The URL can be used to link to this page

05-1-91 Agenda and PacketAGENDA CHANHASSEN PIANNING COMI{ISSION WEDNESDAY, I.'AY l-, 7997, 7.30 P.!,1. CHANHASSEN CITY IIALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE 1 CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC HEARINGS OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSTNESS APPROVAL OF }{INUTES CITY COUNCIL UPDATE ONGOTNG ITE!{S ADMTNTSTRATIVE APPROVAI,S OPEN DISCUSSION ADJOURNMENT Preliroinary Plat to subdivide a 39,885 square foot parcel into two single fanily lots which will require a Iot area and Iotwidth variance ( lakeshore rridth) on property zoned. RSF,Residential Single Fanily and located at 6541 l{innewashta Parkway, Ken Lund and Dana Johnson, washta Bay court Addition. File CITY OF PC DATE: CC DATE: l{ay 1, 1991, E #: By: CAS 91-3 SUB oI sen/v Hempel STAFF REPORT Fz C) =LL ko lrJFa Subdivision of 39,885 square feet into Trro single Fanily Riparian Lots of Lg,943 square feet and Variance Request to the Lot Area and Lot width RequireBents L. I I. t PROPOSAL: 5541 llinnewashta Parkuay //;;/{/ -APPLICANT: 9/t /qr r'_ _Pt? Ken Lund and Dana Johnson'63 01 GreenbriarExcelsior, IIN 553 31 WATER AND SEWER: PHYSICAL CIaRACTER. : RsF, Residential Single Faroily 39,885 square feet N - RSF, vacants - RsF, recreational beachlot E - lilinnerrashta Parklray and RsF W - llinnelrashta ParLr,ray and RSF Avallab1e to the site. The site currently contains a vacant singlefanily resj.dence, driveway access to Minnewashta Parkway and a shed. The subject site is a riparian lot with a DNR protected creek directly to the north and located on aportion of the subject property. 2 OOO I,AND USE PLAN:Low Density ResidentiaL EHANHISSEN A'':j- 11 " ' '- -':'-.' LOCATToN 3 PRESENT ZONING: ACREAGE: DENSITY: AL'ACENT ZONING AND I,AND USE: o 8i oo a I A oaa g 6 ooFt 8orl ooon ooclt 6?00- 63oo c4OO-- 65 6600 6 c800 c900 too0 7t0o_ 720O- 7.oo oo ID6 toa6fiotl cF kopasDairuvotd LAKE HIIYTEUA.'H7 RD _a PU D-R -l I/t !a tx(rttottYt T. tr **\ rE lD o*l couFT\ r I .VY f, \u r ,lt t-lr ,I I _ 3 I 3l__!or 0 ,l l s (, -?_lui.rt I \ [, -I, -Ia I a! --r '- -- !aI! I IaIt-rrl aI aFal: i -f= GllIt: I 9I I r l! r l:a11 , F I - a ! Da - a \ 75OO_A / ,I 7!OO ,) (: ' i.'-' I j ;!IVl" /T ilI aKt l,|-o 6 I{ashta Bay Court l,{ay 1, 199L Page 2 PROPOSAL Lot Lavout and variances The applicants are proposing to split a single fanily residentiallot into two single fanily 1ots. The lot has an existing home which has been vacant for tlro years. The lot is bordered by Minner^rashta Parkr"ray to the west, a DNR protected creek to the north Lake tlinnewashta to the east and a recreational beachlot to thesouth. The zoning ordinance requires riparian lots to have a minimum of lot area of 201000 square feet and a Dininum of 75 feetof lot width at the ordinary high vater nark. There is also a 50foot setback for any structure from the protected creek. The proposed lots do not meet the lot area requirenent of 20,000 square feet nor do they provide the required 75 foot Lot width. The proposed lots contain 19r943 square feet in lot area, which is 57 square feet short of the 201000 square foot mininur for eachIot. The 1ot width at the ordinary high water nark for each lot is 74 feet which is only 1 foot less than the required 75 foot widthat the ordinary high water Eark. Although the lot area and lotwidth of the proposed lots are just under the reguired rninirnun,they sti11 require a variance for the lots to be approved. The applicants lrust prove that a hardship exists in order for the variances to be granted. The buildable area on Lot 1, Block L is also restricted due to the 50 foot setback fron the DNR protected creek. Section 20-58 of the city code lists the following criteria for a variance to be granted: A variance nay be granted by the Board of Adjustnents and Appealsor city council only if aII of the following criteria are net: a That the literal enforcenent of this chapter would cause unduehardship. rrundue hardshipri neans the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography: Reasonable use includes a. use nade by a rnaj ority of conparable property rrithin five hundred (5oo) feetof it. The intent of this provision is not to a1low aproliferation of variances, but to recognize that in developed neighborhoods pre-existing standards exist. variances that blend rrith these pre-existing standards without departing fron them meet this criteria. currently, the existing single fanily lot has reasonableuse with the ability to support one single fanilyresidence. In addltion, the surrounding riparian lotswithin 5oo feet of the subJ ect property all contain the niniuun of 2O,OOO square feet and ?5 foot Iot width. Washta Bay Court May 1, 19 91 Page 3 Therefore, there are not pre-existing standards whichwould allow the creation of a single fanily 1ot vhichdoes not neet the lot area or vidth reguirenLnts. That the conditions upon which a petition for a variance isbased are not applicable., generalli, to other property nithinthe sane zoning classLfication. * There are no unigue conditions of the subi ect DroDertvwhich result in the need for the variance. The irolert!sinply does not have enough Equare footage or i,iati, t6meet the nininun requlreuents. fhe location of the DNRprotected creek uitb the 50 foot setback, 5.nposesrestrictions on the buildable area of Lot 1, ifocX'f. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon a desireto increase the value or incone potential of tlie parcet -i 1and. * The creation of tto sing).e fanily Lots fron one singlefanily lot does increase the valuL and incone potentialof the subject parcel of land. The primary riason thevariances are being requested is so the ap-plicants canafford to build a horne on Iake Uinnewashta-.