy
and I believe they're interested
the timeframe of Lhe plan and it
I would support his conclusion-
handle the growth- I've also had a number
owner immediately to the east ' the Song's
in doing something with Lheir ProPerty in -
realIy fits together quite welI. So ves,
conrad: Is there anvbodv with a difference of opinion?
Emmings: At first blush, and we only got the Plan yesterday to ]ook at and-
that's my reservation. At first glance it aPPears to be a very good PIan.
I don't think, I wasn't aware of the extent of that wetland in there. It
doesn't show up on our maps. It seems to be a real natural dividing Iine
and the subdivision looks like a good one but I iust don't think we've had -
time enough to consider it. Getting that road through there I thought ulas
a big plus to the plan so it may be, I guess mv Position on it xould be
that ue just haven't had the time to look at it or evaluate it but mv
concern would be that if we don't droP the HUSA line down now to say 9o
through the center of that, then we'd have to 9o back Co the Met Council
right after ue get done. Let's say they buy what ure're trying to seII them-
here and we've got to come right back with a little addition right off the
bat. I don't know how that's going to go. How that's going to Plav so it
might be, it might make some sense looking at it from that asPect to do it
now. I don't know.
conrad: I think my thought would be to do it' to direct staff to
those boundaries before this gets to city Council to review. To
To look for the pros and cons and do a thorough job of analysis.
c ha nge
review ir.-
Emmings: Is that in fact a uetland?
Krauss: Yes,
Emmings: Okay. It iust doesn't show up on our maP- It's big to not show -
up on our maP.
Krauss: It's quite a signif icant one, Yes. l.lell, a Iot of them don't shot'J-
uP on our maP .
Emmings: I know but this is a real big one you know and that's a lot of'
Hildermuth: I asree. I think it ought to be included in this studv- In
the plan. It would reduce the 1995 studv area then right?
conrad: YGs.
Nildermuth: By roughly 35 acres
conrad: It makes sense that thaL's the right long term use. From the way
the natural boundaries ar6, I think the boundaries for the study area h,ere,
weII a little bit arbitrary and here we have some natural features to go by-
that are going to dictate how that study area gets develoPed so I think
Logically on the surface it certainly makes sense. I think steve suggested
that there's got to be a little bit more thought Put to it but on the
surface I think it makes sense. Brian?
Planning Commission MeelingOctober 24, 7990 - Page 61
Batzli: tJell I guess I echo Steve's sentiments that I don't know because Ihaven't been out to the site. I haven't really Iooked at it. It seems to
me that obviously, and the particular applicant apologized for not bringinsit to our aitention earlier but it seems like a last minute adjustmentuhich I don't knou, whether it's warranted or not.
Conrad: PauI, r.lhen you say that we have undershot the markIand for new residentiaL use, why are you saying that?
for allocating
Krauss: Do you have a Lable that. shows that Hark?
Kr auss :
go ahead,a matter
hol idays .
November .
l.,lr . Chairman, I'm not sure of the €xacL date. If you told us tomake some changes and send it to the Council tonisht, it's reallyof scheduling. They only have, ue're missing meetings because ofI've got to believe it wouldn't get to them before the end of
conrad: Not that r think we shourd or h,hatever. r just uanted to clarifythaL. rs there a direction that vou forks would Iike to take in terms ofgetting it out of our hands? Reviewing a few more issues? I think wereally have to get out of the building right now. tJhen the lights go out.
Erhart: I think the Lundgren issue is the last issue isn't it?
Koegler: Mr. Chairman, if I might address that. I think consistently inthis plan you've gone after the reasonable test and ue went through thatuhen we tal ked about all the population household projections and ended upwith urhat you labeled as the CiLy,s... Those extrapulated to Ehe plan calIfor a total land reguirement for residential of 1,258 acres. Now bear inmind what we've always used in this pranning process for the last 10 yearsas has the Met Council is a 1.5 factor or SO? overage to allow for mar ketflexibilitv to take care of the Prince properties and some of the othersthat NiII not develop - tle stress that that's important and the i.let councilhas asreed with that consistently. That bumps that number to close Lo1,9oo acres that are required. l^le're presentl.y showing about 1,41o so thisaddition of a net of roughlv 70 or 90, whatever it was, is certainly stirrsupportive and I think still passes that reasonable test quite easily.
conrad: TelI me PauI what the process is. r don't know what they,re goingto do in terms of closing the school down. The question nour is, Ehat'syour next step as a staff? r haven't opened it up for other comments otherthan the ones that I've brought up but do we need, and I guess
commissioners you can tell me too, do you brant !o revieu this and haveother comments at our next meeting or ulhenever lJe can deal with it? Do youu,ant to forward it on to the City Council and I would say if we did Lhat,when would this reach them paul?
conrad: So for us to revieur this at a next meeting or whenever we can maynot delay them reviewing it?
l.larren: Council meetings first and third Hondays in November.
Krauss: It wouldn't be a significant delay, no.
Planning Commission Heet i n9
October 24, 7990 - Page 62
conrad: l.lell it's the last one that I brought uP and that doesn't deal
with anything eIse.
Emmings: You've hit on all of mine. I think you ought to hire a
professional proof reader to go over this text. There's words missing.
And I'm not, well I am being critical I guess but I think after you uork on-
something this Iong, you can't really read it anymore. I think vou ought
to hire'someone to read it and go through it so that, it's Pretty bad-
Eatzli: I had a minor issue that Eric Rivkin brought up on the DNR ourned
land. Is the parcels that he's talking about significant enough to show uP
on our map? Should they be green or are these things iust small that
wouldn 't show up anyb,ay?
Koegler: It's a fairly small Piece.It can be added as a green dot on the
not a big factor.
Batzli: I understand that but
concerned about it and I raise
board and this is the way that
Conrad: Okay. Steve you
including it.
l"! i Idermuth: Ladd?
conrad: Yeah.
tjiIdermuth: Xaybe you
any type of develoPment
vet .
Iooked at. . .entirely wetland.
t,e certainly can do that. It's-Lle 'v6
maP .
Conrad: Okay, there's really only one outstanding issue that we're kind of
surrounding here. Joan, were you in favor of t.hat?
Ahrens: I don't know. I can't say one way or the other right now.
tlildermuth: I got the Packet last night and read it through and ves -
conrad: Brian, you're sort of saying hey. I don't know?
Batzli: Correct.
Conrad: And !.rhat would you Iike to have haPPen?
Batzli 3 t^lell the thing that troubles me is that there nav be other tvPe
situations urhich may have arisen in the city and that we may or may not
have reviewed if people had been given the same chance. I'm concerned that
dealing with it at this late moment, l ]ove Lundgren Brothers develoPments
but it appears to me lhat we may be showing some sort of favoritism to this-
particular Project and I don't know the exact reason why.
Conrad: The reason that staff relaLed
be requesti ng.
was that ue're under whaL ue should
we've seen one proPosal and I'm just ' I'm
it so Lhat ue can at least all be totallv on-
lre hrant to 90.
were in favor of. Tim, you were in favor of
just ought to make the point that vou know, before
comes through, Lhere's a lot of stePs !o 9o Lhrough
Planning Commission Heet i ng
October 24, 799fU^ - Page 63
Emmings: Yeah, we're not approving this subdivision.
Batzli: I realize that.
l.lildermuth: It's just some rou€rh sketching from a plan standpoint.
Ahrens: But that's removing a lot of land from the study area.
Conrad: A lot of it is undevelopable.
Ahrens: I mean there must. have been some reason ue had that in there,
Emmings: l.te're precluding the possibility of that subdivision if we don'tinclude that Iand now I think and I don,t urant to do that so I'd move the
HUSA line down and f'd move this uhole thing onto.
Conrad: oo you Hant to dish no staff revieu or are you comfortabledirecting staff to do that?
Emmings; r'm comfortabre on the basis of the fact that we noN know tha!there's a natural feature there lhat provides a better dividins Iine thatthe MUSA shourd run through rather than just running it on lot lines.
Conrad: okay. And Tim?
Erhart: Exactly. There's nothan it's Iines that Here madesomething and it makes sense.
rationale for theup 10 years ago.
Iines
I NIS
that areat least there
we 've
ot her
90t
conrad: So what would you like tocomfortable letting staff move the
Erhart: Yep. Yep.
Conrad: okay. I think thereline so Iet's move the line.
do in terms of our analysis? Are youIine based on the proposal?
in favor at
else?
this time of moving the
Emmi ngs: Are bre
conrad: tle have
going to move
t hat
are more
Anythi ns
this on
mot ion -
Emmings: Are you
Conrad ! Hait. Is
Emmings: I'II move that the planning
Comprehensive PIan with the one changeboundary of lhe 199s study area on the
down to run through the middle of thethe maps.
to City Counci I ?
Commission recommend approval of theue discussed with the northerncorner of TH 41 and TH 5 being movedwetland that's been now identified on
to ma ke
r eady?
there anything else? Okay, make the motion please.
Conrad:Is there a second?
I 'I I second that.Erhart:
Planning Commission Heeting
October 24, l99O - Page 64
conrad: An)z discussion?
Batzli: I guess I'd just like to go on record that I'd }ike staff to Iook ''i
at that veri carefully. I
conrad: I think that's another, yeah me too tyPe of comment. And uould
expect that if something, r'd like to see the analysis that vou do on itprior to the City Council seeing it. Anymore discussion?
Emmings moved, Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of the ComPrehensive PIan rith the one change that the northern
boundary of the 1995 stud), area on thc corner of TH 41 and TH 5 be moved
down to run through the niddle of the uetland that's been now identified on-
the maps. AII voted in favor and the notion carried unanimouslv.
Conrad: I thank you all who are here and stayed urith us. I'm imPressed.
That's kind of nice of you to do that. l.le lost a fetl PeoPle out there buts
thank you. Stay in touch with the neusPaPers because it uill let you know
urhen this goes to City Council. City Council has the last sav and there
will be changes. Then beyond that Metro Council has the last sav. Thank
you .
Batzli moved, tlildermuth seconded to adjourn the meeting- All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The neeting ras adjourned at 11:15 P-m--
Submitted by Paul Kr auss
Planning D irecLor
Prepared by Nann OPheim
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COI'}IISSION
REGULAR }IEETING
NOVEHBER 7, L99O
Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7:38 .p.m..
}IEHBERS PRESENT: steve Emmings, Ladd conrad, Brian Batzli, Jim Nildermuthand Joan Ahrens
|iEi{BERS ABSENT: Tim Erhart and Annette Ellson
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director; Jo Ann Olsen, SeniorPlanner; and Sharmin AI-Jaff, Planner 1
PT'BLIC }EARING:
SITE PLAN AMENDI,IENT FOR I{CGLYNN BAKERIES TO ADD A 52.972 SOUARE FOOT
IANUEACTURING ADDITIoN AND A 3-600 REFRIGERATIoN EoUIPIIENT AporTIoN To THEEXISTING BUILDING ON PROPERTY ZONED IOP AND LOCATED AT ONE I{CGLYNN DFI:IVE.
Jo Ann olsen presented the staff report on this item.
Krauss: There's one additional thing r might add too. The applicant isattempting to get the buildins in the ground expeditiously. They have arapid work schedule and we tried to be accommodating with that. Uhat theywourd like to do is be able to put the foundation of the building in early.tlhat ue've come to accept, if you,re nilling, is basically this. If therevieu goes through smoothly tonight for their apprication, we discussedthis with the City Council on Monday. The City Council., assumingevervthing goes werl here, is willins to allow staff to issue a foundationPermit which would be totally at the builder's risk should the council comeup with new conditions but it r.lould allow them to get into the groundstarting nex.t week. The Council will have final say on the site planitself. tle'II get it on the next meeting but because of the schedules thatwe have coming up, because of the holidays, they would lose sufficient timethat thev probabrv wouldn't be able to get the building started this week.Again, this is a]l contingent upon a successful review here tonisht but theCounci I ulas r^ri I I i ng to go along (ith thaL .
conrad: Jo Ann, what's the new buirdins versus the ord buirding on that?
Olsen: The gray area. . .
Conrad: Okay, good. Thanks. l.le,ll open it up for comment. If peoplefrom l.'lcGlynn urould like to make a presentation, we'd start it off withthat .
scott Harri: Thank vou Hr. chairman. Thank you staff. Hy name is ScottHarri and I,m from van ooren, Hazard, Stalrings. our role in the projecthas been to prepare the submittal that you have bcfore you in part and asco-authored with the applicant,s archi tects , . Setter , Leach & Lindstrom.t^lith us tonight is, on mv far right is Dan HcGlynn xith McGrynn Bakeries.Dick Erickson rrith setter, Leach & Lindstrom and Tom Roberts b,ith c.F.Haglund. c-F. Hagl.und is the construction manager and contractor forl.lcGlynn Eakeries on the project and as I mentioned, Setter, Leach is doingthe architecturer uork on the project. l.le'd like to show you, as staffhad mentioned... If you look at this top elevation you wiII see the treesand plantings that r.re uould be proposing as an alternate means to
Planning
November
Commission l.leeti ng7, L99O - Pase 2
satisfy...as staff had indicated earlier... tlhat Ne're proposing on thisthing in order to bring doun the height and massing.of the building itselfis we're proposing I guess an alternating section of evergreen trees that
would be approximalely 14 to 15 foot in heisht interspersed uith deciduous -trees which r.rould lend I guess year round, a variety of color to that wall
and hopefully reduce the long distance type of concerns Lhat staff had
indicated. SecondLy, what we wou.ld ]ike to do and the other thing that Jo
Ann had mentioned was as part of the project evolving beyond the submiLtal ,-
r.,hat you've seen there is the architectural development of a smoking
shelter and outdoor break area. To that extent the contractor would like
to build most of the surface improvements out there this fall if possible, -if weather permits. Thus we've moved ahead uith some of the design and I
would like to have Dick Erickson I guess make a very brief presentation on
urhat that feature looks Iike. At this point we've got some architectural
drawings, so Dick? And then following ulhat, he's got some PersPectives and
then I have a site plan that shows what the surface improvements and
Iandscaping would be in that area.
Dick Erickson: On.the existing south side of the office, this is a thumb
nail sketch of the off ice...in the background. l^le're deve]oPing...and
canopy and under the canopy a smaII enclosed shelter where emPloyees can
come out at their break and have a cigarette. This shelter is there
because after relativeIy...It's actually and enclosed glass area not too
dissimilar to a city bus stop. The canopy will Project out...across the
canopy as a roof elemen! and then the glass portion of the enclosure would
be...co]or on the first and second ]evel and in the corner of the office
here there are two major...and ue're using that same idea... I iust wantad
to give you an orientation. This canopy area again is right by this
triangular area shown on the plan right here. Sittins in this I guess oPen
space. l,Jhat ure have proposed for that area is, in lhat nitch right there'
the canopy area...right here the main entrance to a large employee
Iockers...through this sider.ralk system right in here. There's an outdoorpatio area here with picnic tables on it surrounded by some Iandscaping.
There'd be a large berm that ure had built over here to somewhat screen this
lower level break room and lunch room from the parking Io! here so the
views are somewhat protected from the lower level of the building so this
sidewalk system over here wiII just be kind of a...suPPlements the Packet
and submittal and comments thaL staff has made. I think Dan would Iike to
say a f eur words.
Dan McGlynn: Good evening. I'm Dan l.lcclynn from l,lcGlynn Bakeries. I iust-
uranted to come up and say hello. f haven't been to a Council meeting yet
or Planning Commission yet. My brother's been handLing most of that. IjusL urant to say that ue've really enjoyed our move in to Chanhasson.
Because of the way Lre h,ere structured in Eden Prairie' Ne brere forced to
Iook for other places to build. Chanhassen has been a great sPot so far
and everyone with the city has been more than accommodating for us to grobr
as fast as we'd like to. We're experiencing some very rapid glrowth in our -company. Hoving in just in December for the offices and a little bit of
production in November, it's amazing to us that we're already asking to add
on to our building since we ueren't expected to need that sPace for another-
5 years and it Iooks like we'II use the sPace very quickly with our fast
growth but we've now got over 3OO employees. It's become a major camPus
for us and ue really appreciate uhat the City's done to accommodate us in
being able to ma.intain our fast grorth because without that, ue'd be in
trouble in our industry. Thank you. If you have any questions, r.le're allhere and we'd be happy to ans!.,er anyLhing
Conrad: tJe might have some later. Thanksin town. Okay, we'II open it up for oLherother comments on this particular project?
Dan. Good to have your companypublic comments. Are there any
Batzli moved, l.lildermuth scconded to clos. the public hearing. AII votedin favor and the motion carried- Thc public hearing nas closed.
Ahrens: I have a question about the east side of the buildins.the side that faces Audubon Road? Risht? And that's going tothe new building?
Nor,J that 'sbe part of
Olsen: Yeah, there is a portion. There will be an
side of the
east wall.
Ahrens: What is the landscaping on that bui ldi ns?
olsen: They're really not changing uhat's already there. There's e prettyextensive berm. A berm for visual on Audubon and that has some landscapingon it. . .so we've screened that fairly wel] . . .
Ahrens: And what about the north side of the building?
olsen: Again you've got the berming and landscaping. This is uherethey're going to be doing the grading. ...elevation there that wiII befLattened out and in the future there wiII be other industrial. . .
Ahrens: I guess I've aluays approached that building from the north andthat, it's just a stark white wall is my first approach to that buildingand I've always.
Ahrens: Okay- I'm glad to.see the landscaping plan because the buildingneeds it. I don't have any other qucstions at this time. The staff reportis pretty complete.
Conrad: I know you're over there Jim. Anything?
l.JiLdermuth: I agree. The staff report is very well done. It looks likeall the bases have been covered. I have just two questions. Is there anyplan for noise abatement on the refrigeration equipment or isn't that goingto contribute significantly to the outside ambicnt noise Ievel? Oo you
have existing outside refrigeration equipment nobr?
Dick Er ickson:
nou for a year
The existing refrigeration equipment has beenand a half about. Is ]ocated behind a precast.in operation
screen waI I
Planning Commission l.leet i ng
November 7, 7990 - Page 3
Krauss: That's true but what we've found in working with this is thebuilding uas designed to be modular. It's expandable and it's expandablein a serjes of phases. The southern buildins wall that we're working with
now is the ultimate expansion of that buildins so ue,re putting in thepermanent landscaping there. The north buitdine warr will have some futureexpansions that are programmed and come later. And as we vieul it, as thatultimate wall is expanded to it's final location, ue'lI have the similartreatment incorporated at that time.
Pla nni ng
November
Commission Meeti ng7, l99O - Page 4
right here... As a part of this refrigeration equipment for the expansionthat b,e're proposing now, ure're adding additional precast concrete screenwaII right here that wii.l be the same appearance as this one only Lherewill be initially a funnel out to the...primarily to keep air...but thebulk of this refrigeration wiII come off of this area to serve future
expansion of the freezer orhich wiII help in this general area. As far asnoise, I r.rouldn't expect there'd be much change from what you've been
experiencing for the Iast year.
t^,ildermuth: This is what, an ammonia system?
Dick Erickson: Yes.
l.lildermuth: So it's basically just the turbine noise?
Dick Erickson: Yes.
tJildermuth: Okay. One of the things that I guess, one of the comments
I've heard about Lhe operation in general is thaL from time to time there's
an odor in the area. Are there any plans to address that or will thiscontribute to that? Strong vanilla smell is r.,hat I've heard
Dan McGlynn: There is some odor I suppose associated with our business in -that the air velocity going through our ovens and going up stacks and uhat -not does give out baked products smel]. l.le have the same situation in EdenPrairie. In Eden Prairie it's a Iittle different in thaL McDonald's is
across the street and hopefully we're cancelling some of those smells. I'mnot real good at iL because I don't smell it anymore but I think it's oneof the, in this particular plan because the product, ure're baking mostly
muffins and Iight pastry products. The odors given off are much more mild
than say strong cinnamon based or onion based products that He have in the -Eden Prairie facility. I don't see the current smells as changing very
much and with the capacity that we're building onto the plant nou, therewiII be additional lines to r.lhat we have but I don't see it increasingdramatically at this poi nt.
tli.Idermuth: There wiII be additional stacks though? Vent stacks?