- That the aLleged dlfficulty or hardship is not a sel.f-createdhardship. * The hardship is self-created. The existinq lot isconforning. and the request to split the lot -into tvosingle fanity lots results in the need for variances.. Tlrat th9. granting of the variance wiLl not be detriuental tothe public welfare or inju:ious to other land or inpio.renenisin the neighborhood in whicn the parcel of land is- locatea. * The variances requested are very ninor in tetms of squarefootage and lot width. The glanting of the variinceswill result In an addltional jingle fanily i"=ia""c"-onIake Minnerrashta. T!at^ !h-e proposed var.iatio-n sill- not inpair an adequate supplyof light and air to adjacent propirty or s,r,stantiallvincrease the c_on.,estion of trre putrit ii'r".t=, -;-i;;;;;;;! th9 danger of fire, or .endaiger the pubtiJ-;;;it=-;;substantiarry dininish or irnpalt-property -values wrtrrii trrenei.ghborhood. * The proposed variance uirr result in increased densitvover what uould tl1rically be pernitted. ffris couia-li f b. d. e. Washta Bay Court May 1, 1991 Page 4 considered to increase the danger of fire or publicsafety and increase congestion of public streets. In addition to the lot area and lot width variance requests, thereis the potential for another variance request for the 50 foot setback fron the DNR protected creek adj acent to the north propertyline. The prelininary plat shoys the buildabLe area of Lot 1, Block 1, with a 30 foot setback from the street, a 10 foot setbackfron the side 1ot, 75 feet froB the ordinary high water mark and a 50 foot setback fron the creek. There is an area for a home to belocated but the buildable area is very restrictive. There is apossibility that a variance would be requested to the 50 foot setback to a11ow more flexibility in the Location and design of a home on Lot 1, Block 1. Currently, the existing hone is approxirnately 32 feet froD the protected creek. staff explained tothe applicants that if the existing non-conforning structure rrasrenoved, any new structures would have to neet the requiredsetbacks. A variance to the 50 foot setback would be considered bythe Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Util it ies The existing house is currently connected to both nunicipalsanitary sewer and water service fron l{innewashta Parkway. Anadditional sanitary sewer and vater service hook-up is alsoavailable to the parcel fron Minner.rashta Parklray. S treets The parcel fronts l{innewashta Parkway, shich is a 22 foot wide biturninous roadway that is in generally poor condition. As you nay be aware, the city is currently preparing a feasibility study to consider upgrading ltinnewashta Parkrray to a 32 foot wide urbanstreet including curb and gutter, stom serrer and trail. The proposed irnprovernents vill not reguire additional right-of-way or pernanent easements fron this parcel. Gradinq and Drainaqe The site currently sheet drains frorn Uinnerrashta Parkway to LakeMinnewashta. The plans do not propose any grading or drainage improvements. The northerly edge of the parcel borders a stream.This stream is the outlet for Lake l,linnewashta uhich drainsnorthlresterly under TH 7 lnto Lake Virginia in the City ofShorewood. ft is recoEDended that the applicant dedicate .adrainage and utility easeDent over th€ northeasterly 10 feet of Lot1, Block 1, to,protect the strean bank uhich extends into Lot 1. The existing ground elevatlon at the proposed house pad locationsis between 94?.2O to 948.50. According to the U. S. Department of Washta Bay Court tlay 1, 1991 Page 5 Housing and Urban Devel.opnent floodway nap, CoEmunity panel No.270051 00058, the 100 year flood elevation for Lake t{innewashta is945.00 (NGVD 1929). This elevation may restrict the type of housesbuilt on these Lots. city ordinance Nb. 142, section-i3, requiresresidential basernent construction be 2 feet above the regufatoryflood protection elevation (945.00). This will require additionaifill naterial to be hauled into the site. ft is rLconmended thatthe applicant supply the City with a developroent pLan shorring thelor.rest. floor_ and garage floor elevation for each 1ot. Along with a- grading and erosion control plan to ensure proper drainage iroundthe house pads. COMPLIANCE WITH ORDINANCE - RSF DISTRTCT Lot Area Lot Lakeshore Fron aqe Se tback creek etbacks Ordinance 20, OoO BLOCK 1Lot 1 19,943* Lot 2 !9,943* * Variance reguired** Potential Variance SUMMARY 90 r 751 74t* ?41* 50 i 50r** N/A what started out as a sinpre rot sprit has turned into a difficurtsituation with the discovery of two variances required for approvilof the subdivision. This situation is nade even- more diffi;illt inthat the variances are very ninor. The lots are only 52 squarefeet under the required 2o,o0o square foot 1ot area iininun andonly 1 foot less than the 75 foot Lot width requirenent. The DNRprotected creek to the north of the proper€y also creates apotential for a future variance request ftr €fre location of asingle farnily home on h! 1, Block i. Therefore, the 1ot splitcould p_otentially resurt ln the need for 3 varlances to be granled.The DNRts position is that they would recorDmend denial of thevariances but if the city does recotntnend approvar of the var5,ances,they lrou1d not nake an obJection (Attachnent *2). Staff is in the same situation as the DNR. Even though thevariances can be considered ninor,. the lots do not m"5i tneordinance requirenents. staff nust recornmend denial unless ahardship can be shovn- (not financial). The hardship is clearlyself-created in that the exist-ing 1ot is conforrning and subdividin!it .into two single fani.1y. lots is resulting in ttre ,r""a to.variances. There is no neighborhood substand-ard for undersized 152. 114 t Washta Bay Courtllay 1, 1991 Page 5 lots for rrhich staff can reconDend approval of the variances. Using the criteria for nhich to grant a variance, staff cannot deternine that a variance is warranted. Therefore, staff has no choice but to reconmend denial of the requested variances and thesubdivision. The Planning Conmission and city council can recomnend. approval of the variances if they feel that they are rninor enough that approval does not result in a significant irnpactto the lake and surrounding properties. should the Planning Comrnission and counciL reconnend approval, reasons for the approval should be stated so that a precedence is not 6et for futureriparian lots requiring variances. The Planning conrnission anelCity Council should also state whether a variance to the 50 foot setback should be pernitted, if reguested. RECOMMENDATION Staff reconmends tbe Planning Counission adopt the following Dotion: I'The Planning Connission recommends denial of the prelini4ary plat #91-3 as shown on plans dated April 1, 1991, for the following reason: 1. The subdivision creates two non-confonning lots.rl Should the Planning Conrnission reconmend approval, the following conditions should be adopted: 1. The applicant shalI supply the City with a developroent plan indicating the proposed house pad elevations, .Lncluding the lor.rest floor and garage floor elevations. 2. The applicant sha1l supply the city with a finished gradingplan showing existing and proposed finished 2 foot contourelevations for revlew and approval. 3. The final plat shall reflect a 10 foot uide drainage andutility easenent over the northeasterly x0 feet of I,ot 1, Block 1; to protect the stream bank fron further alteration. 4. The city shall waive the requirement for a developmentcontract due to the fact that no public improvernents are required for the subdivision. 5. Each lot should be restricted to one driveway access point, inan effort to linit the access points out onto Minnewashta Parklray. washta Bay court l,!ay 1, 1991 Page 7 7. 8. ATTACH},TENTS 6. The applicant shall obtain and conply with all conditions ofthe l{atershed District and DepartEent of Natural Resourcespernits, if any. The existing hone nust be vacated and utilities pernanentlydisconnected before approval of the lot spIit. A- denol_ition pernit is required before dernolition begins onthe dwelling. 1 2 3 4 5 Merno frorn Dave HenpeL dated April 24, Lg9]-.Letter from DNR dated April 24, 199L. Meno frorD steve Kirchman dated April 9, 1991.Letter frorn applicants.Prelininary plat dated April 1, 1991. CITY OF CH[NH[ESEN II{EM ORANDUM TO: FROM : DATE : SUBJ: Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner Dave Hempel , Sr. Engineering Technician ^WApril 24, 199I Proposed Lot Subdivision - 65i1l Minnewashta Parkway LUR 91-5 690 COULTER DRIVE. PO. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739 AN UTILITIES The existing house is currently connected to both municipal sanitary sewer and water service from llinnehrashta Parkhray. atlditional sanitary sewer and water service hook-up is also available to the parcel from Minnewashta ParkBay. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The site currently sheet drains from lilinneltashta Park$ay to Lake t{innewashta. The plans do not proPose any grading or drainage improvements. The northerly edge of the parcel borilers a stream. This stream is the outlet for Lake Minnewashta vrhich drains northwesterly under Trunk Highway 7 into Lake Virgnia in the C19yof Shorewood. It ls reconmended that the applicant dedicate a drainage and utility easement over the northeasterly 10 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, to protect the stream bank which extenals into Lot 1 ( see attachment *1). STREETS The parcel fronts Minne$ashta Parkway which is a 22 foot wide bituminous roadway in generally poor condition. As you may be a$are, the city is currently preparing a feasibility study to consider upgrailing l.linnewashta Parkway to a 36 foot wide urban street including curb and gutter, storm sewer anil trailway. The proposed improvements will not require ailditional right-of-ivay or permanent easements from this parcel . RECOM}.,1ENDED COND ITI ONS 1 The applicant shalI supply to the City a deveJ.opurent planinilicating the proposed house pad elevations including lowestfloor and garage floor elevations. The applicant shall supply the City a finished grading plan shovring existing and proposed finished 2 foot contourelevations for review and approval. Final plat shalI reflect a I0 foot wide drainage and utility easement over the northeasterly 10 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, toprotect the stream bank from further alteration. The City shall yraive the requirement for a Development Contract dueto the fact that no public improvenents required for the sub-division. Each 1ot should be restlicted to one driveway access point,in an effort to timit the access points out onto MinnlwashtaParkrray. 6. The applicant sha11 obtain and comply nith all conditions ofthe Watershed District and Department of Natural Resourcespermit, if any. 1ap 3 4 5 c: Charles Folch, Asst. City Engineer ' The existing grounil elevation at the proposed house pad locationsis between 947.2O to 948.50. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development floodway map, Ccmmunity PanelNo. 2700510005 B the I00 year flood elevation for Lake Minnewashta is 945.00 (NGVD 1929). This elevation may restrictthe type of houses built on these lots. City Ordinance No. 142,Section 23; requires residential basement construc!ion be 2 feet above the regulatory flood protection elevation (945.00). Thiswill require additional fill uraterial to hauled into the site. It is recommended that the applicant supply the City with a developnentplan showing the lowest floor and garage fLoor elevation for eachlot. Along with a grading and erosion control plan to insureproper drainage around the house pads. Jo Ann Olsen April 24, I991 Page 2 2. A-\ B c\q (,l"lU \-+'Z'c.3 --9 .//c'v>^- ,.,. '::",, NT ATTACHMENT # 1 /, 'rt,'ba / I ';"I I A ,I _=;i*( N --LQ 4,.,)c -.\U,J Y I ,/ 5 4 I q. I ; -:- -7 r,) !NK NB INU I\E,L.tTUI\ O ,HONE tiO. tELi b!l-lYo-2(o9 ttAtt ot NtNgtES@TA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAT _ Metro Wators, 1ZOO tlarner Rd., St.77 2-? 9to RESOURCES Paul, UN 5510G FIL! No I I I t I Apr:iI 24, l99l ,ro Ann Ol EenSenlor planner City of Chanhassen 590 Coulter DrlveChanhassen. tlinneEota 55312 RE3 V.ARIANCE REQUEST, IJUND AND JoHNsoN.cITv or ciailral-s'slt,-'ipivL-n -c-61i'N?;' rJANE urlrNEwAsHrA ( 1 o -eP)' Dear }ls. Olsen: We have reviewed thc varlance requeatauove-ier-e-rl-n-Jela- p-iopo,or . rh;-'r;-;;"lt"r"fjJr",i""o/:(iiirf;i"r.n:39,885 rquare rooi paicet-irt. iro'i#"= of 19,9,r3 aquare feet wlthlot uidthg ot ?a tieti lter;ilr:{-.-'ri-"r"r,"" frorn the nlntmurn Lotelze'of 2o,ooo rdurr. r_eet ano-'rorirffi rot rldth of 75 leet 1!regulred. ' we re'cornrnena denlil;;-H, liillli*r;i+iil#fi*;;it-LT.i:T:'..$,t=.: ,fithe clty,e rhoretand i"srLii.; rn thls partlcurar r-ituatroa, we recogntzg that the ]ot arzes andr'ldths are verv crose.to *16 ;l"i;;;E:" 'oe alBo recar.r dtiit *reori9lnar' aurvev for thre parcer i'iat.itla. a pu.ch larger lot. Eascdon these constderatlons, we woura ntColj."[ r].fr;""ir;;ianted avarlance for th. proposid a6;i;rji;;.-- You also asked ne to c-onnent on the possrblllty of a varlance fronthe s0 foot setback lron tnJ'-.iiix'li the northern srde of thcparcel. He nould not objaci-1;-;",r econs r ru cte a jtr-uctu re' r a- n6 Jios;; ; .!H *Ei .i""r'."