Dan HcGl.ynn: There r.riII be, yes. This particular expansion is mostly for
baked product. If and urhen we expand the north side of the building, thatis unbaked product and there'd be no odors associated with that. And just
to touch on the noise issue. The main engine room for the ammonia aystem
is enclosed in the buildins and that is rather noisey but it's containeduithin it and the only thing outside is the cooling towers urhich just have
Iarge fans on them
l.rildermuth: Yes - That's typical of an ammonia system. Paul , thank you.
Has there been any comment from the neighbors?
Krauss: The only comment that we ever received directly on an odor issue
uas early last spring uhen we r.rere having some of the informational
meetings on the comp Plan. At that time there was somebody, and I don't
recalI who, but somebody from Timberwood b,ho mentioned that they found an
odor objectionable. They r.,eren't sure whether it was coming from McGIynn's
or from the Pies facility in Chaska and as I recall. they also raised a
PIa nni ng
November
Commission l.1eet i ng7, 1990 - Page 5
concern about some lightinS. Unshielded IightinS that r.ras directed towardstheir neighborhood. t^le addressed the Iightins. tte .asked the project
manager to change those fixtures which they did and h,e've not since heardanything on the odor.
l.lildermuth: Okay. It looks like a good project to me and it's nice to see
somebody doing welI enough to expand.
Batzli: I think I just have two questions. I like the addition and thereport and I Iike the landscaping here. I think that'd be attractive andit's nice to see some break in the evergreens. Hy question tJas, there's adifference in plans and there's a large dollar figure in your
administrative approval . The question is, they've given a letter of creditto the City apparently to cover the cost of the berming and landscaping.
Does that change at all with what they've got here?
Krauss: There's 9oin9 to be an increment, yes.
Olsen: Another letter of credit.
BatzLir An additional letter of crediL? But that's in addition to the
IE6,OOO.OO one is it not?
Krauss: The one that we have now covers the parking lot instal.lation andthe buffer of .that- t^,hat we're looking at to get to now is the incrementalcost of Iandscaping that's being proposed specifically around the building
ProPer -
Olsen: ft's an addition to the !E6,OOO.OO though too for this part of theproject. Hhat you're looking from Dave's memo?
Batzli: Right. But there was in the administrative approval u,e got aletter of credit for $211,OOO.OO?
Olsen: They essentially covered the cost
Batzli: Right. And so Lhere would be anthat? okay. Do ure need to do something
No. It's in the zoning ordinance
of all of that.
additional letter of credit afterin our approval?
now. It's done as a matter ofKrauss:
routine.
Batz]i: okay. And there Hasthe grading dated a different
changed at al] in our plans?
apparently some plans submitted todate than the plans ue have. l^lere
you for
those
Krauss: No.
BatzIi: okay. Those Nere the only tb,o questions.
anything additional . l.lhat's here seems reasonableEmmings: I don 'Lto me.
have
Conrad: The landscape plan here that was presented tonight, that fa]Is on
the south side of the parking lot?
PIanning
November
Commission Heet i ng7, f99O - Page 6
OIsen: The bui Idi ng.
Conrad: Of the buildins?
Olsen: Right up against the wall-
Conrad: So the Iandscape plan that I see in the packet, this is inaddition to Hhat, the landscape plan in the packet so r.re really havesheltered, okay. There are no berms on the south side of the parking lot.I don't know what additi.on has been put on the parking lot. How much has
been put there? Are r.re talking bis addition or small addition? I don't
have a clue.
Olsen: On the parking lot side?
Conrad: Yes .
Olsen: Yeah. It's kind of see r.,here the orisinal one ended here?
conrad: Yeah. okay, to the Nest. Okay, show me the new stuff. Hhat,snew? AII that? Okay.
O]sen: And the berming, it just drops right down. Doh,n into that littlearea.
Conrad: Right. So we haven't asked for berming. l^le've asked for trees.
OIsen: Yeah, Iots of landscaping.
Krauss: There is heavy berming and Landscaping however along the h,estelevation of the parking lot which faces Timberulood.
Conrad: And that's where I was going. Getting there kind of slow but.
olsen: Almost naturally right now.
Conrad: So this is probably our only time that h,e can really get into anykind of concern with the r.resterly side right now?
O]sen: They'1I be coming in for an expansion.
Conrad: To the Hest?
Olsen: l,Jho]e new building..-so there's a potential that there uill beanother buildins expansion to the west where at that point you r.rould evenlandscape further.
Conrad: Bu! is the landscape plan to the west of the parking ]ot, is thatthe final landscape plan Lhat will have their. The building may expand tothe b,est but how about to the west of the parking lot? Are He ]ooking atthe final landscape plan for the shielding of the parking Lot?
Olsen: Of the parking lot?
PIanni n9
November
Commission l.1eet i n97, 7990 - Page 7
Conrad:
that?
Hore than likely. And that is right now trees and berm or what is
Krauss: There's an extensive
uhat Scott , 10 feet?
change in elevation. ft's on the order of
Olsen: You can kind of
not.t we're not - - .
see...and this is h,here there's expansion. Right
Scott Harri: Right now this property slopes up on this side up here to alarge plateau area and then slopes down about 10 feet from the elevation ofthis proposed parking ]ot over here. And then the trees would be inbetweenthe parking Iot and this plateau area.
Conrad: Okay, that helps. t^le're aIl comfortable?
t^lildermuth: I particul.arly Iike the south treatment.
Conrad: Jim, you brought up a good point on the smell. I've never thoughtabout that but it sounds Iike ure've had one complaint.
Emmings: I'd have a comment on that. You may be getting a lot morecomplaints because I remember I read an article, this has to be 2O yearsago. Someone had done some studies in areas where they had bakeries in
Europe and there were bakery smells in the air and they found that thebirth rates around there were higher than they were and I think maybe ueshould warn the Timberwood people. And I'm slad I don't live there.
Emmings: No,
mil itary.it was serious. That sLudy was probably funded by the
tlildermuth: I'd make a motion that the Planning Commission recommendapproval of site plan *88-3 and the conditional use permit *88-2 for
l'lcGlynn Bakeries for expansion to e production plant erea and refrigeration
equipment room as shown on the site plan dated October 15, 1990 tith thefollowing conditions l thru 6. l,Jith the understanding that the letter ofcredit and cash escroh, amounts urould be increased commensurate with.
Krauss: Could we modify condition number l which implies that we weregoing with an architectural approach to the south elevation. That's since
been surplanted by the Iandscaping plan. Tlfat the.approval should be
amended to include the landscaping along the south elevation that u,aspresented to the Planning Commission this evening.
Wildermuth: So incorporated.
Conrad: hlhere do you want to incorPorate that?
Olsen: In condition 1.
Conrad: Okay.
Conrad: l.las there a serious side to that article?
Conrad: Anything else? Is there a motion?
PI anni n9
November
Commission Heeti ns7, !99O - Page I
PUBLIC HEARING:
TONTNG OR D INANCE AMF NDI.IENT TO A|.FNrt sFaytfl,N )6-)Aa. ()1 eFaatralrnNAr
BEACHLOTS TO ALLOLI PORTABLE CHEMI TOILETS ON RECREATIONAL BEACHLOTS.
Public Present:
Name Address
Gene & Nancy Chr istensenPresident, Minnewashta Cree k
Homeourners Association
Sharmin AI-Jaff presented the staff report. chairman Conrad called thepublic hearing to order.
Nancy Christensen: I'm Nancy Christensen and I Iive at 6561 Kirkwood
Circle and I'm the President of th6 Minnewashta Creek Homeowners
Association and we earlier requested this variance and |rhatever else ule
asked for. I've been working on this thing for a long time and I guess
l.lildermuth: Probably replacing the architectural features as landscaping
features
Batzli: second
Uildermuth moved, Batzli aecond€d that the Planning Cooatission rccommcnd
approval of Site PIan t88-3 snd Conditional Usc Pernit *88-2 for itcGlynn
Bakeries for expansion to the production plant rrca lnd rcfrigeration
cquipmcnt room as shonn on the site plan dated October 16' 1990 tlith the
folloring conditions:
1- The applicant provide staff with a plan indicating how the landscapins ]
features of the office uiII be extended to the Production Plant
addi t i on
2- The applicant shall Provide additional Colorado Green Spruce along the
south entrance Ieading into the southerly Parking Iot.
3. Comply nith conditions of approval of staff's administrative aPProvaI
of the parkins Iot expansion ( Attachment ).
4- The applicnat shall obtain and comply with aII conditions of the t
tlatershed Oistr ict permit
5. Working hours shall be between 7:OO a.m. and 6:00 p.m. tlonday through
Saturday with no work allowed on Sundays and holidays.
6. To guarantee compliance oith the conditions of approval , the applicant -shall furnish the City with a Ietter of credit from a bank or a cash
escrour in the amount of !E6,OOO.OO. The security !",iII be released bythe City upon satisfaction that the conditions contained herein have
been complied urith.
Ali voted in favor and the motion cerricd unanimously.
6551 Kirkwood CircIe
Planning
November
Commission Meeti ng7, 7990 - Page 9
what I'm just
situation and
say i ngI thank
is I'm extremely pleased withyou for her recommendation.
Sharmin's help on this
.Ihank you.
Conrad: Thank you.public hear i n9?
Any other comments? Is there a motion to close the
Batzli moved, l.lildermuth scconded to close the public hcaring. All votedin favor and the motion carried. The public hearing ras closcd.
conrad: Steve, I know you're opinionated, I,Il start et your end-
Emmings: t"le get into a different kind of odors on this one. I think I'mkind of in favor of at least trying this. t,e've got a letter here from theDepartment of Natural Resources I know and they seem to be a little learyof doing it but recognizing that it's something that maybe is coming and Iguess my approach would be a Iittle different than is presented in thestaff report. One thing is I know that eJe have several of these in thecity at the present time. tle have beachlots Hhere they have set them up.
f n f act you had one ).ast year . tJell , I say one on there.
Nancy ChrisLensen: For a r^rhiIe. Couple r.leeks.
Emmings: Yeah, and I think they have one at Greenwood Shores didn't they,or did I see that in the staff report? And I know there's anoLher one onLake l,linnewashta. The Hinnewashta Heights folks have one down there andthat was there a1l this past summer. And I don't know if b,e got complaintsabout it. Have Ne ever had any complaints about these?
Olsen: I haven't heard any.
Emmings: tJhich to me maybe suggests that it's possible to find a uray to dothis but I guess I would not, at least initially, I think r.re ought to bevery resLrictive until we get a Iittle more experience with it. I don'tthink it ought to be a permitted use. I think it should be a conditionaluse and that we should look at each and every one of them and that alsothat allows, they have to give notice to neighbors so neighbors can come inand give their opinions about them. I don't think it should be a permitted
use .
A1-Jaf f : !.le are recommending that it be a conditional, use.
it says hcre. I! says.
conditional use and this is an amendment to
Emmings: tlell that's not what
Krauss: Beachlots though arethe beachlot ordinance.
Emmings: Oh, okay.
Krauss: 5o somebody
want to do this, you
that comes
would have
in, if you have an existingto have a modification...to beachlot andthe beachlot.
Emmings: Alright, then let me ask you this then. If it's a grandfathered
beachlots and they want to take advantage of something that's allowed in theordinance, do they have to then meet all of the conditions of the?
Krauss: Not necessarily. ].le talked about this this afternoon. f can onlytell you what we've thought about this. The grandfdlhered use does not
have a CUP okay? Having a toilet added represents h,hat I view as anintensification of a non-conformity. The way to deal ujith that is to make -the offer of a CUP available. If it's a CUP, they can legitimitize thebeachlot. Change the status of it recognizing that you may in fact want to-apply. I mean when you're intensifying something, phen you're legitimizj.ng-
something, I view it as someLhing of a tu,o Hay street. They're coming in
to ask for a toilet but you may have aspects of that beachlot that are non-
conforming that you trould like to see made conforming or at least made an
improvement to as a condition of getting the CUP. I think that under the
cUP you would have the leverage to do that.
Emmings: okay. Because you know that, I think that Hinnewashta Heights
beachlot is only 25 feet uide so there's a whoLe bunch of Lhings they
obviously couldn't comply r^rith in our ordinance but on the other hand I
think that's a good comment. t,lell, then there's no doubt that if it's a
conditional use, that's important to me that we look at each and every onb
of these. Another thing is that I don't know t"rhy.
conrad: I don't understand that though. The conditional use. Therefore,
because you apply for a beachlot it is assumed thaL you can have, it's not
Iike you're looking at it. As Iong as it meets the rules that have been
described here, basically it's there. So in other words, if you granL the
beachlot status and you meet the 2 oy 3 rules that ue've got, it's there
and that's.
Emmings: t"leLl r,:ait. tre don't have enough rules and I'm getting to what Ithink the rules ought to be. One thing is, here you're putting basically astructure within 50 feet of the shore and I think the shoreline, I thoushtthe Shorel.and Ordinance, I didn't look it up but I thoughL the Shoreland
Ordinance says there can't be anything within 75 feet so I don't know ulhy
that number wouldn'l be 75. I'd get them back away from the ulater.
Krauss: Yeah, I. guess I couldn't argue that. I mean certainly the
sLructure setback is 75 feet. Is Lhis a substential structure? tle could
come up t,lith standards that urould theoretically aIlow the placement of
chemical Loilets but realistically not and I'm not sure whether 50 feet
versus 75 feet is honerous enough to do that but at the very least we felt
that the 50 feet was sufficient to guarantee the physical separation for
the anchoring in the case of spillage and it was the recommendation of the -ONR, if I recall. Ie u,as more of an environmental constraint. If you
wanted to go with the 75, I don't think we'd oppose it. I'd just ask you
to make, I don't know the situation with all the beachlots. I mean they'revaried and they're.
Conrad: But is there anything allowed within 75 feet of the lake? There
is no structure to my knowledge in Chanhassen.
t"li ldermuth: And a dock .
Emmings: That would be but those
Another thing is I don't know urhy
are real differ entthis isn't I imi ted
but anyr",ay.
time. I take it-to
AS
me
to
Planning Commission tleeti n9
November 7, !99O - Page 10
Emmings: t^lell canoe rack maybe. Something like that.
Planning
November
Commission Meet i ng7, 1990 - Page 11
that they're going to lease these units from somebody who then is going tomaintain them and I don't knou why we wouldn't limiL. this to say June 15thto August, end of August because that's the only time people are using theproperty in any concentration that I'm aware of. I think, then you talkabout a permanent structure being built to house the toilet but I'm notsure what that means. In (d). To house this unit that they rent to housethis SateIIite type unit?
Krauss: I think He rrJere trying to cover all the bases. I mean portable
toil.ets seem to come in two different types. I mean you either get theSatellite type that's molded in the factory and they plop it on the site oryou get something lhat's, you knour a chemical toilet that can be inslall.edin a boat or recreational vehicle or something eJ,se. Using the later, ue'dIike to have a structure that looks Iike it fits.
Emmings: Well there for sure we want that 75 feet back I urould think. Iuould. And I ulould think that that structure, ule'd want to have separateapproval on that too. Or that it would be approved as part of this. Okay.I guess I think there are beachlots that exist in th6 city where wewouldn't !.Jant to see one of these because they're so small that there's no
way to keep it from impinging on the neighbors and I don'L think, this is aconvenience item and to me it takes a lower priority than the pleasure ofthe neighboring residential owners. So I guess what I,d put down here,I !^,rote a little intent secti.on and I al,so added some. And the intent Ithink is that, I think it should go somethins like this. I don't know.This is right off the top of my head but it i.s the intent of the City of
Chanhassen t,o allow chemical toilets at beachlots so Iong as themaintenance and use of these toilets have no undesireable impact on theenvironmenL, residential neighbors or Iake users. On Lake Hinneulashta
where I live, we've got I don't know how many beachlots but there's got tobe I don't know. Do you know houl many? 4 or 5,6? And I don't u,ant todrive around the lake and see a Satellite from the lake lookins into it,see a Satellite on every one of those. It could be quite a few and Lotushas quite a number don't they?
Conrad: A coup I e .
Emmings: It's more than that from what I read in here. I don't know butit sounded Iike. It is being alloued primarily for the convenience andsafety of children uho often cross busy streets to return home to usetoilets. It is recognized that maintenance and use of chemical toilets on
some smalI beachlots may be inappropriate because they cannot be adequatescreened from residential neighbors or lake users. Then I had anothercondition r.lhich was the conditional use permit may be revoked if there arecomplaints from residential neighbors. If lhere's any violation of theintent of the ordinance or if there's any evidence of failure to maintainthe toilet to eliminate odors and pollution. So I guess overall my poj.nt
is that I think there's a good reason to have them for a short period oftime during the year and that if we could be very restrictive about it, atIeast initially, I could get behind it.
Ahrens: tjhat would they do? Come in and tow them away?
Emmings: tjellout there this see, you lease these things.
summer didn't you?
Now you leased the one you had
Planning
November
Commission I'teet i ng7, 7990 - Page t2
Nancy Christensen: tlelI someone in our Association had...
Emmings: Okay, so you lease them and then you have a Pumping agreemqnt
urhere they service them and all of that and I guess I see this as asituation where that would be the way to do it. Have it there for 2 7/2
monLhs because I can tell you that from r.ratching, the way people use thelake, there's very little use of the lake even in August. The end of June -and JuIy it's used very heavily and then it tapers down real fast. Even aLthe end of JuIy. In my experience. But if it was there from June 15!huntil when people returned to school Lhe end of August.
Batzli: The season's kind of Hemorial Day to Labor Day.
Emmings: But I teII the heavy.you
theBatzli: ueIl. f know heavy use is.
Emmings: The heavy use is right aroundrea]Iy starts falling off. At least on
observation. But anyway, that's uhat I
conrad: okay. Good comments. Brian?
Batzli. r tleI I he sLoIe aIIrhetorical question of the
communities that we caIIed
it. t^lhy are we doing it?
the 4th of JuIy and after that it
Lake Hinnewashta. From my
wouId.
my thunder so I'm just going to ask kind of astaff and that's why, if every one of the
said don't get into it. Don't do it. Don'L do
Krauss: t,lho was saying don't? oh, the cities. ttell to be honest, I meanthis is, we are not incredibly excited about the specter of dealing with
another issue on a lake. You knou it's one of those things that you'd
prefer that it go away and never happen but it is happening. l.le've been
asked to deal xith it in the most effective way we knox hor.l . As to r.,hy
other communities have not dealt with it, I don't know. Sometimes the
situation is different. Sometimes you don't have the recreational beachlot-that the common use on some of the lakes. I don't know why other
communities haven't confronted it. tJhen I get calls from other planners
too, I mean your reaction is to air on the conservative side. If you don't-
know the answer, then don't do it if you don't have to. l.lell, we've been
asked to do it and so we've done uhat ure can to make sure that it's done assafely and as sensitively as possible. If the ordinance goes ahead likethis, it's something that we could administer and we could live with.
Krauss: Frankly, I would prefer not. I mean I'd prefer to deal uith the
ourners of the beachlot and not who they contract r.rith. In my view the
oulner's Iiable for the maintenance. The owner's liable for the conditionsof approval . Hou,ever, they obtain compliance r^rilh lhose conditions isreally their business. It presents a Iittle bit of another layer of
administration for us and I'm not sure that it's necessary.
Batzli: tlould it be helpful at all to require that if in fact most ofthese things are leased, and I assume that most of them uould be, would it -
be appropriate to have a copy of the contract on file r.,ith the city or
something? To make sure that they're.
it or not I laid
political stuff
awake last night thinking about this.
going on, you were thinking about
tli ldermuth: The Association.
BatzIi: The Associ ation?
Conrad: And what,s the penalty?
Krauss: t,el] I don't know. That's the concern. I mean I raised theinitial concern urhen f uas uith the City of l.{innetonka you know ue had oneof these things, or severa). of these things tipped into a bay, Now it wasfrom a city park but they were not anchored and were vandalized and tippedinto Libb's Lake. Libb's Lake does not flush very readily from Hinnetonka.rt's the eastern most arm of the lake. As a consequence, for the rest ofthe season, for a month and a half, that lake was unswimmable becausethe...count was too high. I don,t know whether any of our Iakes inChanhassen exhi.bit the same characteristics. They don't have that kind ofa bav structure certainly r^rith a narrow Iittle inlet that Libb's Lake has.
t^Je are taking the active approach here in requiring that these things beanchored so hopefully rather than dealing with the aftermath of a pioblem,
_ ..,e can try to avoid Lhe problem in the first place. And we,ve also gotthe physical separation from the Iake which if it's 75 feet, particulirly
more than 55 fee!, you know these things don't have a tremendous amount ofcapacitv and bv the time it gets to the lake, hopefully a lot of that r^rillbe intercepted by grass or sand or whatever.
Batzli: I think these things are a favorite target of college, hishschool , whatever aged kids. They seem to be fun to tip over. I know thatthev're tipped over frequently at crescent Beach in Shorewood/Tonka Bay.l.Jhatever that park is actually in. I was familiar urith the one in Libb'sLake. rt seems to me thaL you knou in those instances you're talking abouta city owned park and you should have more control over it and yet iheydon't seem to have any control over it and for us to require the beachloLowners to control it, I don't know if that,s going to be effective or not.That's r.Jhy I'd almost like to see them, this may be out of the realm ofpossibilities but post a bond or something. r like Steve's additions if wego ahead with this.
l.lildermuth: Bel ieve
Conrad: t,i th alI theportable toi lets.
l.lildermuth: About whether or not this is a good thing or we should belooking at something like this and f guess f came to the same conclusionthat Steve did. That it's probably worth while looking at and it,sprobably something that' maybe who's time has come for these beachlots. rwould favor a Lime limit and r would rike to see the whol.e concept rimitedto a portable structure onIy. Nothing permanent so that would probably
mean taking (d) out of there. Reference to a permanent structure.Especially if we're still going to look at 5O feet because that kind ofviolates everything else that we've got.
Batzli: l.tho then is responsible if there is some sort of, i.f they tip itover into the lake? You're going to try to hold the. beachlot oulnersresponsible for that?
Planning Commission Heeting
November 7, 1990 - Page 13
Batzli: Some of them do have like a fence like stockade type approach uitFa little entrance and the back swings open so they can take it out. Nowthat's the kind of screening almost that you may or inay not appreciate over -
the proposed screening but .
l.lildermuth: I think if I were a neighbor I'd uant to see vegetation type
screeni.ng as opposed to some kind of a fence. I think that's pretty Hell
addressed in (c). FulIy screened by coniferous vegetation. I don't know
urhat the time limitation on it should be. Staff can decide that. If it,s
Labor Day to Memorial Day or whatever. Or l,lemorial Day to Labor Day,uhatever it is. But I think there should be some kind of time limit on it -and I would like to see it restricted only to portable structures. Andtrould this be reviewed on a case by case basis as it's currently proposed?
This ordinance? So you'd have a chance to look at all these grandfathered
Iots?
Conradr But you'd apply the rules that you Iay down now.
tlildermuth: Right. AppIy Lhese rules. The beachlot association thatI belong to, I think if they came in for one we'd probably deny it becauseit's an odd configuration and it just, I don't know hor.r you could do
something like that and satisfy the neighbors. That's aII.
l.lildermuth: t,eII. I think that some of the conditions that are put inthere are going to preclude that because if the beachlot that ue have onLotus Lake were to come in and ask for one, the thing r.lould end up havingto be located in the middle of the tennis court and it just doesn't work.
Ahrens: Because of the setbscks?
t^lil.dermulh: Yeah. Because of the setback requirements. The fact thatthey have to be fully screened I think is some kind of assurance that.
Planning Commission Heeting
November 7, 7990 - Page 14
Krauss: Yes, Each one urould have to come before you and make their caseat a publ ic hearing.
Ahrens: I don't have a real strong feelings about this but you knor.rI guess if there's a need for this we should be looking at it. I've heard -a lot of discussj.on tonight about the appearance of them and some beachesare too small and some beaches are big enough to handle these and it seemsIike we're getLing into such subjective criteria in determining r.rhere they -should be and where they shouldn't be and if a neighbor compLains and they
should be taken out. I have a lot of problems uith that. I think that if
we have an ordinance that says that they're allowable, then I'm surethere's children on all the beachlots and I'm sure there's a need ifthat's. PauI said there's a need because there's children who have to usethe portable toilets r.rhen they're out there and then Steve says he doesn't
uJant to see them on every beachlot as he's riding around on the lake
because of the appearance of that. I mean hou are we going to determine?Every other lot or you know,2 out of 4. Only half the beachlots get them
because more than that uould be aesthetically ugly or hou are we 9oin9 todelermine that? It seems to me that if we're goinE to allow these thingson beachlots, we're going to just have to allow them. Either that or uesay only on beachlots of a certain size.
Eatzli: There has to be at least one opening.
just plant things around it?Ahrens: tJhy can't they
tli Idermuth: l^lel I they can .
Ahrens: So you're saying the setback requirements will Iimit the number.
Ahrens: I think that h,e should be concerned with these so close to the
Iake but on the other hand if people need them Lhev need them and I think
lle should provide them. I imagine we haven't had a lot of problems with
them on uith Greenwood Shores because nobody can get to that beachlot
anyNay. It's probably never even used excePt for 2 or 3 PeoPIe a YeaY.
t^lho walk 4 miles down f rom cR 17 to ge! to it.
tlildermuth: t^lho knor^rs it's there?
Ahrens: Yeah, right. But you know I do have a Problem ulith it. I guess
Steve, maybe you could exPlain what you mean if there are comPlaints.
I mean we get a lot of comPlaints from a lot of People and some of them
have some merit and a ]ot of them don't. If an association is aPProved for
puttins one of these things in and a neighbor mavbe, I don't know do thev
have to be right next door to the beachlot or are they across the lake from
the beachlot. If they say I don't Iike the uay that looks, then do we pull
it?
Emmings: f r.rould Presume that if a Person that, well first of all. You
would and should come in before we permit it because they're going to have
to, \.o get a conditional use Permit they're going to have to give notice to
the neighbors that they're Planning to Put one of these things in and
everybody pretly much knows r.lhat they look Iike so you exPect to see those
neighbors in here complaining then. And franklv, I'd have a hard time
unLess the association, if you have a neighbor who says I don't l'rant to
Iook out. I don't mind Iookins out mv window at PeoPIe plaving on a beach
but I do mind looking out my window and seeing a blue hut there that peoPle
are going in and out of constantlv. I don'L want to do that. I'd have a
hard time, unless the association could tell me how thev were going to
screen it in a Nay so that that urould be the satisfaction of that
homeou:ner, I would say they don't get it.
Ahrens: l^lhat if they come in after the fact?
Emmings: After what fact?
already granted.
comes in?
neighbor urho Iives there.
and saying Nhat?
like it. Thev don't like to look at it.
Ahrens: After it's
Emmi ngs: t!ho? t^lho
Ahrens: WelI some
Emmi ngs: Coming in
Ahrens: They don 't
Planning Commission Meeting
November 7, ].99O - Page 15
l"l i ldermuth : The visual impact .
Emmings: I guess my notion is just that if we're going to venture into \
this, which f'm not sure u,e should, but if ue're going to venture intothis' I think we should be real restrictive to start with and if they turnout to be no problem, maybe we Hant to make it easier for people. But it,s-going to be harder to 9o back and get more restrictive. Hetl, it might notbe. r shouldn't sav that. r was thinking it uould be harder to get morerestricLive later. rt's harder to take somethi,ng a..,ay once somebody hasit. But if there's a demonstrated problem, r'm sure we could find a way to-
Ahrens: That's all I have.
Conrad: Thanks Joan.
tlildermuth: Doesn't Steve uJant to make thi.s motion?
conrad: HerI, r have a real tough time with this one. r think a casecould be made for allowing them on certain properties but r don't see-tt-,"restrictiveness yet which r think everybody has said. There are just somanv negatives that can occur. rt's just one of these things saying whyare b,e doing this in the first place. As many outlots as re hare oibeachlots, we really haven't been, that have been in existence for 1o-1svears' r reallv haven't heard alr that much demand for this. The notesthat we have from one resident who has. you really have to be within 3s0feet of the beachlot to be a member of that beachlot and r guess I'm not.
Emmi ngs: 1 ,OOO isn 't it?
conrad: Ah, it is 1,ooo. But even so, that sti]I doesn,t seem to be a biginconvenience to me. yet on the other .hand, r think r courd be persuaded iiwe had the right restrictions and we don't right now. on-irre sideyardsetback, if somebodv put a chemical toilet uithin 20 feet of my propertyrine I'd so wild- r just, r'd go bezerk you knou. That is so far away'from what ure're intending. A beachlot of a priviledge. rt,s not a right.It-is a privileds,e, not a right. It allous more peotle .c""". "ni.f, t;;- -priviredge on that lake and whatever that means to different peopre. rtreal. ly is an important difference yet here you can,t impinge on theneighbors with the volume of people. I can consider desiening an ordinance-that said that if beachlot owners, if members of the ."="ii"tion are ofthat beachlot were on either side of the beachrot, then lim passified alittle bit because they're part of the process. ihey're parl of thedecision making process or the process thaL the owner who'subdivided thisland in the besinning had to deal with when he subdivid"" it but if thatbeachlot is abutting on individual residenLs that's not part of thatparticu.lar recreational beachlot. r think we don't have the controls right-
Planning Commission l.leet i ng
November 7, 1990 - Page 16
Krauss: If I cou]d, Anybody can make a complaint against things at anytime and the most uJe can do is follow up on that. And if it's a complaintthat we can't resolve at a staff level that we think'is verifiable, we'IIbring the item back before you and the City Council to re-evaluate ifthey're violated the conditions of the approval . And if they have, you canyank their permit
Ahrens: r rike the intent statement that steve added onto this but r thinkthat maybe the rest of the nording may be a IiLtIe too restrictive.
PIanni ng
November
Commission Heet i ng7, 7990 - Page 17
Emmings: t^lhat trould you do, can you tell us urhat restrictions you'd wantso maybe r,re coul.d put something together here or do you want to r^ror k on it?
Conrad: I think I said the things that I felt.that beachlot u,as surrounded by other members orvote for that.
I think if surrounded, ifproperties , then I could
Emmings: The trouble with that though Ladd is in the subdivisions uhereyou have beachloLs as part of your subdivision, the neighbors on each sidearen't part of the beachlot, They have their own beach. They have their
oi^rn lakeshore so that's, so right aulay that doesn't exist. But the realproblem here is that on most of the older beachlots, see now we've got to
have 2OO feet on lakeshore. You've got quite a bit of space to r^ror k uith.
3,OOO square feet but on the old ones they're aII, some ere 25 feet wide. Ithink thaL one on Lake l.linnewashta is 25. Hot^, r4ide is yours? HoH much
Iakeshore have you got?
Gene Christensen: It's 95 I think.
Emmi ngs: Yeah, end therea home,
on that one you've got on one side of you there's
Gene Christensen: Both sides.
Emm i ngs r Both sides?
Iakeshore property or
use of this.
They are privat€ homes that have no, they'renothing to do uhatever with that subdivision or the
conrad: See in that case I would have to, the only way I would gran!
something in that case Steve would be if the neighbor agreed. ThaL's theonly way I r.rould do it. One, I've Eot to be satisfied that environmentallyHe've taken care of the situation. There is a reason the other communitieshaven't alloured these and I don't think ue should be real naive. ft's aproblem. Tippins over and maintenance and smell and you knon, the smellsof chemical toilets are not great. tle're talking about l,lcGlynn's, I don't
!,,ant to be next to that smell . Nor., there are Hays to solve thaL problem.
It's not that it's absolute but it's a real pain. Administratively t.:e'recreating a pain for the city. If we have !o monitor. If r.re have to dealwith this. I can visuaLize a need but again, I would have to look at it ona case by case basis. I urould have to inform the neighbors and if theyfel.t it r.ras offensive, I would have to decline. I would have to reject the
no!$. So what I'm saying, without belaboring the issue, 50 feet is not.].JeIl, I can't build a little leanLo uithin 75 feet qf a lake and thereforethe 50 foot in our current recommendation has to go to 75. It just has to.25 foot from the sideyard doesn't make any sense to me a! aII. That'sjust, I just don't want that. There's got to be more protecting aneighbor. I think the length of time that Steve said is important. Ithink there should be a penalty or some recourse lJorked into the ordinance.I think the portable Loilet has to be colored Lo be, you knoul I've seen alot of ugly ones that aren't necessarily the prettiest things in the r.rorld.I'm not sure tdhat firmly means. Ooes tha! mean it's on a slab? I guess mybottom line is I don't see anything I can vote favorably for tonight so if
somebody uJants to make a motion and uants my vote, the best they can do isto table it otherwise I'11 vote no.
PIanning
November
Commission Heet i ng7, 1990 - Page 18
use- So if ue uork the language in that way, then the
chance as long as I've solved the environmental thingssetback things. Then I would feel good about it.
beachlot has a
and some of the
far as loo ks .but you're
2 trees. Be i ng-
as you do . t,e
Ahrens: tJelI I don't think so.
conrad: But see that's what, if r^re're going to put the ordinance in.
Ahrens: It says fully screened.
conrad: okay, so one tree on each side? And uJhat kind of tree? I'mgetting picky but again, you've got to have that dourn. If you want to havea conditional use permit, you've got to know what you're talking about. Nour-it's not that we're going to get different dimensions of the portable. tle
know what it is. tJe knor.r that it's this big by this big so what are we
talking about? I guess I!d prefer to be as definite as possibl.e if we uant-to allow it. f 'rrr not real convinced I b,ant to temper r.rith it but if the
balance of you feel it's worth responding to the City Council's need, thenI think r.re should put some specifics in here to deal with it. Yes sir.
Gene Christensen: I think I feel the same Hay as you do asI mean obviously if I lived there I wouldn't like it eithertalking about putting trees. You're just talking 1 tree orI'm part of the association, I u,ant to hide it just as much
wan|- to ma ke it look nice .
Emmings: In response to that Ladd. Nor,r the one that you had on your lot,
because I drive by there all the time, you couldn't, you essentiallycouldn't see it from the lake unless you looked for it. They had it r.ray
back touards the road. It didn't look Ereat from the roadside but itdidn't Iook bad either. I don't think it uas really objectionable. Then
we've got this one on Lake Minne..rashta Heights. This narror., 25, I thinkit's only 25 feet wide. They had one down there all summer. I never sawit from the lake except a couple times when I ]ooked for it and then I saulit and it's just sitting out there. They have residential neighbors onboth sides and I don't think either one of them could see it due to thetopography. So there maybe it's perfectly appropriate and there's no ulay
they met any setbacks like this because it's 25 feet wide. They couldn't
meet any setbacks. So these are going to have to be reviewed on a case by
Ahrens: I don't think r.re can solve the environmental problems. I meanit's there and it may be tipped over and it may cause problems:
conrad: WeII no, if it's firmly end I guess I just challenge r.rhat firmly. -
In this draft it says firmly and that's what I say. Is that a concreteslab where it's bolted doun and Lhen it's going to sLay. If it's screened,
what does screened mean? One tree
Conrad: And that's where I brant to leave the problem because you'II takecare of it because you live there and that's reaLly r.,hat I uant to makesure of. I want to keep out of this mess and let the association take careof it but what happens in those siLuations is the immediaLe neighbors andthat's uhat I'm most concerned uith. How do we handle, how do we make it?
You can uork out things within your association buL how do we take care ofthe immediate neighbor and that's the issue that I have to address myself. -
case basis and it may be that somebody like Minnewashta Heights could getthe neighbors to agree to have it by simply 9oin9 to them and saying we,vehad it here for 3 years. It hasn't been a problem fbr you. lould you signsomething that would allow us to continue to have it? So I don't know. Ithink it needs to be rewritten.
Conrad: I agree with uhat you're saying Steve. I agree with that. Ithink there's so manv different situations with these beachlots. rt's hardto develop an ordinance that meeLs them alI. Sometimes they're screened.
Sometimes the neighbors are a distance away and won't be a bother. you
know Lotus Lake Estates is a good example. They have 3,OOO feet oflakeshore. They can put it there and nobody's going to know. you knor^r andthere's.
Krauss: Right. urith conditional uses you're tarking about a class of usesthat are considered extraordinary and potentially obnoxious but if theymeet criteria that you've established, then you,re committing yourselves tosay okay. I mean it met the criteria, it,s fine ulith us. One of thethings you also have to recognize though is you're not, when you,rereviewing cuP's you're not limited to those 4 or s criteria that ule came upwith or Steve, what you'Il come up dith. There's the g or 10, r{hatever itis, Mom and App]e Pie CUP conditions that preface that section and they
Planning Commission l.'teet i ng
November 7, l99O - Page 19
Uil.dermulh: Lotus Lake Estates? Is that the one up on the hill there?
Conrad: Yeah. See they've got 3,OOO feet. In that case, there,s noprobJ.em r^rith neighbors but then again, ure have a lady who's talking about,who's writing us and saying hey, I don't h,ant thaL going next to me andthat's real valid because again, you look at the probrems of smell andsight and thar-'s, I don't think that's the intent of urhat u,e uant abeachlot to be.
Emmings: I'd rnove that we table this and try, I think it,s worth persuingand I think h,e ought to urork some more on drafting it a little bit. I'dlike to take a shot at it. At drafting something.
Krauss: One note of caution though. I aluays preface this by saying I'mnot an attorney, especially when f'm confronted by g of them. t,e can,twrite an ordinance that says if you do x through z you,re entitled tosomething unless somebody objects.
Emmings: tlell, but ue could require them to secure the consenL or not heveit. That could be a requirement. If what you,re saying is right, then uecould require consent.
Batzli: r guess r wourd be more in favor that it would be revocable by thecity if either safety or environmentar concerns over the toilet arose.r don't know that r Nant to preface their right to continue using the toileon a neighbor.
Emmings: Once it's granted.
Ahrens: r agree because in that situation uhere, rike you said there was abeachlot that's only 25 feet r.ride or somethlng and nobody can see it oneither side but what if they complain anyway?
Planning
November
Commission Meet i n97, f99O - Page 20
give you a great deal of latitude.
Conrad: But it's also the intent statement. You knoul what r.le've got to
is be able to do a good job of helping slaff or helping neighbors
understand what the point is. That's why Steve's introduction of what
ue're trying to accomplish is very important because what I don't want to
do is lead somebody down the pike and say hey, you might be able to get
this. Or it is yours for sure. They have to know the intent for what
we're trying to do and uhen you're controlling smells and stuff like this,
it's a bigger deal . I think you aII have to Put yourself in the Position
of being next to one and say okay, how would I t.rant to be guarded. How
should the City guard me and I think there's uavs to do it' I'm not sure
what the words are. There's a motion to table. Is there a second?