# .;i". i:tatructure. Basically, -"" ao --n-of- r-"nt to Gee the currentnonconformlty exacerblied, - it -'i ror"_ - extreme varlance isconsidered, $e ri,ould need to OeE"rrine"ifrettrei-triri"t,ii^iiiIt". Thank you for thc oooortunity to connent. please contact ^e .t ??2_ze10 tf you have eiestionJid;.ii;;t;ese cohtnentg. Slncerc1v.C"l'lil- Crll Straucc Area Hydrologlst cc! ehanhasson shorelqnd flle AN EOUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER HPt 24,91 LA:40 Nc,.010 P.022, CITY OF CH[NH[SSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE ' PO. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 M EMORA\ DU},I TO: FROIII : DATE: SUBJ: JoAnn OI sen, Senior Steve A. Kirchman, April 9. 1991 Planning Case: 91-3 Pl anne r Bui ldins Official (qp ,l SUB ( Lund & Johnson) Home must be vacated and utilities permanently iliscgnnectedbefore approval of lot split. Permits required for utility disconnect. Demolition permit required before denolition beginsdwelling.on .1. April l, 1991 6301 Greenbr i ar Excel s ior, l{N 55331 Tel. 174-OLO3 l{s. Jo Ann Olsen Seni or P I anner Ci ty of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Street Chanha s sen, l{N 55317 Re: Proposed llashta Bay Court Dear Jo Ann: Se are proposing lo subdivide into tvo lots the Cecila E. McClenaghen property on the veste!ly side of LateMinnewashta. The existing properly contains 39.885 squarefeet. Thi s i s 115 sguare feet less than the required IO..OOOsquare feel. Also. the rear or lateside has an eristlngvidth of t48.00 leet vhich 1s 2.OO feet less than the 150.00 f ee t requi red. I'n asking for tro variances on said p!operiy and vhy ltUould bet le, lhe l{innevashta/Chanhassen area. The proposed plat, therefore, vill reguire tvo variancesr Fi r s t . square Second. each lot vill haveof 74.00 feet vhtch is 1.0 Ci ty ordinance. each lot vill have 19.943 square feet rhich is S7feet less than requircd by City ordinance. a reat orfoot less lakeside di s t ance than requi red by a Taxe s on said The tar ba setax rale. pr ope r tyafter the nov ate as of division vill L990. be at There vi I I beproperly.tvo slngle fatily houscs built on this s2,092. a hi gher b, Houses sill be valued at $225.000 to S2SO,OOO.According to the tax asseEsor. that eould be$1600.00 cach. Total extra taxcs vould be J92oo.oope, year. d. tvo i i ne this I t apppears on the sani tarY sever and rraler services to the ci ty engineer and lhe proper t y vas dividable. sewer plan tha t there is the propertY. At that cl ty rusl have thought e I hope you vi I I kindly ok our Tasht a our subdivi sion. The neI hooes wi l1 of the area. Sincerely, Dana Johnson The house has nov been vacant for tvo years and is in poor condi t ion. I r vould benefi t lhe surrounding prop.rties by having the house derolished and iepiaced vith the tuo nev hores. ge think it uould greal ly lnprove the area looL. I knov Ey feet on lhe lale side is short. but it's only 24 inches short of the 150 square feel ' That's only 12 inches Pet lot. And the square footage is also short by a total of 115 squate feet. That's 57 square feet pel lol i the size of a valk-in closet in a hou s e. I'r squeezed in betueen lhe road and the lake' I knov I do not reet the ci ty subdivi sion requirelents. but the difference is so slall' Dana ,ohnson lived in the llinnewashla area for 15 years' Ken Lund has lived there for 22 yeats. Ie both have lake access and our fanilles haYe alvays dreared of living on Late llinnevashta' This uas the flrst affordable drear laLe lot in the years ve've lived there that cate uP on the larlet. f Bay Cour t vatiances grea t ly ilprove the on I ook Ken Lund I t o t{"r,,.; 14rrA 5 /,, so JE,ELoPMENT REvlEw APPUcArltl ^".r.-5 he, t,sT </b Phit;P \v{fear APPLICANT ADDRESS bso( CFr..eqn2 $1-ra{- ADDRESS:b32q Darpel Ave E&nr..,r...rJ 5t%{ TELEPHONE (Day time)l7/otos H TELEPHONE: ?7,/ct-s-{ u 1. _ Comprehensive Plan AmEndmEnt 2. _ Condilional Use Permit 12. _ Vacation ol Row/Easements 3. _ Grading/Excavation Permit ts. X Variance 4. _ lnlerim Use Permit 14. _ Wetland Atteration Permh t5._ Zonino App€at 6. _ Planned Unit Development 16. _ Zonlng Ordinance Amsndment 7._ Rezoning 17. _ Filing Fees/Attomey Cost 8. _ Sign Permits 18._ Consuttant Foes 9. _ Sign Plan REview 10- Site Ptan Review A lisl o, lll property ownera wirhin SOO laat lncluded with lh€ rpplicltlon. Twenty-3lx tull 3ize tolded copler ot the ptrn3 mu3t bc rubmltted. t%' X I l' Heducad copy of trlnsprrcncy tor erch phn rhBt. ot the boundlrlet ot tho property murt ' NOTE ' when multiple spplications are processed, the appropri8te fo€ shall bo charged lor 66ch applica on. t CITY OF CHANHASSEN T9O COULTER DBIVE I I CHANHASSEN, MN S53rzL-LL N e5 (612) e3z.reoo OWNER: rr. X subdMsion 5- _ Notificarion Signs TOTAL FEE S PROJECT NAME rrrJ o-S l',t* LOCATION t LEGAL DESCRIPTION ol LU Q:- c4 Nost\'^'as1 f Se"-*n,3e a3 S FEOUESTED ZONING RsF PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION REASON FOR THIS REOUEST L daoi'fY REouESTED I..AND usE oes'or.rnrror.r 4e sv[e,-4t a-Q Aep de rusi'l ^J ee \ e .JC This application must be completed in full and be iDevnitton or d€arly printed and musl be accompanteO Uy att in ormation and plans raquired by applicable City Ordinance provlslons. BEfore riling thls application, you should conter with the Planning Depertmenl to delermine the specilic ordinance and procsdural ,equirements applicaue to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible foi comptying with all City requirements wlth regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the pirry whom lhe City should contact regarding any rnaner pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy ol proot of ownership (either copy ol Owner's Duplicate C€rtificate of Title, Abstract of Thle or purchase agreement), or I am the aulhorized person to make lhis application and the tee orvner has also signed lhis applicafion. I will keep myself informed of lhe deadlines lor submission of rnaterial and the progress of this application. I funher undersland that additional fees rnay b€ gharged lor consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any aulhorization to proceed wfth the study. The documents and lnfonnation I have submined are lrue ard