BatzIi: Second.
Emminss moved, Batzli seconded to table action on Zoning Ordinance
Amendment to amend Section 2C-263(2), Recreational Beachlots to allow
portable chemical toilets on recreational beachlots for further study- AII
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimousl),'.
do
conrad: tje appr ec i ate
trying to make sure t.te
appl ies to everybody .
coming in. I said a lot of negative things
the right thing there. It's not iust vours
you
9et
Emmings: LJe've got time to uork on it before next sPring too.
butir
PUBLIC HEARING:
ONI G ORD M NDI"lENT NS -7 5
)r!-74q )-'r', i )E< ANN -el E l.al NCERN TNA AI t anxxFoaTAt AND I Nnr r<?oYAlo-7
DISTRICTS T r NCRE ASE FLEXIBILITY ESTABLTSHING PARKING S E T BACKS BYN
ADOPTING A P FORMANCE ORIENTED APPRO ACH TO STANDARDS AND AN AHENDMENT TOR
Fq,TAEII TqH oFnt tT R tr M tr NT FOE RI IF FFC, YAATTG YN TI.IF T.lD nt <T9TaT
PauI Krauss presented the staff rePort on this item. Chairman Conrad
ca]led the public hearing to order.
Batzli moved, tlildermuth seconded to closc the public hearing. AII voted
in favor and the notion carried- The public hcaring rras closcd-
Ahrens: The buffer yards you talked about in relationshiP to the
comprehensive plan, is this r.rhat, the 50 foot buffer vard. Is that h,hat we
put in?
Ahrens: I don't a nythi ng.have
Ioo kst^l i ldermuth: It fine to me.
conrad: Yeah, but we apPreciate you coming in and talking to us and
listenins to r.,hat we have to say and maybe bre can call uPon you to heIP us
as ue draft someLhing.
Krauss: 50 foot along rights-of-uays 1OO foot from internal ProPerty
Iines.
PIann i ng
November
Commission Meet ing7. f99O - Pase 2!
Batzli: I didn't have anything other than I uras envisioning a situation
urhere the public right-of-way was above the parking .lot. The higherelevation. So then 5 foot screening doesn't do any good. tlhat's thepoi nt?
Krauss: If you can't achieve it, you're going to havc a
Batzli: You could achieve the 5 foot high screening butany good
Olsen: At Ieast 5 feet.
Krauss: That's true. I would
30 foot setback.
you're not doing
Ahrens: But if Lhe highuray'sthat much good either.
tli ldermuth: It's almost
perceive that to be a loophole.
above a parking lot anyulay, 30 feet Non't do
point.
or 30, it doesn't make much of a
a moot
it's 1OAhrens: Yeah. tthetherdifference.
Batzli: HoN about into the industrial office park to
TH 5. Isn't that down lower a little bit there?
the south there al^ong
Olsen: Burdick's pr oper ty?
Batzli: Yeah. I don't know. I was just envisioning areas hhere thismight occur and do we care if you only have a 5 foot high screen.
Krauss: But i. n exchange , r.re] I brhat you
much more intensively landscaped area.
worthwhi le?
are getting is you're geLting aIs the trade-off for lhat
BatzLi: f guess
that situation?f l^ras
Oo we
thinking, should we have Ianguage that talks about
car e?
Emmi ngs: Br ian, maybe
reduce it to 10 feet.paragraph there?
misreading this butthat the part you're to me this saystal ki ng about?
that
Tha t
BatzIi: Yeah.
I'm
fs
you canfirst
Batzli: Can't you get closer anyr.Jay even though you're not screened atall? t.,ell, it true that you're not probably worsening the affecL ofgetting closer to the highway. Is that uhat you mean?
Ahrens: Risht .
Krauss: AIso, I wonder r.Jhere that's going to occur. UnLess you,re nearthe TH 5 overpass.
BatzLi: Yeah. tJell that's where I uas thinking.
Krauss: If you're that close to right-of-ulay.
PIanni ng
November
Commission Heet i n97, 7990 - Page 22
Emmings: You reduce the setback to 10 feet. If you demonstrate to thesatisfacti.on of the City that 1OOZ screening is provided at least 5 feet
above the adjacent parking lot. Those are the words'. Now it says, you'vegoi to have at least 5 feet of screening, ft doesn't say the stuff has to -be 5 feet high. You've got to have 5 feet of screening so it may be thatthe stuff has to be 10 feet high or whatever. So maybe it's not a problem.
Batzli: I don't know. I only had
my packet but I guess f didn't get
understand it but in any event. Ican't remember now.
30 seconds to look at it. It wasn't inthe plain meaning out of it the u,ay you
was going to ask something else but I
Batzli: I'll let you know.
Emmings: Okay, that's the only place we've
in terfirs of planning for the future just to
established in areas uhere higher intensity
intensity uses?
put it now. l.lould it be better
say that buffer yards are to be-
uses interface with I ower
Krauss: That r.rould give )rou some flexibility to amend the plan to that.
should do that.Emmi ngs: I think ue
Ahrens: I like that.
Kriauss: Oh, actual Iy,
they do occur above.
well if you had the whole ordinance in front of you,
Emmings: I don't. Okay. Llhy don't you just say any other required
setbacks. Just again, make it easier. Then on the next page, the lastparagraph in that same section where right above the big letter C. I had
trouble reading this. It says, in instances where existing topography
and/or vegetation provide buffering satisfactory to the city, or ohere. in -combination with quality site planning this is achieved. tlhat is achieved?
Krauss: A buffer satisfactory to the city.
conrad: If it comes !o you.
Emmings: On the buffer yards it says that we're going Lo do this where
higher intensity uses interface uith Ior,r density residential neighborhoods.-
Hy question is, how about a high intensity use next to a medium density
residentia I ne ighbor hood?
Krauss: The only place this wiII be employed is where it's so designated
on the official comprehensive plan. The only places that occur is on the
official comprehensive plan is where you have that interface betureen IOP
and some commercial and low density residential.
Emmings: Then in the next paragraph under C, and this is just minor but
the buffer yard is an additional setback requirement. It is to be
cumulatively calculated uith, and then I'd take out 'the' and put in "any
other " required setbacks period. It says setbacks outlined above and they -may be above. They may be below. They may be who knous uhere.
Planning
Novenlber
Commission l.,leet i ng7, 1990 - Page 23
Emmings: I thought you meant there, or uhere this is achievedquality site planning. But maybe, and it didn'L seem the samedon't know. Is this clear to you? Maybe it,s just ine.
throughto me but I
Conrad:said or
Krauss:
That
where
s kind of foggy. l.,ould you think it would be clear if wethis is achieved through quality site planning?
Conr ad :Are sidewalks always on the public right-of-way?
Yes .
conrad: So if there was
we really cot-tldn't, moreperformance standard?
a sidewalk that had to be in the front yard,than likely t^re couldn't do this in terms of a
then
Krauss: No, you might be able to. you might not get the20 foot reduction. You might get a 10 foot reduction.full benefit of a
Conrad: uhat do
Ber ms?
you expect these reduced front yard setbacks to Iook like?
Krauss: Heavi ly ]andscaped
achieve that is.berms. Often times in 10 feet, the only uJay to
Krauss: Sure.
Emmings: r don't knor^r if that's clear or not. rt was clearer to me but rdon't know if it's clearer to everybody. Then in (e) down there, againthere's that interface with ]ow density residential neighbors. I'd justsav Iourer densitv uses. Fourth Iine doun. And then that first indentedparagraph again just change, in the third line down just change ,the" to'any other " required setbacks period. tt,s the same change. And then inthe very last paragraph above where it says Section 2. That's the samelanguage again and d just change it so it says, where this is achievedthrough quality site planning. That's all. Otherr^,ise it seems like a goodidea.
Conrad: 1O feet is just nothing.
Krauss: The only h,ay to do that though is the way that Redmond did itwhich is come up xith a 2:! or 3:1 slope cxternally. Tj.e it into aretaining waII on the back side so the cars park into a retaining wall andthen heavily plant on it. You can do a pretty effective job,
Conradr But exLernally we're not talking about timbers are we? uould ueallow timbers?
Krauss: No, internally.
Conrad: Yeah, internally that's okay but external.ly. Externally ue,re nottalking about superficial. t,ell is it possible that ure could be talkingabout Iandscaping timbers on the outside?
Krauss: l"lerr it might not be. r mean r can envision a situation where youtake like the keystone block that a lot.of people are using now and you
PIanni ng
November
Commission Heeting7, 7990 - Page 24
have a meandering stone wall on the outside to give you some height andthen you plant on that. That can be very attractive. tlhat I didn't wanL
happening was a fencing but it's a site p]an. You h'ave a lot of ]atitudeto pick and choose and teII them how Co operate that so
Conrad: So r.Jhat are
the parking I ot?
we trying to achieve? Are h,e trying to simply screen
Krauss: You're trying to screen thethat would otherwise be intrusive.direct head-on exposure of the cars
Conrad: And have ue gained, for sure the
this performance standard, they uill gain
has gained what? Or maintained what? l.Je
the parking lot?
applicant who is trying to meet
some property use and the city
have maintained the screening of
conrad: Is that true?
!.lildermu!h: I think you're stil] getting an environmental amenitv.
conrad: Picture Redmond and hou nice that front yard looked,
they're going to do a nice iob. I think they're a good.
and I think
Krauss3 tle have documentation with Redmondperceived it on the outside, it's not going
internally that you'II notice it.
that shows from how we
to change. It's only
Krauss: or provided it. I mean there are some Parking lots where, well we
have a 3 foot, what is it 3 foot,2 foot berm requirement. tlhen you've got-
a 2 foot berm and tree every 40 feet and a 30 foot setback you meet the
ordinance right nour. I think in exchange for lhat laLitude you're getting
the abil.ity to demand a much higher quality buffering treatment
conrad: See I'm not too xorried about them. I like r.lhat I sau and I like
performance stuff. I think the more Performance things. If you have an
intent of what you're trying to maintain, then I really like the
perforrnance type of standards tha! tle're doing here. Try to challenge and
think of r.rhere we'll be beat and won't maintain the aPPearence and that's
r.rhy I get a little bit, you know railroad ties kind of, could achieve
something but I'm not sure that that's Nhat b,e're looking for but what ue
again in this, the intent statement for allowins this is really, it's
rea]Iy not there. Now basically an intent statement here is screening and -I don't know that we always put intent sLatements in everything L,e do. It
seems like that's sort of a formula approach but on the other hand when I
see somebody coming down the pike who u,ants to take advantage of this, I
want to say well here's. r.,hat we're trying to do and right now what ue're
trying to do is screen the cars end is everybody comfortable r.tith screening
the cars
Nildermuth: I guess I don't feel in most cases that Passionate that thev
have to be screened
Ahrens: I think on a public right-of-uay I don't feel that it's that bis a
deal either. That they be completely screened.
PIann i n9
November
Commission Heet i n97, 7990 - Page 25
I guess that's why I don't have an objection to reducing this
Batzli: But see I think the setback serves a purpose in that parking backto open spaces and things. This provides some green even though the carsaren't screened. It provides aD area that breaks up the landscape.
Provides more percentage non-impervious, etc, etc and so in exchange forreducing that, I think we shoul.d get something in return.
Conrad: Yeah, I agree. I don't know that we're gettinsi back u,hat we'regiving up. And my perspective has always been in these particular
districts, there's some nice. t,e really do have some nice commercial ,industrial areas. It's just really pretty and part of that is because
we've got LhaL 7O/3O standard. Because we work in some grass. tle've got
some trees and if this makes our industrial park areas ]ook really nice.
Krause: t^Je wouldn't be changing that standard at all.maintain that 7O,/3O.
tle would stiII
Conrad: fhe 7O/3o.
Batzli: But it would be in a different part. t,,hat you talked about...
Krauss: Frankly that oftentimes allows you to demand a better quality openspace. A lot of projects come to us and by the time the meet setbackstandards, they're provided the 3OZ open space. I think that's not openspace. That's just a little grassy strip along the tar, f urould muchrather be able to say, if you've only got the 10 feet here, that 3OZ chunkof your 5 acre site is 9oin9 to be a legitimate open area someplace on yourproperty. Redmond by the uay, it's kind of a r€lated issue, Redmond meetsthat 70,/30 standard which they were required to meet is buying the 1.5 acrewetland from the City. They u,on't be able to touch the r.retland a! all. I
mean iL's going to look exactly the way it does right noN, which by the wayI think u:e've agreed to a selling price of about !E88,OOO.OO.
Conrad: And r.rhere does the $88,OOO.OO go?
Conrad: The mone)u should 9o back into wetland improvements and alI thatkind of stuff. I'm sure it's not going there.
tJi I der mut h: General fund.
Conrad: tlhich defeats the intent. Totally defeats the intent.
the Council . l^le're not losingKrauss: l^le tal ked about that quite a bit ata r^retland though. I mean the original .
Conrad: [^le never &rere .
Krauss; Bu! the original proposal deposited by Redmond and their
development group was that they gave us a case in Lakeville uhere they t4eregoing to destroy a wetland and the Army Corps of Engineers allowed them to
buy a r,letland 30 mi.Ies away and improve it in exchange for the loss. I
t^, i I der mut h :to 10 feet.
Krauss: That's the $64,OOO.OO question. Nobody knows.
P Ianni ng
November
Commission l.1eet i ng7, l99O - Page 26
Batzli: Have ue, kind of a related issue, originally Redmond was arguingthat they owned the strip between the frontage road and the highway andthat should be included in their percent non-impervious. In a situationIike that, have we handled that as far as, uould that have been included
and that type of thing in their percentage calculations?
Krauss: ft's covered by right-of-way easements. Now I don't knor.t
have specific language that prohibits the inclusion of right-of*ulayland in those calculations.
that we
cove r ec
Batz]i: r know that you guys argued that policy wise and uhatever but you -couldn't ever put your finger on anything.
Krauss: tlell if you're leading up to maybe we shouLd look at insertingthat in the ordinance someplace in that calculation, it may not be a badidea and I think a blanket statement needs to be made in there that wedon't cornpute that acreage or that area for setback purposes either.
conrad: t^Je'd better get bsck on task here. So, the front yard setback in
these districts, because some of us don't feel that lhey're important atall. I'm trying to figure this out. I'm being a little bit facetious.
Your position realIy is that ue're not giving much away so ne don't really
need to dernand much.
tlildermuth: The buffer areas do but.
Cohrad: IoP stimulated it. This applies to everything.
tlildermuth: That's true. So here's urhat you've got'. You can have asituation. Now staff has control on some of this stuff but we're notgiving them any guidance here. It's going to be up to them when an issue
comes in- I'm just challenging our thinking of what u,e want. tJhat the
standards are that we're looking for. tle Iiterally could have on eitherside of Redmond you could have peopfe living within that 30 foot setback.Living trith it with green space and then there's the one ohere because tshey
can meet a performance standard and they cen cut it dourn to 10, have we
maintained the character of u,hat ule're trying to maintain with front yard
setbacks? tlith greenery? Have b,e maintained it with this language? Ifthat's r^rhat He're trying Lo maintain. tJhatever ue're trying to maintain inthese districts with setbacks, have we maintained them? That's the only
mean that's a no net loss type approach. tle're not losing anything in the-sense. tle're gaining !888,OOO.OO. I don't know urhat the Council's going tcdo with it. I brought forward suggestions that they' use it for that asueII but I'm just not certain yet.
Conrad: tle understand xhy they wouldn't but.
t^lildermuth: Right. And this is valuable property ue're tal.king about in
Lhese business neighborhoods. You know business highway. Business general
districts. and reasonably intense use compared to IOP.
Conrad: Yeah. UelI Iop is here. This applies to IOp.
Emmings: A does too.
Planni ng
November
Commission l.leet i ng7, 7990 - Page 27
thing I'm challenging you aII r.rith.
Batzli: Provided thev can still meet the percent imbervious, r think thatpercentage impervious wiII, having us not be along the highu,ay is probablyactually perhaps more beneficial, even though r Iike the open space even onthe highway. If they've got it someplace else on the lot, hopefully it'snot tor.:ard the most intense use which would be the thoroughfare so_I guess I like the 30 feet but if in fact they can screen i!. If we getsome berming and things that ue wouldn't otheruise get, r'm comfortabiewith it.
conrad: So how do you have better control on? Terl me again, what can youdo in these 10 feet thaL we might shrink doun to? l.Je can require plantinsseverv x number of feet. sort of at staff discretion or whatever you feelis appropriate, to fit in to the context of lhe neighborhood or theparticular business park. How do you?
Kraussr UeII, we're throwing it backwant to get this flexibility, you'vesatisfaction and to yours and to theof 1OOZ opacity 5 feet above it.
into their laps. l.Je,re saying if yougot to demonstrate initially to ourCouncils that you've achieved the goal
Krauss: yeah. And I think quite conceiveably we're going to havecommercial developers that aren't going Lo want that. UeII, they mishtuJant the f lexibilitv but they're not going to ..,,ant to exchange it f oi thelack of, or for a parking lot that aoesn'i look Iike rt's ielt busy and -
hustlins and bustlins like we have a going shopping center here. you knowRedmond r think it's very appropriate in an industiial areas where theydon't care you know and I think it's going, to be physically impossible forsome people to accomplish that. Itls also going to be cosily.
Conrad: But the standard realIy is to screen the cars?
Batzli: tJell they could just put infeet. t^lhy urould that be costly?a 5 foot berm and put a tree every 40
Krauss: Because firstevery 40 feet is going
O1O.OO a foot per sideauthority I think in a
Balzli: Okay, so they put it 15 feet backlhe difference? You could end up r.rith a 540 feet.
of al I , the only r.,ay to do a 5 f oot berm and treeto be a doubled sided retaining urall and that'sand it gets very expensive. PIus you have thesite plan review. . .
instead of 10 feet. Now what,sfoot hish berm and a tree every
Krauss: tJe don't. tle tell people whatgoal. You have latitude under the sitedarn ugly way of achieving this and ueso and so. tle do that all the time.
we Nant to heve to achieve tha!plan review to say that's a reallron't accept it unless you revise it
B6!zIi: yeah, I don,t knoH that we do it so much asadvance. I mean we don't look at berms usually andmake it a foot higher and put a tree every other.
guys doing it
no you've got
Krauss: tte do it aII the time, yeah.
you
saY '
ln
to
Planning
November
Commission Meet i ng7, 1990 - Page 28
Batzli: But it is in lhe realm of possibility th5 foot high berm with a tree every 40 feet and th
r isht?
Olsen: Yeah, if it's looz screened.
Conrad: l.,hat more would you want?
Batzli: I don't know, a tree
Conrad: Okay. I don't uantgrind us into the ground.
Batzli: It already is.
Conrad! Yeah, we did it. I'
Emminss: I Ii ke it .
at you could end up with a-eyld be within the Code
every 20 feet. I don't know.
to beat a dead horse here. I don't Nant to
m not real comfortable but.
Conradi I know you do. That's why I'm uncomfortable. I like the buffer
yards urith Steve's additions. Is there a motion?
Ernrnings: tJelt I'II move that the Planning Commission recommend aPProvaL
the proposed ordinance amendments r.rith the changes that we talked about 'that I talked about or made. You knoh, Nhat those are don't you?
of
or
conrad: tle don't but that's okay. No, ue do. Is there a second?
t^ii l der mut h r Second.
conrad: Any discussibn? How are you going to vote Brian? You can't tell
me so we don't have any discussion on that. f can't figure out any other
standards that I'd like to Put in here. I guess my only concern was
wording beyond the effect of screening. I think aesLhetics has something
to do with r.rhat b,e're trying to maintain.
Batzli: I think so too but then I think you get inco the intent statement
that you kind of ran up the flag Pole and nobody really st.lallowed it.
Conrad: Nobody really jumped on it, no.
Batzli: Because Steve felt comfortable so he had drafted an intent
slatement.
Conrad: There are some on this commission uho don't care.
Batzli: And there's one that.didn't have the packet in advance so I can't
help vou .
Emmings: tJhy don't Ne put something in there about, in 1(a) whv don't we
pu! something in there about our intenL? It's not too late to do that.
Conrad: I floated that and nobody.
Emmings: BuE you have a chance that we could amend i!.
Planning
November
Commission l.,leet i n97, 1990 - Page 29
tlildermuth: The motion has been made and seconded,
Batzli 3 But ble're discussing it.
Emmings: This is a discussion. I can make an ameridment if I Nant to.Anybody can. I can move to amend my own motion. t^lhat could ue say inthere so? So basically what you're saying is, and ue don't want them justto think of blocking our vision. Ee also want them to think in terms ofuhat?
Conrad: Aesthet.ics. The aesthetics.
Emmings: Too late.
Conrad: I know. It,s tough.
LliIdermuth: The problem is vou can't anticipate every situation thatyou're 9oin9 to come by...
Batzli: I vieur the intent statement,. if in fact there $as one, that ue'regiving up open space and allowing them to do this in exchange ior some sortof trade off in additional screening, vegetation, that type of thin9.r mean r think that should be the intent. Nor,r how you say that, beiausereallv r don't think you can say so that it's aestheticaliy ereasing. r^,hatyou urant though in exchange is.
t,li ldermuth: Additional Iandscapi ng .
Batzl i : Yeah.
l",li ldermuth: And planti ngs . . .
Batzli: Then. . .nould be reguired, yeah.
Emmings: Nhy can't we say that it's got to be aesthetically acceptable?tJhv couldn't we sav something like you said? Say something rike Lh" cityis willing to relax it's setback requirements provided thai a person canshow screenins u,hich is both effective and aesthetically acceptable to thecity? Now I don't know that, it's a little vague but.
Batzli: It's darn vague.
Emmings: l.lell ' but r don't know that you can't do that bccause we'regiving' the rvnch pin it sccms to me Brian is your ldea that ue're givingup something and so ure get something back. l.re get to determine uheiher ornot. it's good enough .
Ahrens: Nhy don't you just, in A(e). Is that A(e)?
Emmings: Yeah,
Ahrens: The second to the last sentcnce, acceptable scrcening is to becomprised of berming and landscaping. oo xe just add maybe a couple ofwords onto that sentence...acceptable screening?
PIanni ng
November
Commission Meet i ns7, 7990 - Pase 30
Emmings: But I think contained inthe fact that the City is relaxing
the notion that Brian brought up
a requirement and. intends to get
about
back.
t,li Idermuth: . . .quaIity.
Emmings: Right. t^lhich is both effective and aesthetically.
tjildermuLh: I don't know if we
ure're willing to trade off.
Nant to say relax the requirement. Say
Emmi ngs: t^lel I okay .
Krauss: I wouldn't have a problem r.rith the intent statement as drafted. It
is vague. f Iove vague statements. our City Attorney hates Lhem. tJe'II
have a tug of r^,,a r over that but I think, you know you are trading something
and you should have the latitude to be more demanding.
Emmings: Right. To me that's totaLly different than
permitted use but it's got to be a Pretty house. That
Krauss: You can say if you don't }ike it, go uith the
That's what everybody else has to 90 t{ith.
Emmings: Exactly.
Conrad: Do ure need to word anything?
Krauss: I don't know. If t.te just incorPorate Steve's
motion's amended to do that I think ue're okav.
Ahrens: t,hat language was that?
Conrad: t,e're not sure. Aesthetically plcasing r^las in
Emmings: Except Jim didn't like part of it so mavbe we
something that.
l.l i l der mut h :
u hat?
say r ng
mea ns
a house is a
nothi ng .
30 foot setback.
language. If the
there .
could come up with
The Citv's uilling to trade off a reduction in the setback or
Emmings: tle]I, we'Il say the intent of this section is that the citv is
r.rilling to trade a smaller setback for screening that is both effective and
of hish cuality aestheticallv? Something Iike that.
Batzli: I would sav additional landscaping.
Emmings: Yeah.
motion with that
Put that in there too, I'm going to movc to amend my own
I a nguage .
conred: Is there a second?
Ahrens: Second .
Emmings: t^,e've got to vote on that first don't ue? The amendment?
Plannins
November
Commission l.,leeti ng7, 7990 - Page 31
Conrad: tle I I I
Batz I i : Unless
sure.
friendly amendment and the second will accept it.
mad at myself.
'm not
it's a
Emmings: Okay. I made it myself. I'm not
Conrad: Okay, I'm going to call a question.
Emmings moved, l.lildermuth seconded to approve Zoning ordinance Amendment toamend Sections 2o-5O4, 20-695, ZO-7L5, 20-235, ZO-755, ZO-774, lnd 2o-81Sregarding parking setbacks and buffcr yards amending the stafi report asfollous: To incrude an intent statcment r*hich readi, the intent of thissection is that the city is uilling to trade a smarrer setback foradditional landscaping that is both cffcctive and of hieh cualityaesthetically. And changing the phrases in B(c) and C(e) by deletins thephrase 'interface with low density residential neiehboihoods- and repracinsit nith 'interface uith rower density uses.' and cianging the sentence, -rtis to be cumulativerv calculated uith the required seibacks outlinedabove-' to read, 'rt is to be cumulatively calculated with any otherrequired setbacks -' Arso changing the first sentence in the iast paragraphof item B(c) to read as follows, .in instances chere existing topographyand/or vegetation provide buffering satisfactory to the City, or r.rhirequality site planning achieved,.. A1l voted in favor and tire motioncarried unanirnously -
FINA L STUDY R EPORT FOR AND RTD E FACILITIE SINTHEC ITIES OF C SKA.CHANH SSEN AND E DEN PRAIRI SOUTHL,ES T HETRO I T CO}I}IIS SION.
Paul Krauss presented the staff reportpresent to a nsuler questions.on this item and Fred Hoisington was
Conrad: Anybody have questions?
Emmings: I'm going to confess that Iabstaining from any vote.didn't have. time to read this and I'm
t^lildermuth: The only comment that I have is r.then I look at the prototypesite plans, it seems as though there courd be a little more efficient useof the bus loading area and that seems like that could be accomplished bytrunkating a corner. Having a speciar bus lane cutting a ccirner off asopposed to coming into a parking lot and having a big sweeping area that itturns around in. It would take less carking space for the bus to stop andIoad .
Krauss: This is the prototype plan?
Krauss: Yeah . l.rel I the prototype isn't ,they're basically using for our specificto be desisned to fit that site.
they've got
c i rcumsta nce
deFign tha!
because it has
A . ner.l
a nyway
tlildermuth: It just seems
much more efficient u,ay to like coming and trunkating a corner uould be ago.
t ildermuth: The prototype plans are in the back.
Planning
November
Commission l.leet i ng7, 7990 - Page 32
Batz]i: I had a question for Fred r.rhich was kind of a general question anc|.that is, how has the study taken inLo account the proposed light rail and
..lhere the bus facilities r^rould be in connection with those?
Fred Hoisington: Brian, uhen ue firsL began this study and one of the
thi ngs we did was try to he.l,p the 'commission understand hot^, al I of thesethings would tie together and ure did a lot of diagraming and so forth at
that time to do so and we had some, I don't even know if it ulas in the
draft. I think it t"ras in the draft report and it is not in this final
report but some serious criticism of the location of LRT in the southr^,est
corridor. I have some real reservaLions about using the railroad right-of--
uay, at least until after it leaves the Eden Prairie Center area. Now toget to Chaska it probably wiII have to use the right-of-way but that entire
system is built on maximizing or minimizing cost by using railroad rights-
of-way and frankly we don't think it uiII work. A lot of the language that-
we hid in there, lhe Commission eliminated from the report feeling that
while we should Lhrow up a red flag, ule shouldn't go so far as to suggest
that they completely throw their Plan away. So t,hat ue ended up *ith Nas -just a set of criteria that said urhen light rail is readv to be Iocated in
the southwest corridor, Please consider these 5 things and don't be limiteo
only to railroad r ights-of -r^ray . Now the reason we think that Iight rail
and that the station, the LRT station ought to be at Eden Prairie center
and we understand there are some real economic Problems with that' is
because all of the systems interface at that Poi.nt. AII of Lhe
intechanging would occur there. AII the multi-purPose triPs tdould start
and end there. Shopping triPs. Commuting triPs and so forth and that's
why we're as concerned as uJe are about where HennePin County is proPosing
to put it, So aII I can tell you is we have great reservations and ue've
tried to leave enough in there to encourage the Iooking at alternatives but
lhere was some feeling that maybe h,e could live xith that alignment. I
don't agree dith that
Batzli: But when that hapPens, I get the imPression from hearing comments
by the various commissioners basically in charge in HennePin county that
it's going to come doon that abandoned rail line. I mean we're not going
to have a choice of rhere it enlers kind of our jurisdiction it seems.
tJildermuth: It's just going to enter the very southern Part of Chanhassen.-
Batzl i : Yeah.
Krauss: t^lell I think you have to realize though that u,e're talking about
the third phase after a 20 year time horizon aL this Point that thev're
looking at. I meen they have some alignments that they own noo and clearlv
they're looking at using those but they haven't done anv real specific
studies for ridership, utilization, station location, anvthing else thev
ulould have to do urhen it becomes more of a realily and they may decide to
change their mind
Batzli: r guess from my PersPective I don't think it's reallv going to be
20 years. I think LRT is going to be accelerated greatlv probablv in the
next couple years but that's iust PerhaPs a Personal opinion but I think
that as gasoline gets very scarce potentially in the near future, there's
going to be incredible demand for advance mass transit.
Planning
Novembe r
Commission Meet i ng7, f99O - Page 33
Fred Hoisington: Brian, I think ma),be you're correct. l,laybe not 2 or 3veers but with, r think ue'II see it in Hopkins sooner than the pran cailsfor. I think beyond Hopkins there are real questiorib and I think you'rerisht. The County and I think John Derris fully expects thaL lhatright-of-wav is r.rhere it's goinE to go and it probabry will. r guess al}we're trying to teII )'/ou in this reiort is don,t close the door on otheroPtions and HennePin County don't close the door on other options becausewe think they ought to look at other things. In terms of ridership, wethink there are much better locations for it.
Ahrens: There are other railroad Iines aren't there?
Fred Hoisington: The only one that would go to Chaska, through Chaskatrould be this particular Iine. There is one of course, thr on" that runsthrough here but then runs north of chaska. Actually north of Jonathanr.rhich would probablv, it might be as good but at this point Joan they,renot locking at lhat as an atlernative. They really had two aLternatives.one was into t'linnetonka and the HinneLonkaees don't like tight rail so it,snot going to be there apparently and the other one is this 6ne and tnis-is-the preferred apparently. And this one is owned and the Soo Line is not.The goo Line is going to continue to have rail traffic on it so there r.rillbe no ability really to put it through here. So it,s going to 9o on that]ine if it's going to go on existing rail li.nes, that'I wrrere ii wilr go.
Ahrens r t^,thy do they want to run it to Chaska anyway?
Fred Hoisington: tJelI r think paul is exactly correct. rf they do get toHopkins in the fairly near term, I would question whethei they;Il "i.. soto Chaska. I really wonder but I could see very easily them coming to idenPrairie center and perhaps never extending beyond that but if they-do, ii-thev stirl want to get over the railroad line and get to chaska, Lnenperhaps that's a good solution but at least for a stretch it makes no senseto me that lhey would use the rail line for that purpose.
Krauss: r think it's significant to realize that none of the light railsvstems that have been built in the last 20 years serve communities thathave 12.ooo people in them. They don't terminate in communities rike ours.Now Nhen in 10 to 12 years from now when we're looking at a population of20,ooo or 25 'ooo with considerable growth, if it happins in Uaconia wilhTH 5 being a commuter route, depending on how things materialize that way,it mav become feasible but you rearly need an intcnsity of, or density oipopulation that Ne're probabLy never going to have out'here_
conrad: t^,hat's the difference between ohat we reviewed on August 1sL andh,hat hJas distributed tonight in our packet? Fred's ,epori.
Fred Hoisington: Ladd, there have been some minor changes. rtrs been solong since we made those. The changes that were maae i,IJ-io do with thecomments that uJere made by each of the city staff's and to a great extentwhat we did r.las tone down the TDM portion of the report and made it clearthat this is ilrustrative and noc inLended to be adopted rock, stock andbarrel by the cities. So uhat ue did uas simply made it optional so the. report is if vou adopt it or accept it and send it onto the council, you,renot saying that you wiII adopt a TDM element. Althoush we still wouldstrongly recommend, as I indicated to you urhen I *as ier. in August, that
PIa nni ng
November
Commission Heet i ng7, 7990 - Page 34
you at least have some policies in your comprehensive plan to dealthet. And I know you've already adopted, I don'L know if you havenot but even if it's nothing more than a phiLosophy, you ought to
something. But that's how we've toned it down at this point.
Batzli: Do ue need a motion to send this on?
with
any or
have
But they may L,ell be there soon. Thank you.
have to approve them anymore.
them.
Batzli: I move that the Planning Commission adopt the final draft of the
Park and Ride Study by the Southr.,est Hetro Transit contained in our Packet -dated November 1st. Do you want us to include your comments addressing th€
study?
Krauss: P I ease .
Batzli: Including the comments addressing the study as noted in the memo
daLed AugusL 2l , L99o by the Planning oirector.
conrad: Is there a second?
t,ildermuth: Second.
Batzli moved, uildermuth seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
that the City Council adop! the final draft of the Park and Ride Studv bv
the Southr.rest lletro Transit with the comments noted in the memo dated
Ausust 2f, ].99O by the Planning Director. AII voted in favor excePt
Emmings and Conrad uho abstained and the motion carried-
t^li ldermuth: tJhy is everybody abstaining?
Conrad: I didn't get a coPy of the rePort so I don't know. I u,as
comfortable uhen we talked about it before and I r.tas comfortable
uith PauI's comments but I didn't have a rePort to aPPlv them to.
Fred Hoisington: I just Hant you Lo k ow thaL tre wero comfortable
ulith Paul's comments too. Other than we feel very strongly about the
importance of transit. You're going to see a great deal more of it and
it's soins to come faster than any of us can imagine.
Conrad: . The economics there huh?
Fred Hoisington: Not
are
yet .
APPROVAL OF I,IINUTES:
Emmi ngs:
Conrad:
Emmi ngs :
l^le 9o that memo thet lre don't
Yeah , r.re don 't have to aPProve
You just have to say.
conrad: Anything else? Okay, thanks Fred.
Kraussr f guess. I'm not sure of the structure but have a motion to
accept, recommend that the Council accept the SouLhwest Hetro report.
Are
T hey
Kreussr There's not been a whole lot on the agendas lately but the IICbuilding urhich you reviewed was approved on Consent. The Easy Rider
Addition which uas final plat for the city. Reorganize some lot lines wasapproved. The ordinance concerning the uretlands and access to the wetland
uas approved. The only reasoD it was delayed at the City Council was that
they didn't have a sufficient super majority at a previous meeting to adoptit so it was adopted at the ]ast meeting. PJ's Bar was approved withoutreally much of an issue. The Klingelhutz plat has been uaylaid for thetime being. They're redesigning i!, BilI Engelhardt had some contact with
Carver County on roadway designs for the upgrade of Lyman, Lake RiIey Blvd
which of course was one of the issues there. There's going !o be some
modificalions lo the plat to accommodate that widening when it should occurso I think they're moving in the iighL direcLion of fixing those roadwayproblems. I pu! the candidate selection in my paper here and there's alsothe addiliorial applieation that you got this evening from Steve Horse !^,ho
was one of the candidates for Council. Is also in the packet I handed out
an attendance sheeL and there's some general information. I've gathered
sorne planning material.
Batzl i: An attendance sheet?
Krauss: Yeah, it's back in there. If you
handed out tonight. Behind Steven Morse's
conrad; okay, I think
tle 've got to schedule,
look at the stuff that was
r esume .
r.re might as well , since we're on this subject.
Annette has resigned?
Conrad: Our standard is 752. I think Jim.
t^,ildermuth: Our standard is 752?
Conrad: Yes .
Krauss: one thing that's not reflected hourever on the attendance record is
the multitude of meetings, special meetings that we had that uere
unrecorded. I don't knour how you lant to take that into account butI don't think the level of effort should be overlooked. That's not
registered here.
Krauss: NelI Annette is thinking apparently.
olsen: She may call you. She doesn't t.rant to continue and then in 3
months have to quit if it becomes too much but I think she's realizing that
thinss are kind of slowing down. It's not necessarily midnisht meetings
all the lime and she ulants to stay but she do€sn't b,ant to do it like Dave
Headla did and quit in the middle. So I don't know. I think she will not
cont i nue .
Emnings: Her term is up is it not?
Planning Commission Meet i ng
November 7, l99O - Page 35
Conrad: If lhere are no coryections, the l,linutes stand approved.there any corrections? There are no corrections to the l,,linutes.stand approved.
CITY COUNCIL UPDATE:
Olsen: It's up.
Kr auss : l.Je have 3
Emmings: So if she
OIsen: Risht.
terms that are up. It's Annette, Brian's and Jim's.
t^,ants to do it she 'I I have to apply .
Conrad: Brian are you applying?
Batzl i : Yes.
Conrad: Okay, Jim are you applying?
l.Ji I der mut h: Yes.
Conrad: O kay .
Krauss: Horl do we uork it when we have standing members that would Iike tcreapply. Do we stiII interview everybody?
Conrad: The one thing that we do do. t^lhat I don,t want to do, well.I feel real comfortable. If we knou we have a vacancy, then f uranE tobring everybody in that's applied. If they've got an applicaLion, we,regoing to talk to Lhem, Hor.rever, if we've got 3 members applying for 3positions, I've got to figure this out. I don't u,ant to deceive people,
There's never been a case when ue have not reappointed somebody so goingthrough an exercise of interviewing and wasting people's time to interview -i.then we don'L have a real precedent for changing. I don't Hant to do that.
Emmings: Excep! there's been a time in the past when it wasit no Ionger is.our choice and-
Conrad: Risht .
Krauss: That's a concern I have and possibly Ladd, maybe there,s two phone-calls that you need to make. First is to Annette and we need to know
cuick.Ly what her intentions are. The second one possibly is to the Hayorand asking if ue three want reappointment, do you still uant to send lheLop three candidaLes plus yourselves forward or do you u,ant to circumventthat process?
Planning Commission Heet i ng
November 7, f99O - Page 35
Emmings: So it's different. The Council's going to make the decision.
Conrad: Okay, I'I1 talk to Don and I'11 talk to Annette
Krauss: If you can let me know so ue can schedule i.! for our next meeting.
Emmings: t^le certainly t,on't intervieur anybody who's been on the Commissionbu! the City Council may Hant to.
Conrad: Ri ght .
Emmings: They interviewed us all last time around didn't they?
Planni ns
November
Commission Meet i ng7, l99O - Page 37
conrad: I think they did.
Emmings: They did me because it was all neb,.