correct to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that after the at,provat o[ granting oi tha permit, such permits shall be lnvalid unless they are recorded against the title to the property for which the approral/permh ls grantEd wlthin t20 days wilh the Carver County Recorder's Ofiice and I original document retumed to Ctty Flall Records. Signat Applicant gnature Fee Owner Appt Received on Fee Paid Recelpt No. _ This application will be considered by the Plannlng Commlsslon/Board ot Adiuslments and Appeats on PRESENT ZONING CHANHASSEN PLANNING COHHISSION REGULAR I,IEETING APRIL 17, L99L Chairman Emmings cal]ed the meeting to order at 7:40 p,m I.tEHBERS PRESENT: TiM Erhart, Ladd Conrad, Steve Emmings, Jeff Farmakes,and Joan Ahrens I.IEHBERS ABSENT:Annette ElIson and Brian BatzIi Paul Krauss, PIanning Director and Dave Hempel , Sen i orEngineer ing Tech n ic ia n STAFF PRESENT : Na ess Hark & Susan Senn Barbara Jacoby Beth Harrington Hi ke Di ngman AIex & Diane tlagenaar Brooks Myhran Denny & Mickey Kopfmann Jeanne MacLean Steve Hestitz Jackie Kurvers Hyrna Kurvers Peter M. Kurvers PauI Kurvers Frankli n J. Kurvers HeI Kurvers Scott Harri 7160 tJiIlow View Cove 7251 Kurver 's Poi.nt Road51 Twin Haple Lane 4O Twin Maple Lane 713O t^lilIow View Cove 60 Twin Maple Lane 7290 Kurver 's Point 728O Kurver's Poi nt 72OO tli I low Vier.J Cove 7240 Kurver 's Point Road Cha nhasse n C ha n hasse n C ha n hasse n C ha nhassen Cha n hasse n Van Doren-Hazar d-Sta I I i ngs PauI Krauss presenLed the sLaff report on this item. Chairman Emmingscalled the public hearing to order. Mark Senn: Hello. My name is t,tark Senn. I Iive aL 7L6o tlillow view cove.tte'lI try to keep this short. I'm President of the Kurvers Point Homeowner's Association. tle've had a homeowners association meetingdealing with this topic. The association basically is or represents 20families that currently Iive in or building in Kurvers Point as well as about over 40 of our children. l.le're really concerned about the thru street issue as it's being proposed by staff and everyone who lives in Kurvers Point, at least at this point, is in unanimous agreement that we'd Iike to see the cul-de-sac stay. l.le feel there's a number of circumstances which have been ignored by staff that are unique to our situation out PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIT.IINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 9-14 ACRES INTO 14 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF. RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAI.{ILY AND LOCATED NORTH OF FIT.IY 5 ONTH 1O1 . KURVERS POINT 2ND ADDITTON. VAN DOREN-HAZARD-STALLINGS - PubIic Present: Planning Commission Heeti ng April 17, L99L - Page 2 there, First of aII, if you go uP and down TH 1o1 , most every streeL that I've aware of that's in the city lhat goes in towards the Iake is a cu]-de-sac already. Beyond tha!, we feel that we have some extenuating circumsLances because our SLreet iS vieuled as an extension of VaIIey View which is a maior east/west connector running all the way through Eden Prairie. on, Iet's caII it a slow day, ule probablv end uP with over a dozen vehicles seeking a route Lo the lake or something else but basically viewing our street as an extension of VaIIey View. on a nice day it gets a Iot h,orst than that. Since the dead end sign has been Put uP, a lot of that's been cuL in about half but it hasn't come anykhere close to sLoPPing it. tJe still get a ]ot of traffic down the street. As it is again, PeoPle evidentally viewing this as an extension or thinking it's a way to find their r^ray down to a park or the ]ake or whatever. tle really think that that situation would get substantially tlorse if it's a thru street and we've seen the effect of putting the dead end sign uP now which is at least been somewhat positive but still hasn't achieved the results we'd Iike to see. tle'd really ]ike to see the neighborhood stay as it is now. The families I think aII enjoy it that way. our kids enjov a safe Plav environment, or at least a reasonably one which we feel r,tould be extremely jeopardized by making Kurvers Point Road a thru street. tle understand staff's point of view as it relates to emergency vehicles but we feel the other issues far outueigh the few seconds or b,hatever thaL itis going to take additional Lime for emergencv vehicles to get there and I think most the homeowners are willing to Live t^rith that risk rather than see the road go through. And if you'd like to hear from aII 2O families or whatever, we can but I think Lhat's generally the comments that tle're aII in agreement with and if you have any guestions, we'd be happy to ansuler them. Emm i ngs : that the TH 10 1? [^,a s plan anyone ever made aware, or for the entire subdivision when did you first become atlare included a connection back out to Mar k Senn: assoc i at ion Emmi ngs: So Mar k Senn: Emm i ngs : t,eI I I meet i ng it was Agai n , can only say personally I did at the first homeowners f attended this year. just this Y eat spea k t hat f can only for you - you Iearned that? myseLf on that. Mark Senn: okay. Thank AIex l,Jagenaar: I'm A].ex l.lagenaar . I live aL 7\3O tlillow View Cove.AIso I think it's relevant in my professional background. I'm a professorof epidemiology at the University of Minnesota and prior to that, for 10years I was at Lhe University of l,,lichigan Transportation Research Instituteas a scientist. My professional area of research and effort deals withtraffic safety. I study dail^y the consequences of children being hit bymotor vehicLes. And it's a very disturbing area in which to work. The frequency and the regularity with which this happens in our country and my main concern is not only for my own two boys that Iive in this area. tJiththe increase traffic thaL wiII come through if this is made a thru street Planning April 17 Commission l.leeti ngl99f - Page 3 and the point that was made that it's directly across from VaIIey View Road and gets tremendous increase in traffic. People seeking access to Lhe Iakeor just misunderstanding that it's not a continuation of Valley View Road.IncidentaIIy, I'm the first house in Kurvers Point subdivision. The cl.osest one to TH 1O1 for the people coming in and I see them coming in halfuay and turning around, parLicuarly late in the