Olsen: But when you reapplied they didn't?
conrad: I think they did. In fact I do like that idea. I think that'sreally a good exercise. If they have some. I just think that's a good
exerci.se. It takes the burden off the peers and puts it onto the people
who do the appointing and I think that's really appropriate. That's not toget out of a burden but the fact of the matter is, it's real difficult to
be real honest trith peers and to do something that might be negative butI think it's real appropriate that the city Council review people that have
been here. Okay, so f'lI caII Annelte. I'lI caII Don. tle'II figure thatout and if that goes, if Annette is for sure not going to apply, then we'I1bring in anybody r.,ho wants to talk to us for an intervieu.
I
Ahrens: PauI , can you tell us again rhen our meetings are? I lost theIetter you sent out. In December. Did you say the meetings?
Olsen: There's jus!one.
on here.December 12th.Erim i ngs : It's right
Ahrens: Oh, okay.
Kraussr t^Jell actually I should also te]I you though that I Hant !o
schedule a meeting for the City Council to recieve and hopefully act on the
Comprehensive PIan before the end of the year. I was talking to the Mayor
this morning. It's probably going to have to be done on a special meeting
basis because there is a potential that we stiII may have considerable
numbers of people shouring up. I think the ulay that that should be handled
is that you need to be there to present the plan to the Council basically.
Here's the r,rork we've completed. We're here to answer questions. I'IIcertainly be there but you know, you've put 2 years of effort into this
document and I think it uarrants out of the extraordinary that's not just
me carrying forurard your recommendations but being there in body as well as
spirit. So I don't know of the exact date for that but ule're uorking ongetting all these dates shaken out this Heek so tJe can tell you very soon.
Emmings: I think it makes
be.
sense for as many of us to be there as we can
conrad: okay. tJe're back on staff report. Paul , item number 7
Krauss: Yes, I told you Ladd at the last meeting about the rural areapolicies that they're changing their persPective. The Hetro Council. LJe
are urorking up a written response to the HeLro Council and ue're also
working a response through our Southuest Communities Coalition. Basically
ure're supportive of the fact that Lhe Melro council is indicatins
flexibility uhich is something they rarely do. I'm not sure their
flexibility is well focused at this poin!. I'm noL certain that at thispoint they've dealt well enough. They've come up urith an idea called
transition area. That's great. I mean u,e certainly are on the cusP of a
transition. I mean rre are a transitionary outside the MUSA Iine as are
Planning
November
Commission l.,leeting7, f99O - Page 38
many of the third and fourth ring communities but they don't talk aboutwhat that transit.ion area is supposed to be very much .and they don't dealwith conflicls lhat say that you can,t build a 4lane hishway through atransition area even if the traffic warrants it because Chaska's on eheother side. They've created transition areas and nouJ I thi.nk they have to -
deal with j.t so ure're asking Lhem to confront those sorts of things. Iwill keep you informed of that and I think it's going to lead into some ofthe work tasks that u,e u,ant to undertake. I know Tim has periodically -tarked about the minimum 2 L/2 acye lot sizes in the rurar areas. r thinkNe've seen, whether or not it's a lifestyle we concur uith or not, how muchof a problem those subdivisions are to devel,op around and it may urellbehoove us to allow lot sizes down to l acre if you can accommodate the onsite sewer so they get that same number of houses. It,s just compressedinto a much more manageable aiea. But u,e'Il be bringing this forward toyou in probably the next month or tuJo when we see how this shakes out,
conradr Good. AnyLhing paul under Ongoing Items?
Krauss: No .
a
Conrad: Adminstrative Approvals? Open Discussion? I think Erharthere so we uJon't have his favorite. t^le'll wait for Tim to show. Ueabout applications for the PIanni.ng Commission. Anything else?
Batzli.: I noted the new status, I think it's new, of the rezoning thedistrict to A-2 on our status sheet. It's nou, scheduled.
Conrad: Anything e Ise?
is not -ta I kec
Batzli: Yeah, is our fees in lieu of parkland ordinance valid still?
Krauss: t^teLl, r think it is but r wanted that to go also to the park Boardand have them evaluate it. sometimes the uay in which it,s calculatedleaves us open r think to contested situations but ue've been consistent atanv rate. The policv is fairlv well established. rn fact frankly, eitherwe've been doing something tha!'s innovative in Minnesota for the last 15years because nobody else is doing it or the rest of the country's waybehind us because basically that's the way l,linnesota communities do it-
BF
Emmings moved, Batzli seconded to adjourn the meeting-and the motion carried. The meeting ras adjourned at
Submitted by Paul Krauss
Planning Director
AII voted in favor
10:oo P.m-.
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CITY OF
EH[NH[SSEN
1
2
690 COULTEB DRIVE. P.O. BOX.I47 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-s739
UEUORANDI'U
To: Planning Connission
FRo!{: Paul. Krauss, Plannlng Director
DATE: l{overnber 2L, L99O
SUBT: Report fron Planning Director
At the City Council neeting on l{onday, Novenber 19, 1990, thefollowing actions were taken:
The site plan amendrnent for l,Icclynn Bakeries to add a 52,972
square foot manufacturing addition and a 3,600 square footrefrigeration eguipnent building addition tas approved on the
consent Agenda.
Strgar, Roscoe and Fausch Traffic consultantE working for the
Chanhassen HRA presented a prelininary report on downtowntraffic and street design of llest 78th street. The ERA
conmissioned the study last spring with the goal of a getting
a better handle on the need for inprovenents to west 78thstreet in light of continuing developroent in Chanhassencentral Business District and to review the existing street
designs for conpatibility. The report indicated thatsignificant growth is expected in the downtown as connercial
developnent continuee. A€ a result of sRFrs input, 78thstreet is being desigmed for a four lane section from uarket
Boulevard west to Kerber Boulevard. The consultants indicatedfurther that existing 78th street fron }larket Boulevard eastto Great Plains Boulevard Day uel1 need to be widened to four
lane at sone point in the future, however, the inclusion ofturn lanes and sone geonetric rnodifications would probably
suffice to aIlow the street 6ection to remain as developed in
the short run. Signals are also envisioned to be required at
ttlarket,/Great Plains and potentially Iaredo. The Councilprovided interaction on prelininary results giving the
consuftants direction for further study. The consultants will
be naking reports to the HRA in the future and staff rrill keep
the Planning Cornmission posted on the reportrs progress.
Planning Commission
Report froD Planning Director
Novenber 21, 1990
Page 2
The Council reviewed a preliminary plat to subdivide 8.7 acresinto 15 single fanily lots called the Troendle Addition. Arearesidents again raised guestions about traffic suitability of
Lake Lucy Road as the sole entrance to the Troendle .Adldition
and Vineland Forest. Ihey pressed the Council to proceed withplans to connect Nez Perce through the Owens r property
Pleasant vier,r. Staff indicated that ve did not have a problenwith this, however, it involved the property of a party thatiras not involved with this subdlvision. An attorney for FrankBeddor indicated that the Orrens property is in bankruptcy andthey could not voluntarily sell the property. However, if theCity wished to proceed with a conderona€ion, this nay beacceptable. Staff discussed other issues relative to thep1at. The applicant is now willing to agree to the conditionto provide the 7 foot of additional right-of-way alongPleasant view. They are continuing to ask for a variance fo;the existing. barn, and while no action was taken by theCouncil on this natter specifically, there appeared to b6 sornedesire to compromise on this issue. Ultina-tLly, the Councitelected to continue action on this itern directing staff towork to undertake a revieu of rhat would be required toconplete Nez Perce to pleasant View.
5
The City Council adopted the final park
Southwest Uetro Transit.and Ride Study for
The city Council approved utility rates for the Surface WaterUtility Program that had been appioved several nonths earlier.Financing for the utility was approved at a rate approxinately60t of nhat had been requested by staff.
Adninistrative Site Plan Approvals:
ct Staff has authorized a nodification to . the ChanhassenHospitality Suites Hote1. The trash enclosure wasoriginalJ.y to be located adjacent to the west ira11 of thebuilding. Ultiroately, ttris location proved to beinfeasible because of the lack of coordiriation betweEnthe developer and the City resulting in the placeDent ofvater shut off vaLves in the original locafion for thetrash enclosure. The developers unilaterally built an 8foot tall wood trash enclosure in the west farking lot.staff .raised obj ections to this location dueio it,i frigfrvisibility and received conFlaints from aaioiniilproperty orrner as well. Staff worked out a coulronis6agreenent on the trash enclosure whereby it sill be cutfrom 8 feet to 5 feet in itls present l6cation and wiitbe reclad in siding to natch the hotel. Staff believesthat this is a highly visible location for the trash
3.
6.
Planning Conmission
Report froD Planning Director
Novenber 2L, L99O
Page 3
7
dumpster sitting in what is essentially the front yard
on what will be the najor entrance into the ChanhassenCentral Business District. We believe that the nodifiedplan for the enclosure is the best that can be expected
under the circunstances.City council review of Comprehensive PIan. Staff discussedestablishing a date for the City Council to review the
Cornprehensive Plan. Originally, the Council had indicatedthat this \rou1d probably be heard in Decenber, however, due tothe large number of budget meetings and short time available,the Council has elected to hofd a special meeting inconjunction with the Planning Conuission on Monday, January7th, at 723O p.n. I am reguesting that the Planning
Comrnission be present to present the PIan to the City Council
and to respond to such questions as they may have. Staff vri11proceed to advertise this neeting in the usual manner. It is
hoped that the City Council. t s review of the Plan can beconpleted as soon as possible so that it nay be forwarded tothe Metro Council and the plan accepted and IIUSA line nodifiedprior to the end of the 1991 construction season.
Staff has also spoken to two parties rrho are probably going to
make requests to the City Council to nodify the ConprehensivePlan. The first proposal concerns the 137 acre site adjacentto Tinben ood. Staff has always represented to the PlanningCommission that if someone rrere to bring along aoffice/industrial class A caDpus type project, that lre would
be willing to bring it forward to the Planning ConEission foryour revierr. We believe that this is a valid strategy inspite of the previous discussions on this site since it nay infact offer the Tirnbenrood residents the kind of developnentthat they desire and it uay be advantageous for the City forthis to occur. I have talked to a group of individuals whoclaim to have a tenant for most of the site locked up and iswilling to build a canpus type facility. I have seen no plans
and cannot teII you that a project such as rre are looking foractually exists. However, these individuals are nakingrepresentation that they could put such a project together and
nay lrish to talk to you and the City Council about this. Ifthey proceed with these plans, staff will bring theu beforeyou Irith some analysis.
The second concerns the Rod Gramsrs property. Rod cramscontacted staff regarding the property and itts potential use.This site vas originally to be gruided for industrial officeuse but vas then converted to residential use due to theissues raised by sun Ridge Court and Audubon Road homeowners.I,[r. crams does not object to the residential designation,
however, he believes that there may be a better split of this
Planning Conmission
Report fron Planning Director
Novenber 21, L99o
Page 4
property with the northern part being industrial and the
southern part being residential. He believes this is the case
because the property is bisected by a pipeline which takes alarge swath of land and acts to physically separate theproperty into two parcels. It is also difficult to developresidentially around these pipelines for obvious reasons. lilr.
crams or his attorney uay nake a proposal along these lines tothe City Council. This proposal was originally to be made byMr. cramsr attorney at the public hearing before the Planning
Commission, however, the attorney was unable to be presentthat evening.
As the Planning Coromission is aware, staff has been workingwith Carver County and other agencies on the Eastern Carver
County Transportation Study. The document has recently been
completed and included with our Conprehensive Plan. A publichearing for elected and appointed officials is going to beheld on lrtonday, Decenber 10th fron 7:00 p.n. to 9:00 p.n. atthe Carver County Courthouse to review this document.Unfortunately, this night coincides with a city Councilmeeting, so staff and the City Council will be unable toattend. However, the Planning Conmission is welcone to attendand provide any conment you feel appropriate. Staff !ri1latternpt to have the consultant and the County Engineer presentat a neeting of the City council in January to discuss theEastern Carver County Study with then in person and of coursethe Planning Commission will be invited to this as rrell.
r R! rr,
CAFVEN @UNTY COUNTHOUSE
GOO EAST
'TII
STREET
CHAS(A, XINNESOTA 553r8
1
CCX]NTY O CAPVrc
Novenber 14, 1990
Carver County Board of Connissioners
Carver City Council
Chanhassen City Counci]
Chaska city councilVictoria City Council
Waconia City Counci 1
rRou Eastern Carver county fransportation Iechnical co!0nittee
Roger custafson, carver county Engineer, conynittee Chair
SUR EcT: Eastern Carver county Conprehensive fransportation
Planning study - Fina1 Report
The transportation study of €astern Carver county began in
February, 1989, and uas expanded to lnclude light rail transl.t (LRl)
and the City of lfaconia Ln Decenber, 1989. The final report of thestudy 16 attached for your infornatlon. The rtudy report ls aprofessional and technical evaluation of transportation supply and
derand in eastern Carver County. It provides the fraDework fortransportatlon plannlng through the year 2010. f'lre findings and
recoE[endations in the report provlde a valuable resource rhenconiiderlng future conprehensive plan revJ.sl.ons, capital LDprov.EentprograDs, work prograns, right-of-ray acqulsltlon and preservationlnltlatives, and Jurisdictlonal transf€rs.
The cooperation and coordlnatlon anong tbe countyra and clties,Btaffs has b€en very beneficlal throughout the Btudy. It tE rtrongly
recoEaended that the transportatlon tecbnlcal coEDittee be continuedae a planning and coordinatl.ng comittee. A nuDber of activitles ofthe cornlttee during the next tro yearE rould be:
Review couprehensive plan revlBlona to lalntaln consl,etencysith the base roadeay systeD or a nodiflcation of lt.
TO
Up,alate the Eastern Can Gr County '8ra!flc t{odel to conforosith a revlsed h/WI - Xetropol ltan Councl.l lodel for the
uetropol itan lrea.
Afln'lEfn Actt,llEel4l O*ofimtv E n**t
'IJBLIC
WORI(S D:PANTME T
lar2l aa+r213
2.
\.t
llovetnber 14 , 19 9 0
Page Tro
4
5.
6
A najor product of the Eastern carver County studyis the Eastern Carver County Traffic Uodel . This
nodel includes the base roadway networkcharacteristics, denographic forecasts by zone,
and forecast traffic volunes by roadway 6egnent.
The availability of this nodel enables theconnittee, a city, or the county to quickly
evaluate the traffic inpacts of changes in landuse and base roadway characteristics. Ihispernits nore effective interaction sith the
Un/DoE, tletropolitan Council, .developers, andothers when considering proposed conprehensiveplan nodificati.ons.
Consider and/or propose Deasures to preserve roadraycorri.dors needed ln the future.
Assist in coordinating the tlning for constructing portionsof the base roadsay 6ysten.
Review the design characteristics of various portions of the
base roadnay systen for consistency (speed, strengtth,capacity. . . ).
Evaluate current and future jurisdictional responsibilitiesfor the base roadway Eysten (state, county, city, township).
Evaluate current systen desigmatlons (F.A.S., F.A.U.,C.S.A.H., Irl.S.A.S. ...) and reconmend approprJ.atenodifications .
llonitor conditions affecting transportation (developnent,light rail transit, railroad abandonrnent.. . ).
3
7
- A presentation of this study has been scheduled for the evenlngof Decenber 10. This presentation ril.I be the initial opportunity iorrany county
- officials and others to be lnforEed about th- einaingl anareconnendations contained in the study. Representatlves fron tlrecounty, al.1 the cities, all the tornships, lqn/DOT, Xetropol.itanCouncil, the legislature, and other groupi and orfanlzations wiU benotified of this presentation. A copy oi the prelentation notice lsattached to this DeDoranduD.
Attachenent
I
PRESENTATION NOEICE
EA,SITEETN CA-r\'ER, CC)I,N8Y
CO!{PR.EIIENS I\78 EFI..LNSPtr)F'.1D4'TIC)NPI.A,ND'ING STITE)Y
carver county and the citles of chaska,
chanhassen, carver, Victorla and waconia are
pleased to present this report as a valuable
iesource in- advancing the obJective of providing
an adequate street and highrray syst€n to aerve the
projec€ed poputation and eroploynent growth in the
eastern portion of carver county.
FINA.I. R,EPO.EIE
CITY OF
CH[NH[SSE[I
690 COULTER DRIVE . P.O. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
TO
IIIEMORANDI.,}{
FROM:
DATE:
SU&f:
Planning Coromission
Paul Krauss, Planning Director
NoveDber 2L, L99O
Report from Planning Director
L
2
At the City Council neeting on l{onday, Novenber 19, 1990, thefollowing actions rrere taken:
The site plan anendment for t{ccl}mn Bakeries to add a 52,972square foot nanufacturing addition and a 3,600 square footrefrigeration equipnent building addition was approved on the
Consent Agenda.
Strgar, Roscoe and Fausch Traffic Consultants working for the
Chanhassen HRA presented a prelininary report on downtor4rntraffic and street design of West 78th Street. The HRA
commissioned the study last spring rrith the goal of a gettinga better handle on the need for inprovenents to west Z8thStreet in light of continuing development in ChanhassenCentral Business District and to review the existing streetdesigns for conpatibility. Ihe report indicated thatsignificant grorth is expected in the dolrntown as conmercial
development continues. A6 a result of SRIrs input, 78thStreet is being designed for a four lane eection fron llarketBoulevard west to Kerber Boulevard. The consultants indicatedfurther that existing 78th Street fron titarket Boulevard eastto creat Plains BouLevard nay ue1I need to be widened to fourlane at sone point in the future, hovever, the inclusion ofturn lanes and some geonetrlc nodifications rrould probablysuffice to allow the street section to renain as developed inthe short run. Signals are also envisioned to be required atIilarket/Great PLains and potentially Laredo. The Councilprovided interaction on prelininary results giving theconsultants direction for further study. The consultants will
be naking reports to the HnA in the future and staff will keepthe Planning Commission posted on the reportrs progress.
Planning Connission
Report froD Planning Director
November 21, l99o
Paqe 2
J The Council reviewed a prelininary plat to subdivide 8.7 acresinto 15 single fanily lots called the Troendle Addition. Area
residents again raised guestions about traffic suitability of
Lake Lucy Road as the sole entrance to the Troendle .Acldition
and Vineland forest. They pressed the Council to proceed withplans to connect llez Perce through the Owens t property
Pl,easant View. Staff indicated that we did not have a problenwith this, however, it involved the property of a party that
rras not involved with this subdivision. An attorney for frank
Beddor indicated that the orrens property is in bankruptcy andthey could not voluntarily sell the property. However, if theCity wished to proceed with a condernnation, this nay beacceptable. Staff discussed other issues relative to theplat. The applicant is now willing to aqree to the conditionto provide the 7 foot of additional right-of-way alongPleasant View. They are continuing to ask for a variance forthe existing barn, and vhile no action was taken by theCouncil on this natter specifically, there appeared to be somedesire to conpronise on this issue. Ultirnately, the Councilelected to continue action on this iten directing staff towork to undertake a review of what would be required toconplete Nez Perce to Pleasant Vierr.
5
The City Council adopted the finaL Park
southwest Uetro Transit.and Ride study for
The City Council approved utility rates for the Surface WaterUtitity Progran that had been approved several months earlier.Financing for the utility rras approved at a rate approxinately60t of what had been requested by staff.
6. Adninistrative Site Plan Approvals:
Staff has authorized a nodification to . the ChanhassenHospitality Suites Hote1. fhe trash enclosure wasoriginally to be located adj acent to the west wall of thebuilding. Ultinately, this Location proved to beinfeasible because of the Lack of coordination betweenthe developer and the city resulting ln the placeDent ofrrater 6hut off valves in the original location for thetrash enclosure. The developers unilaterally built an 8foot taII wood trash enclosure in the uest parking lot.staff.raised obj ections to this location due to itr; highvisibility and received conplaints from adjoiningproperty owner as vell . Staff worked out a coupromiseagreenent on the trash enclosure whereby it ui1I be cutfron I feet to 6 feet in itrs present location and !ril1be reclad in siding to match the hotel. Staff believesthat this is a highly visible location for the trash
a.