afternoon and on the weekends when there's recreational traffic out trying to get to the lake. And that's the same time that Lhe kids of the neighborhood are out riding their bicycles and so forth. So I'm concerned about this. You know in terms of designing new roads, a major effort that's now being implemented,in Europe it's frequently called the passification of traffic and that is designing the roads in a uay to minimize the hazards. To minimize the interaction betr^,een pedestrians and bicyclists and automobiles. And those interactions are very hazardous and I think if we put this road through, r.lithout a cu]-de-sac, it will increase the amount of traffic coming through Lhere and that wiII substantially increase the hazard. Not only to our children right now but this wiII be this way for decades to come and it will influence hundreds, perhaps thousands of children over those years that Iive in that subdivision. Thank you. Emmings: couid you teII me, it's not completely obvious to being connected back up to TH 1o1 Hill increase the problem seen with people who are already coming in there. tlhy ttilL it's hooked up at the other end? me why the roadthat you've it be more if Alex tlagenaar: Because if it's a thru road, then it's not a dead end.gives somebody additional incentive to go straight across. They come to VaIIey View. They stop. fhey Iook and they go straight across into Kurvers Point subdivision. II Emmings: And where do they go? Emmings: That's 2 tr ips. Alex Wagenaar: A substantial proportion will come in to l^lillow Vieur Cove. Go to the end of that cul-de-sac and come back. A substantial proPortion of them come into my driveway and turn around and 9o back. A variety of thi ngs . Emmings: In that last case, the fact that the roadgoing to matter. And if the road is connected thru Lhere and come back out onto TH 1o1 , they won't be cul-de-sac and coming by your house a second time. is connected thru isn't and people drive down turning around in a Alex l^lagenaar : will come inLo No. But it's ]ikely to increase the number of PeoPIe that the division in the first place. Emmings: And why do you think that? AIex l,lagenaar: Because it wiII be a thru street. Alex l.lagenaar: They go in a couple of ways. They go dou,n Kurvers Point to Lhe end and turn around and come back. Planning Commission Meeti ngApril 17, t991 - Page 4 Emmings: A thru street right back to ulhere they came'from basically, r ight? Alex l.Jagenaar: t^lelL they don't know that, I mean to us it seems like it.ft comes back to TH 1O1 but it doesn't come back to where they came from because they come to VaIIey View, they cross over, they go down about theequivalent of whatever a city block before iL curves. It continues to go a]ong. They see the lake there and they continue for the rest of the way and then back at TH 1O1 , not where they started but whatever it is, a halfa mile. Emmings: I r.,onder if they'd be dumb enough to do that twice if they didn'tget anywhere but maybe they are. AIex l,Jagenaar: tle]I, we haven't surveyed these people. I don't knoul if wecould stop them urithout some police assistance. I've done a Iot ofroadside surveys and stopping people and interviewing them about safetybelt use and Iooking at child safety device use of people. t,le've not donethat in this case and that's a possible thing that we could do to find out what they're Lhinking. tlhat they're looking for. tlhy they came into thedivision in the first place. Uhat their ultimate destination was and hotathey're being, whatever the configuration of the road is not discouragingthat adeguateLy enough. But I think that if it's a thru street, it,s not a dead end street, that it may very r.lell encourage additional traffic to comeacross VaIIey View into the subdivision. Emmings: Thank you . Can end sign there if it isn'tput up a dead end sign? ask the city, dead end? IfW€r a can we lie and put up a deadit was a thru street, could we Ahrens: Why don't you just put a no lake access sign? Ahrens: That seems to make more sense. Just a quick comment. I thinkthat there's probably a lot of traffic going through nobl because there,s alot of ]ots for sale back in there and probably there's just a lot of localcuriousity. People h,ant to look inside the new subdivision that's being bui It . Alex l.lagenaar: Do you think they come out and look at houses... Denny Kopfmann: Hi- I'm Denny Kopfmann. I live at 729c Kurvers point Road. Hy approach is a Iittle different. AII of my neighbors have smalIchildren. I have children that are 15 and 13. My son is driving. And Ilocated probably mid-section on Kurvers Point so we do have the bis loopfront of our house where everybody comes in and turns around- tty concernis TH 1O1. I want to stay away from it. Hy kids are scared of it and Idon't want two accesses. I only bJant one. I guess staff, a question 'm IN Hempel : That's a possibility, yes. Emmings: Let's keep Lrucking through. [.le're in a public hearing here.This is your chance to be heard so whoever else would like to address thispiece. Planning Commission MeetingApril 17, f99f - Page 5 I have for you is, the sight lines on this other approach. They,re badenough where we are nor.l, My kid, h,e,ve taught him to brake at the top ofthe hill so thev see his rights. Kno!^, he's turning and on a s.aturday nightwhen your son isn'L home and you hear those cars on TH 1O1 , you wonder iithat reft turn going to be successful , and I'm concerned about that otherturn. Hou, are his friends coming over or the kids in the neighborhood, hisfriends visiting, cruising by to see if my daughter's home, cruising by tosee if my son's home, I think the one access makes a lot more sense. Emmings: could r ask you a question? Are you aware that the original pranfor connecting the road back up to TH 1o1 included cutting that hiII dotrn? Denny Kopfmann: Yes. That concerns me about rH 1o1 because we don't knowthe future of TH 1O1 so if we commit nou, to a Lhru street, do we have abigger battle in the fuLure? Do we have a different thing to address? Imoved from Eden Prairie, t^le Iived Lhere 15 years. t^,e never once came overand wenL dourn Kurvers Point until we were looking for a Lot but r do seeEden Prairie coming over. r see them taalking down our access. r see thembikine down our access so r wourd just as soon keep it, let's deal with theone access we have on TH 1o1 because Lhat's dangerous enough. Traffic isonly increasing. Thank you. Emmings: Thank you. Is there anybody else? Emmings: So it was your assumption. a cul-de-sac. uras going to stay that way? AIex t^Jagenaar: That was Emmi ngs: Okay, and that Alex l^lagenaar: Yeah. Scott Harri: Mr- Chairman. I'm Scott Harri andhere. f was uondering if you utanted me to put inyour convenience? I represent the developerour two cents nor^t or at Emmings: One question would be, do you these folks Lhat thaL road ulas going toto TH 101? know why the developer didn't tellgo thru and get connected back up Scott Harri: I can't answer that. In fact,their sales Iiterature that uJe provided themsubdivision - throughout the whole process was showing the entire Emmings: Including a road 9oin9 back out to TH The entire project that was LOt? approved.Scott Harri: Yes. AIex l^lagenaar : Just to anshrer your earl ier question. [.le weren't a].rarethat it was going to go thru to TH 101 until the recent homeownersassociation meeting either. On the plat that I saw when we were shoppingfor houses, it ended where it does now. The rest of it just said fuLuredevelopment. Planning Apri] 17 Commission Heeti n9 7997 - Page 6 Emmings: So that they bought their is information that Iots, as far as you these people would have seen when know? Scott Harri: but that Nas and thi nss. I can only conjecture. I've never seen a the sales Iiterature that we provided them sales pr esentation with the smal I maps MeI Kurvers r can I answer that? Emmings: Sure. HeI Kurvers: I'm MeI Kurvers. I'm one of the develoPers. AII the PeoPle, AIex uras probably not informed but the builders r^lere informed and I can't dictate to the builders what thev tell the PeoPle. He bought it through a realtor and again, I can't dictate to the realtors what they teII Lhem - But everybody was informed as to what the Plan was and we said the only change came about uhen tle Iooked at it with the traffic coming off of Valtey View Road, and this is a serious Problem. These PeoPle are coming in there. I can Iook out my window, I can see them at any hour of the day - Night. They're coming in there. They're making turns. They don't read the sign. People come in Lhere and Lhey say is Lhis an extension of Valley View and I said no. The sign says dead end. It's Kurvers Point Road. You can say blhat you want. It's only one time but how many times do ue have people lhaL are only one time? And if we take that sign down, I can teII you uhen they come through there and they find out thaL they are in the wrong road and they make this turn around, they're going a lot faster than they are coming in. So if you have any other questions bn it' tle did inform the people. tje didn't hide anything. tle told them urhat it uras. t,le told Lhem and the plan is there. The brochure. I've got a brochure in my briefcase if you'd like to see uhat. Emmings: And that shows the whole subdivision with it going back ouL? MeI Kurvers: It shoh,s it but this is 4 years later. Traffic has increased. tle've Iearned and that's t^thy we're up here with this plan. We're not hidins anything. I've lived here al} my life and vou can ask someone else. Emmings: tle]l, I know. They all said they didn't know and I was wondering why they didn't knou. MeL Kurvers: t^JeII they didn't know because they probably were not informed by the realtors or whatever. I mean the PIan is there and it does say that it's a second phase. And like any PIan, the second Phase may change. You do learn, I hope we do anyway from uhat we did in previous times andprevious years and that's why we're up here urith this Plan now. That we did learn, and I think we've got a good plan and that's r^rhy we're here. If you've got any other questions, I'd be happy to answer them. Emmings: Thank you. Is there anyone else here who uants to sPeak? Steve Mestitz: I I i ve ,aL 72OO My name is tlillow View Steve Mestitz and Cove. Part of my I'm a general surgeon and training was at a major trauma Planni n9 April 17 Commission Meet i ng 1991 - Page 7 center at Hennepin County Medical Center followed by some time at Children's Hospital. The proposal to open this up to TH 1O1 ,although I'm not a trafficologist. I don't understand al] of the in's and out's, seems like it would really increase the number. of cars that would go through our development and it really scares me becauFe part of my daily job is to take care of people who get injured. And having done that at a major trauma center, you see a lot of little kids that set hit by a lot of cars. It's a, from a strictly personal standpoint, and I don't necessarily want to make this too melodramatic but you only need to see one or two of those to make you very, very motivated to try to cut dourn the amount of traffic that interfaces with children that are playing in that area. And I know there's 4o children in that area nobl . There's going to be a lot more in the years to come and so from that personal perspective, there's going to be a lot more in the years to come. So from thaL Personal PersPective, it's very frighLening to have a non-dead end and more traffic aoing through that area. Emminss: Thank you. Anyone else? fs there a molion to close the public hea r i n9? Ahrens: Second . Emmings: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing. I'lI call the question. MeI Kurvers: t^lait a minute. tJe have some information... Emmings: Oh. Go ahead. ScoLt Harri: I just didn't want to get out of step with your protocol . I've introduced myself. I'm Scott Harri with Van Doren-Hazard-Stallings and we prepared the submittal before you tonight. And also the original Kurvers Point 1st Addition. With me tonight ' you've met MeI Kurvers and there's Frank Kurvers and his son, Paul . [^,e're here this evening requesting your recommendation for aPproval of the Kurvers Point 2nd Addition as we proposed it. tlhen the Kurvers Family decided to develoP Lheir property in 1987, they made a very conscience declsion at that time to create a unique residential neighborhood of high quality homes. The original site plan that was designed to meet these goals, tlhile resPecling landforms, both vegetation patterns, existing wetlands and Lotus Lake, the 2nd Addition of Kurvers Point is now being Presented. And Phase II retains lhese