Planning Conrnission
Report fron Planning Director
NoveEber 21, 1990
Page 3
7.
dumpster sitting in uhat is essentially the front yard
on uhat will be the najor entrance into the ChanhassenCentral Business District. We believe that the nodifiedplan for the enclosure is the best that can be expected
under the circunstances.City council review of Conprehensive Plan. Staff discussedestablishing a date for the City Council to review the
Conprehensive PIan. Originally, the Council had indicatedthat this would probably be heard in Decenber, horrever, due tothe large nunber of budget neetings and short tirne available,the Council has efected to hold a special meeting inconJunction lrith the Planning Connissj.on on Monday, January7th, at 7.3o p.D. I am requesting that the Planning
Cornnission be present to present the Plan to the City Council
and to respond to such questions as they may have. Staff willproceed to advertise this neeting in the usual manner. It is
hoped that the City Councifrs review of the Plan can beconpleted as soon as possible so that it nay be forl arded tothe Metro Council and the plan accepted and UUSA line nodifiedprior to the end of the 1991 construction season.
Staff has also spoken to tuo parties who are probably going to
make requests to the City Council to toodify 916 g6mprehensive
Plan. The first proposal concerns the 137 acre site adjacentto Tinberrood. Staff has always represented to the PlanningConmission that if someone were to bring along aofficer/industrial class A campus type project, that rre rrould
be willing to bring it forl ard to the Planning Conmission foryour review. We believe that this is a valid strateg'y inspite of the previous discussions on this site since it nay infact offer the Tinbererood residents the kind of developmentthat they desire and it nay be advantageous for the City forthis to occur. I have talked to a group of individuals whoclaiu to have a tenant for nost of the site locked up and iswilling to build a canpus type facility. I have seen no plans
and cannot telL you that a proj ect such as we are looking foractually exists. However, these individuals are making
representation that they could put such a project together and
nay wish to talk to you and the City Council about this. Ifthey proceed vith these plans, staff will bring them beforeyou with soroe analysis.
The second concernE the Rod cramsrs property. Rod cranscontacted staff regarding the properly and itts potential use.This site was originally to be guided for industriat officeuse but was then converted to residential use due to theissues raised by Sun Ridge Court and Audubon Road homeowners.Ur. crams does not obj ect to the residential designation,
however, he believes that there may be a better sp).it of this
Planning Co'nnission
Report frorn Planning Director
November 21, 1990
Page 4
8
property with the northern part being industrial and the
southern part being residential . He believes this is the case
because the property is bisected by a pipeline uhich takes alarge srrath of land and acts to physically separate theproperty into tno parcels. It is also difficutt to developresidentially around these pipelines for obvious reasons. ltr.
crans or his attorney may make a proposal along these lines tothe City Council . This proposal was originally to be nade byur. crams I attorney at the public hearing before the Planning
Conmission, hosever, the attorney was unable to be presentthat evening.
As the Planning Couuission is aware, staff has been workingwith Carver County and other agencies on the Eastern Carver
County Transportation Study. The document has recently beenconpleted and included vith our Conprehensive PIan. A pubtj.chearing for elected and appointed officials is going to behel,d on lrlonday, Decerober 10th fron 7:00 p.n. to 9:00 p.n. atthe Carver County courthouse to review this document.Unfortunately, this night coincides with a city Councilmeeting, so staff and the City Council wl11 be unable toattend. However, the Planning Connission is welcone to attendand provide any connent you feel appropriate. Staff wiLlattenpt to have the consultant and the County Engineer presentat a meeting of the City Council in January to discuss theEastern Carver County Study with then in person and of coursethe Planning cornrnS"ssion will be invited to this as ve11.
'iJ3LIC
WORKS DE?ARTHE T
lct2t aaat213
Novenber 14, 1990
TO:
rRou:
SUBJECT:
2.
C,ANVEh OOUNTY COURTHOUSE
GOO EAST .TH STBEET
GHASKA, XtXl\lESOTA 553r8
CCINTY O CAPVru
carver county Board of CounissionersCarver City Council
Chanhassen City Council
chaska city councilVictoria City Councill{aconia city council
Eastern Carver County Transportation technical CoDmitteeRoger Gustafson, Carver County Engineer, Cornnittee Chalr
Eastern carver co"r:'ty Coroprehensive transportationPlanning study - Final Report
Revierr conprehenslve pl.an revl.sions to taintaln consistencvpith the base roadway aysteD or a Dodification oi-ft.---- -'
Update the.Eastern carver County Trrlflc t{odel to conforwlth a revlsed Dlnr/mT - Xetropolltan Councll a"aif-ioi-Ur"netropolltan area.
The transportation study of €astern Carver County beqan inFebruary, -1989, and uas expanded to Lnclude right raii trinsit trnrland-the city of l{aconia in Decenber, 1989. rtl6 rinal repoii of theetudy ls attached for your inforaation. The stuay i-poi[-fi aprofessional and technical cvaluatlon of transporiatt6n eulpry anadenand in eastern carver county. rt provides ine irintpoil'ro.transportation pranning through the year 2010. rhe flndints andrecoEmendations in the report provid- a valuable reeource rih"r,considerlng future conprehenslve plan revisions, c.prGi -ruproveDent
pl?gI.p?, sork prograrns, rlght-of-ray acquislti6n aira preselvationlnitlatives, and Jurisdictlonal transfers.
. - -fh9 cooperatl.on and coordinatlon anong the countyrs and cltles,:!!ffs has-been.very beneficlar. throughout-the atudy. rt-ls strong].yreconnended that the transportatlon ttchnlcal colllitee be contlnu6d'as a pranning and coordinating corulttee. A nunber ot actrviirii oithe conraittee during the next tro yeara uoul.d be:
H ( /,
Mintgti* Actlgy'f4],{,l Opnwnty Emglol*t
1.
\"t
l{oveDber 14, 1990
Page Trro
3
5
6
7
I
A najor product of the Eastern carver county studyis the Eastern carver County Traffic l,lodel. This
nodel includes the base roadway netuorkcharacteristics, deDographic forecasts by zone,
and forecast traffic volunes by roaduay segment.
The availability of this Dodel enables the
conmittee, a city, or tlre county to quickly
evaluate the traffic inpacts of changes in land
use and base roaduay characteristics. Thisperrnits nore effective interaction with the
l{n/DOT, Hetropolitan Council, .developers, andothers when considering proposed conprehensiveplan nodifications.
Consider and/or propose Deasures to preserve roadwaycorridors needed in the future.
Assist in coordinating the tlning for constructlng portions
of the base roadeay systeD.
Review the design characteristics of various Portions of the
base roadway systen for conslstency (speed, strength,capacity...).
Evaluate current and future jurisdictional responsibllitiesfor the base roadway systero (atate, county, city, tonnship).
Evaluate cuEent Eysten deslgnations (F.A.s., F.A.U.,
C.S.A.H., tl.S.A.S. ...) and recoDDend approPriate
uodifications.
Honitor conditions affecting transportatlon (developnent,light rail transit, railroad abandonnent. . . ) .
AttacheDent
4.
A presentation of this study has been scheduled for the eveningof Decerob€r 10. This presentation will be the lnitial opportunity for
lany county officials and others to be lnforned about the flndings and
recounendations contained in the study. nepresentatives fron ttre
county, at1 the cities , a1l the townships , l(n/NT , t{etropolitanCouncil, the legislature, and other groups and organlzations sill benotified of this presentation. A copy of the presentation notice is
attached to this nenorandum.
E-A.S'EEEIN CAR\'ETT EO\,NINY
COITPREIIENS IvE EFI/A,NSP'C)R.1DAITIONPLAlrNIlre slrt E)Y
FINAI. EIEPC)-IT
carver county and the cities of Chaska,
chanhiiien, carvei, victoria and lfaconia are
"i"il!a to present this report as a valuable
I!.o"i."-in-iavancing the objective of providing
an- adequate street aia nignway systen to serve the
;;.1;;i;a-;oputation and tnplovn-nt srowth in the
ia=fert poition of carver county '
I
POSIIIOX DESIRED
tlt'E. l{alter ElIsworth Thompson
lrAlE to-l i-so
APPLICA?IOX FOR CBATIH ASSEN GOTfiISSION
P l ann ing
IT,?BBXAIE
BIT'BDIIE
public Safety
7-29-43
IDDIESS 8002 Erie Avenue
BOSIIESS PBOXE
lor &oic Blvl loo LtvtD tl clrrtrssBl Dec. 1989
: IIGEES? LlmL o! tDocl?lor lrtlltlD, pgus DEGIIIS, t! lrt 2'years coll.
loil! PEOXE 934-6343 566-6723
-
CENIEf,I ITIPLOTHEf,I: IGIYE Posl?rotr, IIIPLoIEB, Im EBIII DtscgssloI oPDrrttls. IF rHpLorrEf,? rs rrLttryELi tlctfr, itscoss pBwraua E[pLOt_IIETI IS TIELL
'
na er at Brookdal e uare Movies for we have 8 theatlers in one co np 1ex.
Also partine sales for the Star Tribrme Newspaper of The Twin Cities f,or six years
IC'IVIIIES IrD ITPILIATIOXS:
TECOGUITIOTS RECEIVED, IB Af,I'
(tTcLuDE ELECIIV! oEFIcEs IrD f,olols oRve served on the Devel openent Commiss ion1
in Eden Prairie up until it disbantled. Also a nember of Pax Christi Catholic Conm-
unity.
interested in the City of C.hanhdssen and its future growth.I l-z
lI ?lLtIG rrlls LPPLICI?IO!, I orDEnstLrD tEtl I oorrtrrtllt ot' E ,ItrE,3IEBqI, rItERESt, IXD plnrlctptttof, rILL BE t rVO!,y!D, lID t ltl plt-PIRID ?o rrrr 80cr I eol{rltHErt tt ?Bl wErt t er epiorrrzo to tf,tl80v! cot{[Isstol.
a GXA
..rJ-,.---.-
.}-..9
t
(oPttoIrL,
-
I
IEASOIS FOR SEEf,rf,c IHIS POSITIOT txD SPECIAL OOALIPIGT?IOIS: r,m verv
I
I
DAIE /1
IPPLICI?IOf,toR en IIIHASSETI ooHrtssloll
EOSIIIOU DISIBED anni ry\lLtt8Itt!
IAHE!Btrt8Drtt (oPltouL)
IDDEESS
1\lot{l PEOf,E 1->>t 1 tOStflSS DtOIt ,!/.}^.A_
bsr ls,l170
lor lorc rrv! rou LrrrD rr caltrla'tr )
ltGEtSt tEyEL O! tDocl?tor lrllttlD, tLoS Dlctlla Il rrl,
Connlf,l lrpLorxExr: -Iclyl_!9gltrotr, tHpLorlr, lrD Brrl! DrscEssror olDgtrls. r! tnpLornEf,r ts rlrtrrvrii Ecirrr Dtscoas prwrous trrpLor-tlrt ls rBL!,
:1.)&'t)-Ba
tA *r'oxz s
1'q-t(?
/\tn( \^{ {G,J ?n,.Z-
L-2.s "!;.e r\1-
lgrlvtrrEs t^uD lrPrLtAttors:tEcoc[trloxs tEcEtvED, tE AIt'
(trcLuDE lLlcltty! otttcls lrD Eorols or
llrsous ?oR sEEf,trc ttlts postttor IID aplcrrl, oglLttlclttofssJ la4-
n
l4r'aA<,Z**
4n-L..--
II ?ILIIG ?Hts lPPLlgtltor, t orDEBstlro ttl? I Go;rttHtrt ot E ltn!,ITERGT, IX tE8tst, tID DAAttclPA?IOt rIt',L B! t tYoL9lD, IID t xt PT8.DTRID ?O IttKg Slrct I @ttltrrrrr? tr tEl wlt?I III IPPOII'tD ?o tBlIBOVtcor{IISSIOT.
t AI
a
I
'c
DTIE o
coHrI ss I o
lLtaafttt
aIIlBDrt! (OPttorr&,
e-
z
6ob
POSIT
llxE!
IDDRESS
IOU DESIRED
tor{E PEOX!39-bq 3c7'tostlEss PBOTB
tor Lorc E.'rt too &tED tr na^rElsstr Z -r ,
ltGElSr EtytL o! tDocl?tor ltlltttD , DtuS Dlcttts, t" lry12rt+
ctlnRrrr L.SPS.3!HEE!: -(G:.;E_FOSITIOE, IitpLOrEB, lrD BitA! DIBCITSSIOI O!Dorrls. r! EnpLorxEf,r rE rr&rrrvzr.i tcclur. itscoss ;itri6i rtrplol-ltEf,I TS TELL'
S
tc?tvtTI AXD APPILTAIIOTS:(IICLI'D8 IL
A^)h
s ,+,Pao 1
lr ors on
')
IEASOTS POR SEEf,IIC
'BIS POSIIIOT I,D SP IrL Ourr,ttrct?torss
J
Ir tt&trc tHIs lPPLtcrttor I EBSttrD ?Btt I
0
olE tInt,llEBGt, lrtERlst, lrD Plat rctPAttor rltL !t trYoLglD ,lrDlIt?t IDInED ?O XAX! SUCA I CClrXt lHlrr tt tBl tivlrt t It'lPPotI?aD !o ?t IIBOVE COHnISSIOT.
at A
RECEIVEB
ocT 2 91990
CITY OF CHANHASEEN
..{rq
-.:al... ra-ErE-E.a- r.
APPLICITIOX ?OR CRTXHTSSEN
I
I
a
:
lEcoG[ItIOf,S SSCEMD, tE tut
I DATE I -an -?0
oorfiI ssI oN
?E8UT?E g
BIrrEDl?r (oPrtou&l /l-tg,-.,',-
-rtu=J-
?osttlox DESI'ED p
IA!{T:
rDDBEss 6{1o l{a z E t'J
lorr prorE __1lr/-9ru{
-_i_
EXce/srbe /4N -rsj t/
4..)hs,a/!osrrtss E
lor LOIG aryt lou t,tvlD tt crrrprestr 3+f? J c-<,Jt?q,
ttcEtst &wtL o! tDocl?tor lrtltflD D&OA Dlctats, t? lrr
A A /)A qp €{6rz"p$,'"!A alJ Huo,t€.rJ al/<--
E!{FLOTHESTs (Gi"E psstrlol, ttlpLOrEE, ttrD BBIE! DTECDSSTOI OrrlLlrpLorrErr rs rlLmrrrii iiiciil-iriloss prBeross t;p&or-
c-l
ANDD'N'
DOrt ES.ttErt ls
Co
*r+;/t'
lertvttlEs ArD aFPtLltttors:IECOGtlIIroBS SECrrvED, tP tf t, (ircLuDE lt.tcttvl olttcls lrD SOIOrs oB
ln/
TEASOTS TOR SEEf,rrc ?EIs postttot rID Sptctr& oul&tltclrtorss
PTRED
'O
xrrE 80cE I OOXllT ?x8rt t! ?E! Rytrt I
U
I
lI rlttrc tfirs rP PLICAITOI a t orDtrstlrD t8r? I Ootot Itlltlr ol E tI llt,tTERGT tItERrSt, aID PAS'IC IPAIIOI rl&L BI I TVOLYID , ltD t ltl ?rE-laovr col|llrsstor.POIrtaD to ?8!
It!t
RECE'YEO
ocT 3 0 1990
C,Ty oF CHAN},ASSEN
IPPLICI?!Of, rOR CBAf,HASSETI
I
I
a
DITE /o- z7'7'o
IPPLICITIOX toR ERTXHASSEI col{rI sslor
DOSI?IOtr DESIBBD l.y' 1c. ,v \-o t"n
2 \.s
ote
lJvu'l t
fiiu,t.0r
f 6^^.\-s 'rh
a./ IL?EBIA?E
llrtEDtt! (oPttolrtl 5 A5-/t
leEa DlcrltS, t? trt
lcrt5
o-
lso ^t
a
IDDBESS *OD I t-Jq ,r-+
lotl PBOf,E s1?rosrlsss PEot! 37 5- ^fq^lor Lorc Erv! too LrvtD tr carl8rsslr I (, v',c"*l-
llcElsl twtL o! tDDcuror lttlltED
GOnEErt afLorxErr! (crv! posr?rot, !rpLot!!, trD BBt!! DtSCESSrOr o!D0trEs- rr lrpLoruErr t8 sELlrrwr.i rzcrrr, ilscsss piwiosi rllp&or-tlETI TS TELL)
o^hv 1,,l^"r{T (tv".
4^J €
ft" S ,/^)
e
r Co^.rS ccud
".[{*@re
i6.tv ?
(rr EIL olltcls IIDdJet5 Za..(
t E EOTOIS On
/6irt"l 0o*t"Q,"Glrls so{+b^Jl t,Ar"ulnsro,*t^, 0
0.iL(n Ii. A,'
"e
\,!i a,l ,
IEASOIS tOR SEEXtrc tllts post?toI rxD Sprcll& oDrt,tllerrtIt l.se( 4-hoLn"-' ol J.1,,2 tu-Qf
OI,Sr J !uo,..t1
(c\oc4
.ut o^tl UE leJ.t
c.i- d Q,'-t\tol
*!.(
€ Co,r,c,j el(,
=t;/r. o bJou.-
u(Z
fu*.t^ti 'tss it.L Wt4 SlI ttLtrc ?flts lPPLrcrttotr, t orDtRst lxD tBrt I r?trtrl ot E t Illt,luERGr, tftERlst, IID DARIICIpAttoI IIIL D! lrvoLvlD , lrD I ltt Pt !-?tntD to ttAf,r 80cE I oorllrrllBrt tr ?E! gvlrt t It lpPOIIIID ?l0 IEBlaov8 cotrrrsslol.
IGTA
<_
'+r3
-. l-Er-rarar-- ..
rl E:
#
I
a
:
_|
lertvtuss rxD tPPtLtArtors:
IECOGf,ITTOXS NECEIVED, tP rII'
I
RECEIVED
ocT 3 0 1990
CITY r.lr unnrrrrn:SEN
I
TAI{E:AR
LDDtEss
DArr to_21 .qo
ll.tEtrl?!
€
'7tt"o t) I VLOL^)U a eu,)CovL Cr+ft^t -sr, .'3/
tor{l PBOrr (L - LL7 L losrrrss plorE (
I lor &orc ElvE tou ttvaD tt anrr8lsstf
llGEtSt &B9SL O! tDuc,r?tor l?rlttlD, ttos DtctaaS, t! lrt
-7
1
!.
t 5).4-7€
cuPRrs! EHPLoTltrs?: .iciY!-Iggirtox, ltrpLorlt, lrD Brtar Dtgcossror o!i:il"ft rr,,r',pLornErr rs ezieriiiii ii',iirr, Drsc,ss prwrous lrpLor-
5/2{Qta.i<tcc I
4i.' t <.r,.4\4 4 2.4 e <-o /rr t r,/T Qv a-L/
t474c tra<,v f
ICIIVITTES AID APEI&IA?IOIS:tEcocBtrtoDs eEcltvED, It ttr,(rfcLuDE tLtcltyt ollrcts lrD EOIOTS OR,€c ,e -4€4
tlASOfS FOR SEEXTIC IHIS POSI'IOT I.TD SP tcttl oorLt?tctttorss J L)EZ
-
72, ,3€ t 4oot-u a4 t4 ,2f2-.<a-q..aa a. r-t tp'cJ/ttcH t Lt V€./ar (/4C &fcr to fl)L7z >a,rrz' aE Ga./t*44 €-7fi-z/4<y€.
a/7'-7 reUe .-or-t <//-c..7, ,1,//,j*€a e/71
tlcE I 4, C., f t,A,' G,
44/4 C aao14,5 t.a4 S
-? ,t114oa t4 f oral Zoc,+LzS ).-A>Z ,,+'rr/c . i .r.fT a./n=
/J<-4-Tt 4G 7Z .s7k?, C
oi sa-,*72 2 ftztez-c.C2r.*rf /t 5, )ala
lI ltLtrc ?tlts IPPLI ct?Ior, t oxDEBStrrD ttrt I Gotlttttrtrt ol E ?trttrEnct, trtERlsr IID PIA'tCtPAttOI rI&L BI ITVOLTED IID t l! PAI-aDARID ?O rArI 8I'cE I Cloxxtlr{ttt tr ?88 JI'Drt t A!i-IPPO tD to ttt,
l30v! cotlttlsslol
a
F
I
lPPLtCAtrox loR CEAIT8ASSEX Oorrrtsstoil
Doslltou DISIRED PLA^Ji vO G Co/v./y.ts > to,\l
artlBDr?a loPttos\LlJ - /a_ /fi
REST'I{E
utnx o. aENl{
CI'RREIflT POSITION:PRESIDENT, }IARCUS DEVEIOPMENT CORPORATION
1ooo1 Wayzata Boulevard, suite 1oo
lilinnetonka, llinnesota
Principal Shareholder
19I4 -Present
UA,TOB RESPONSIBILITIES :
To create development opportunities.
Devefopment of coumercial properties for own portfolio.
A. Retail centersB. office/ttanufacturingC. Office,/WarehouseD. office
coumercial build-to-suits for cllent cornpanies.
Provide full services development organization acquisition,
government approvals, financing, developnent, leasing,
nanagenent, etc.
I4AJOR ACCOMPLISHI{ENTS INCLUDE:
conpleted developnent of a large number of coumercial projects
and have retained a significant interest in the projects and
their cash flow. Have developed ( nelt construction or rehab)
over 75o,ooo sq. ft. of conmercial proPerty over this time
period.
1
2
3
4
PREVTOUS POS ITION:
1984
UAJOR RESPONSTBILITIES :
1.
2.
PRESIDENT, FIRST CORPOR,ATE RE"ALTY SERVICES, INC.
Minneapolis, l,linnesota
(a Division of first corporate Services)* This ras a one year conmittnent
3
Investnent acquisitlons.
Development of connerciaL and residential projects for
companyrs portfolio and various investment groups and/or
portfolios.
DLacenent of interin construction financing and per::nanent
financing for developnent projects.
eackaging of syndications for coDmercial real estate ventures.
GENERAL I.IANAGER, oxFoRD PRoPERTIES, Il{c.
Uinneapolis, l,linnesota
oxford Properties is a Canadian based developrnent
conpany originally out of Edmonton.
4
PREVIOUA POSITION:
1981-1984
ACCOIJNTABLE &B:
St. Paul Town Square from start to finish.
lrlinneapolis City Center - a 3 Million Square Foot l{ixed Use
Developnent project conprised of five segments:' 1. 52-story office tower2. Uajor departDent store3. ApproxiDately 100 shops and restaurants4. 600+ room hotel5. 70o+ car parking garage
UAJOR RESPONSIBILITIES :
1. Developnent, completion, opening start-up and operation ofcity center facility.2. Enployees (300+ in Danagement/operations)3. L€asing/lease adninistration4. Tenant/conmunity relations5. Financial reporting,/budgeting ($35 l{illion budget)6. Revenue/receivables7. Operations (services and physical ptant)8. Special proj ects as needed
MAJOR ACCOMPLISH}.fENTS INCLUDE:
1. Developed a top notch organization vhich is nade up of topnotch people with high norale and pride.2. Brought project in on plan and on tine.3. Achieved occupancy levels far above plan (naxinized revenues).4. Achieved top sales per square foot of all regional nalls inthe uetropolitan area (naxinized revenues-retail ) .5. Packaged sale of tax benefits to syndicator, alloring renovalof equity fron the project and assisted syndications innarketing product.5. Took the lead in successfully expanding dosntosn hours to
compete with other regional malls.7. Achieved nunerous national and international awards forproj ect efforts.
PREVIOUB PO8ITTON: DIRECTOR OF DOI.{NTOWN OPER,ITIoNS/DEVEIOPI.TENT
197 2-L981 St. Paul , Ir{innesota
ACCOUNTABI,E FOR:
Cityrs dountorn operatLons, includlng developuent and operatJ.onof:1. City-owned parking systen2. Sklmay syateD3. fowrr Sguare na11 and park
Developnent of numerous city identified development needs in the
downtown area and on connercial arteries. Functions include landacquisition, project financing, project design and proj ect
nanagement.
}.IAJOR RESPONSIBTLITIES :
Developnent project leader for Torrn square, a Joint venture
proj ect o$ned by the city and Oxford.
Euployees involved in operation of city parking facilities,
skyway system, Torrn square mall and park.
Attracting developers and facilitating city's developnentpriorities and needs.
Land acquisition, proj ect design, project manageuent.
Provide financing tools public/private to enhance projectsfeasibillty.
Downtown pronotion and marketing.
Haximize revenues for city owned operations to provide irnpetusfor future developnent efforts.
MAJOR ACCOMPLISH}TENTS :
completed numerous development projects in which City had a
ro1e, including Minnesota llutual, 31,! expansion, East and west
seventh street revitalization, Science l,luseum, and numerous
parking ranps and skyways.
Development and operation of joint venture Town Squareproject. (overall proj ect Eanager of joint venture effort.)
Developed pronotions and marketing program for dorrntown st.
Paul .
Developed parking systen profitability orned by city to
service shoppers, business and fringe parking needs.
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
1
2
3
4
PREVIOI's ?OsITION8:
*While uith city of st. Paul, I also held positions as:
-Director of Adroinistration
-Proj ect l,lanager
-city Planner
*Prior to joining st. Paul, I held several staff and facultypositions at the University of llinnesota.
*I have an extensive background, going back to junior high school,
developnent and nanaging commercial real estate (rental. andoffice) in conjunction with fanily ormed operations.
I,TEI,IBERStrIPA INCIJI'DE OR EAYE INCI,I'DED S
Downtorrn Council t{enbership chair, Uarketing Coronittee, RetailCoDmittee, and Board
Board of Directors and Executive Conmittee of Kaiser RoIlFoundationBuilding Ormers and t{anagers Association ( BO}IA)International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC)Lafayette club
Minnesota cophers Touchdotrn CIub
Hopkins/Minnetonka Rotary CIubchairnan, Excelsior Planning Connission
Twin West ChaEber of CoEDerceExecutive Board - Boy Scouts of AmericaChair:aan, Challenger District - Boy Scouts of AmericaBoard Uelber, Tonka United Soccer AssociationUniversity of l{innesota Alunni Association
Board llenber, Evans Scholars Alunni Association
Board l.{enber, Agrotec Corporation
Board Uenber, Tutari Corporation
(References, ineluding many top business leaders in thenetropolitan area, will gladly be furnished upon request)
EDI'CAIIO}I:
- Graduated Ilopkins High School8.A., University of Uinnesota - Uagma Cu]n IaudeTriple l{ajor - PsychoLog:y, Sociotogy, Social Workcraduate Work: University of lrlinnesota - psycholog'y
College of St. Thonas Uanagement School-Business
uanagenent
Hubert H. Humphrey fnstitute (University ofltinnesota) h.rbic Adninistration
OTEER DAII:
42 years of Age Address: 7160 WiIIou Vieu Cove[arried - two children Chanhassen, Irlinnesota 55312Excellent health (6t2') 949-2272Extensive academic credentials
Extensive Continuing Education in Dy fields of endeavorLicensed Broker
DAIE /a-30 - ?o
APPLICA?IOU toR CHAIIHASSErl oolltlIssIoI
?ostrrotr DESIRED P l.^,^".i,.C o ,vt.r. i ss,o ,r ParY {' R.cc ; te 1,o,,-
N-u, d J. Ko..bs k (oPttoraL, t- E-<e-
-r_
IDDBESS t3tt zak-So:..* ,lls D?-
lol{! PEoII 368-33o8 logrtlAs OaO;1B ,t#/-.y./3 -2575
lor Lotc Eryt.too &t?lD tr n8rrElsstr i ya.2
llGBlSt L!gEL Ot tDocltror lttltttD, ptus DlcBlas, t! lrr
B S 4.ela 5V 8 s Lueo Sti'ysi<S c/rt iit c,,s i I t al '/r4 ,nn . t. fo
I
I IL'ERXAIB
EI8?BDT't
r:
eBnRUf,? lrpLornEf,?: -lclyl posr?tox, t[pLorEB, lrD BEta! Dtseussror olDgrrEs. rp lnpLorlrErr I8 EtLrrrvrr.i iiigrt, Dtscoss ptwloos lnpLol_IIEUI IS NELL)
Z-rc ./l1ct,'tc:<Nov'* Ea r',rc .\rn c^lo. I 5rr4i.c5 -tar- Z Ac+sk e
, 5.,",y'tsc ty'n;as L)ncler -'n.l lo.'e^74, n K .1-n.,
Jc.* S7 la th,,,.5t /h P.A J u.t r- 55 lo J,.^-7 C-th* (o ,"ts.'l l-^ls
C, v, I E,.,, a " ?:>)AEIIVI?IES AfD AFSILIATIOUS:
IECOGNITTOUS S,ECEIVED, IP AIr'
(IICLDDE ELECIIY! Oltt CES IID EOrOas on
sS tt t*tb r/t71,n n t Sc ','r'r. lt,'lJttl
tErsous FoR sEExrDc rHrs postrtof rxD Splcrrl oBrtrltcrttoai. ,,,1 )n/r, r tl.)
lr.o ,r) ,-' ; l-k'i1,., tou,,'.v,.,z-A bc-ct-tcu"*ol l,.-
,.'r/o ^*,..1 o^.)e^ni lcru{€,rL I /51!,a-S,
t ll.s, e-t z?-L ou'' c,
r .*.,,1"/
Frt{l; kt l" c;
ll ?tLtrc ?flts LppLrcttror, t orDtnstlrD tEtl I Gorotttt|llt o! E 'Itr!,M!9rl trrER8sr, lrD prnrrcrprltor rt&L Br rrvoivd,-iro-r-en per-PAnED ?O XArr 80C8 l Gotlr{trnBir tr ?Er tiyEr? I en'rpiorrizi 'ro rsrlaovt comlEstor.
IGIATO
NECE,YED
NOV 01 1996
-91"-9. p.t-o--.,*t!F-.1--ratl,
rAltES
t DAII
APPLICI lI ou ?OR
lL?tSfttl
llrtEDrtt (oPtIOnL'
I POSI?to! DlStrlD
lAl{Z s v"
lDDtEss I
,loEE DaotB /-+J 4-1a toalttss Dtorl :
s3l
I etor LorG aryt toE LtgED tt calltla8tr
ltGEtS? &trt& o! tDDerrtot lrtrt!Bo tLgB Dtcrrts, 'r-,gtraqearsCc!&p,rl1-
^aC
Ia
connllrr alPl,orrrlrsDOtr!s. It trPLOlnExtllr ls rtLLl
(GM_postltor, !tlp&or!i, lrD ttlll DISCUSSIOI olr t8 tlLrttwLt trclrt, rirlcosi-iiivi6ii'!lo&or_
V (e D" r,t,1,i clo.Qv'rc
€+f<-, S --[-.r^a
lgltvtrt!s rID lrptLttttOrSslEcocf,Itrors tlcrtvED, t! llt,(I
<- c>
f1
!,I C.o
l-.
oDM.tcttY!ICES IID lorots 0Bto<-)or t \'dh
,L
,\.1
J
tltsors ?oR s EEtItC tllls pOStttOt lrD atlCtrg C0r&.tttGlttOrss
eo
II ?tLtIC ?8I
STERGI, tD'ER
DIRID ?O ltrrElaovt co&trss
:-tPP!!9rlI9r, t orocratllD tlrl I Goror,lryI, rlD_arsii cieiiiorrr sr, fi i r;dffi l
rffi trolTrllo,
,fi: . Gorlrriltzm rt rr! rviir-i-ii'EioiiicD rd ffi-
1
RECEIVED
ocT 3 1 1990
CITY UT UhAITHASSEN ":f.
.
-i.q.l-
eEtltHtsszN Gotrrrsstox
I
a
a
\f.
rilt / qo
?OSIIIOT DISIBID
DAII
Ett6t H
t4c
I q (5
I
a
IAHE:€s.8tr?EDrtt (oPtrorrL, I
I.DDBESS L E 4 s
loxt pgorE .l ,/-oqq/tosrrgss rlort 121-21{&/
tor &orc trya tou t tytD tt callElastr f c< rJ
ltGEtSt LtmL o! tDocrttor l?tlt!!D, ,egs DtGtltS t" rrt,
a
P
I
(trcLuDt !&tgttyl olltcls lrD torots ot
tlASOrS toR St8rttc IBIS poslttot rID s?lct lg oorLtttclttorss
()y1 a.h
?ft
AI
RECEIVED
Nov 0 i 1990
OITY OF CHANHASSEN
lr ?I&IIC ?Hts lPPLrCt?to!, t stDEBSrlrD !!r!_!!_cotorrt;rrl o! E lt;a,!!!!9r, rrrER!8r, rro plericr?Arror rrri ec rrvoiv6,'ili-r-in rrr_
'ARID
ro rrrE sEcE l oorrr?rErr ir tsi rvrrr r ri'reioiIi6 S ffi-IDOY! @rutrsstor.
-t
aPpLrct?rox ?oR cntf,Rtsszx 60Hrrssrotl
?lararrrlr.\ Cnr , ,sroru ILIIBTAI!
coRBlrt lHPLotxErr: .!clll-!9grttor, tltptor!!r lfD trrl! Dtacssstor o!Durrls. r! arpLortrErr re lr&,eiivcii diirr, Drscoss prseross rrrpror-TiEI' IS TELL'
lgrrvtrrEs rrD ttltLrlrtots:lBcocNtrtolts SEcrIvED, tt lfr,
EDUCATION/DEGREES
cres$re 11 High School
CresweII, OR
University of Oregon
Eugene, oR
Diablo valley Co I lege
Coniord, CA
califonia State University
Hayward, CA
RES U ME
Graduated 1962
Attended L962 -L963
Attended 1963 1955
B.A.1959 English
San Prancisco State
San Prancisco, CA M.A L97 2 Creative writing
AWARDS / HONORS
PUBLI CAT I ONS / PRODUCT I ONS
1959-AMARANTH-2poems
1969 - THE SATURDAY REvIEw - 'StreetfiSht" - a poem.
1970 - McCalls' OUTSTANDING COLIEGE WRITERS - L970 - a poem
7972 - 1983 - Miscellaneous poems and st
numerous sma1l presses including:
ories publi
wormvJood
shed.in
Revier"/.
Green Horse for Poetrl, The Fault,6EiTtETx a-v ax, c r ee nf i e I d Rev i ew-
1984 TOUCHE'- Three act play produced by Indianhead Players in MN
WRIT ING/ TEACHING EXPERIENCE
r97 2 - 1982 Editor/ Pub l isher .IUICE,literary magaz ine
Hanqing Loose, Ju j.ce,
support grants
as critic for hundreds
JUICE received three federal
Corresponded e/ith and acted
Published seven issues
L974 - L977 Instructor, Oakland Parks and Rec. - Oakland, cA
Created and instructed flriting lrorkshoP, "writing Your way
Out of The Closet.n Designed for adults wanting to write
clearly and well with an emphasis on craft, mechanics and
function.
Oakland, CA
of rrriters
Stephen S. llorse
81 O W Pleasant View Road
Chanhassen, l,lN 55 317
(6L2) 474-099L
Beaver Boys State, Oregon 1962
Mccandless crant 1957 - S20,000. academic grant
Deans list - San Francisco State
Listed in P!!CS!9EI 9! AEgEige! EEilgEg 1e7s
Stephen S. Morse
WRIT ING/ TEACHING EXPERIENCE continued-
OTHER/GENERAT EMPLOYMENT
1988 - ftlElk sates consultant, Besr
Commi.ssioned sa1es.
1985 - 1986 Sales Agent, Krordn Furniture
Commissioned sales.
L974 - L976 Founded Morkiehn Medla, a terevi.sion production companyproducing a i{eekly news show for the local community cable
sys tem .
Produced, wrote, presented and instructed college studentinterns.
Buy Co. Minnetonka, MN
Eden Prairie, MN
1983
1972
COlt.lMUNI TY
, 7979
1983
L982
REFERRENCES
available upon request.
- 1985 Store !,lanager, D'!u Furnj.ture Eden praire, MN
- 1983 General Manager, New Era Furnj,ture Oakland, CA
INVOLVEUENT
- L982 Member of Board of Directors and voluntee! caregiverfor MiIls College Infant/Toddler (enter, Oakland, CA
- 1985 Chairman of !,lerchant Association, Eden prairie.
- 1985 Active member of Westonka Community Theatre, appearingin leading loles j.n two plays.
Stephen S. lllorse - Resume - Page 3
EDUCATION LIBERAL A,RTS EDUCATION
Creswe'l 'l Hi gh School
CreswelI, Oregon
Graduated May '1962 - College Preperatory
California State Uni versi ty
Hayward, California
Graduated December '1969 - B.A. - English
California State Un iversi ty
San Francisco, Cal i forni a
Graduated June '1972 - Fl.A. - Creative Writing
SUPPLEI"!ENTARY EDUCATION
June .l972
Small Business Administration series of classes on financing, accounting
and promoti on.
September I979
Audited'Basics of Accounting Cl ass
I'li1ls College
Oakland, Ca'l i forni a
IiIORKIEHN MEDIA INC.
3137 Cool idge Avenue
0akland, CA 94602
Company Description:
Primary Responsibjlit-y: *
ADDITIONAL !,IORK EXPEPIENCE
PRES IDENT/O}!NER
*Te'levison Production Company producing News
Shows on a yreekly basis for Contra Cost County
Cable conmuni ty,
Produced/Wrote/Presented/tra i ned col lege interns
and sold air time.
OAKLAND PARKS AND RECREA.TIOI'I INSTRUCTOR
0akland, Ca'lifornia 9461.|
De scri pti on :
HARY ATKINS
INFANT TODDLER CENTER
14i 11s Col l ege
0ak'land, Ca'l i fornia
*Tauglt writing workshop for adults; geared to
becoml ng publ i shed.
BOARD !4EHBER
*Board President for Infant Care Center for
Facul tylStaf f /Students
Descriptjon:
STEPHEN MORSE
NCIL
"...Committed to maintaining the Chanhassen LW Styte.t,
"My family and I have lived in chanhassen for seven years and enjoyed the
peace, convenience and prosperity that Chanhassen has to offer. I certainly
don't rvant to change that. I am running to maintain that fine balance between
residential, retail and light industry that currently exists. It's my turn to help.
It's only fair."
Prepared and Paid for by lh€ Stephen Morse lor council committee 890 plesssnl vbw rd. Chanha$en,Mn S53i7
CITY
steve Morse,45, is a chanhassen resident currently teaching Business, Broadcast and
Advertising students at Brown lnstitute in Minneapolis. priorto teaching at Brown, Morse
spent 25 years in retail marketing and management both here and in california. Morse and
his wife, Judy, have a son, Raymond who is an eighth grader at Minnetonka Junior High
School.