original goals but also reflects 4 years of market and develoPment experience. The second phase now represents the addition to an existing neighborhood rather than the creation of a new neighborhood. Hence Lhe knowledge and experience gained from Phase 1 is being applied to Phase 2 resulting in an enhancement of the overall project. The original site PIan had called for 15 lots in phase 2 with an average lot size of just over 23,Ooo square feet. In response to the market, the second Phase is noutproposed. It features larger lots with an emPhasize on the creation of Iots for the potential to build walkouts and as presented, the second phase now contains 14 Iots. As PauI mentioned, one less than the original Phase Erhart: I move we close the public hearing. Planning Commission Heet i ngApril 17, !991 - Pase I 2 with an average lot size of 24,670 square feet. Of the 14 lots, we've desighed via lhe layout, the physical layouL and also the grading, that 10of these 14 ]ots will accommodate a walkout at the ]ower level , Tr.Jo of thelots t^rill accommodate a side lookout and 2 of them wiII require perhaps conventional basement type construction. In addition to the marketconcerns, the new plan also reflects Lhe concerns of the existing residents who have constructed homes in Phase 1. The Kurvers Point HomeownersAssociation who you've been introduced to this evening, has provided inputinto this planning process for Phase 2. Their primary concerns, as they've sLated here this evening, revolve around safety and Lraffic issues, Ofcourse correspondingly the local road system has been changed to establishtwo new cul*de-sacs to I guess address those issues. Consistent u,ith phase 1, the 2nd Addition of Kurvers Point is being presented without any needfor any variances or modifications from the minimum zoning standards. Theproject continues to vastly exceed alI minimum zoning criteria in pursuitof creation of a high amenity, high quality residential neighborhood. Thestaff has prepared a very detaj.]ed and extensive report concerning aII aspecLs of this development. And I don't u,ant to sit here and review andgo over every one of them. Assuming and presuming that Ne can convince youto recommend approval, the Kurvers are prepared Lo meet all the 17 itemsthat are }isted as conditions. tte have some cl.arifications that we'd Liketo perhaps discuss uith staff but they're of a minor nature on only one ofthese things. t^Jhat I'd ]ike to do is spend a few minutes to address someof the specifics that I menLioned earlier regarding market and developmenLexperience gained from the past 4 years to perhaps help you better understand that Lhis proposal before you tonight and the factors needed to keep this a high quality neighborhood. Firstly the lots needed to be atIeast 10 feet wider at the setback Iine than originally proposed. t^lith the1st Addition...feedback from builders and deve.Lopers who wanted to buy Iotshere needed just simply more space. Hence the reduction that you're seeingin this plan from 15 lots to 14 ]ots as we've expanded things ouL.SecondIy, it has become extremely apparent from feedback from the homeowners assoc j.ation, also from builders and perspective customers, thatit's extremely .important to screen the neighborhood from TH 101 for bothtraffic noise and for a visual impacts. To that extent, the first phase contains a berm running fulI length of the east side of the subdivision. As part of thi.s proposal., r.le are proposing a berm similar to that on thisphase along the east side and at such heights that Ne can control Lhevisual impacts to those homes that would be built adjoining TH 1O1 and toat least attenuate some of the noise and the traffic that would be going byand to hopefully deflect some of that noise up into the sky. fhirdly, or I wanted to duell on that for a little bit longer. By creating anotherintersection with TH 101 , a berm or it would require an opening in this berm of maybe 60 to 70 feet in width making sure that we make sightdistance and setback requirements and that virtually would render thescreening and the effects of both the noise and the visual impacts, well it would reduce it signifi.cantly for most of the homes thaL uould be built inthat area. The third thing I'd Iike Lo mention, and the Kurvers Point Homeowners Association I think spoke generally and very specifically totheir concerns over the traffic safety issue. And there is studies that have been done that have shown that cul-de-sac neighborhoods are generallysafer both in traffic and for children who tend to run out into the street and play and this sort of thing. Fourthly, a majority of the buiders PlanningApril 17 Commission Meet i ng!99! ' Page 9 contacting the Kurvers for lots are looking for walkout lots and cul-de*sacIots in r.rhich to build and it's really their customers who are demandingthis type of lot. And as I stated earlier, 10 of the 14 lots proposed would provide for a walkout situation. The majority of them either areIake lols oi would be on a cuL-de-sac. And then lastly, which paul enteredinto the testimony here was a Letter from the Sosin,s. At the time the 1stAddition bras approved, there lJere some serious concerns over the trafficimpact of a second access on Lhe souLh side there. And this plan addressesthat also by not preparing it. The Kurvers Point 2nd Addition as presented here this evening is consistent with other developments that have been approved by the City, especially I guess the major issue we're talking abouL is cul-de-sac length. I guess this concludes my remarks. tJe have alist of cu]-de-sacs that I can show you. Or I shouldn't say show you butin just looking at 2 or 3 that just north of here on Choctab, Circle is acu]-de-sac of 1,55O feet Long with 45 Lots on it. And in Fox Chase,another almost 50 Iots on almost a 2,OOO foot long cul-de-sac street.Projects recently, well not necessarily recently approved but have beenapproved by the CiLy and I have perhaps 6-7 moye that I've just researchedjust recently. Again, making an appeal lhat your action and yourconsideration of this issue should be weighed against perhaps what has beendone in other locations. other cities. To my knowledge, in talking withsome of the Public Safety people here in town, that Lhe problems of a treefalling across the road or a watermain breaking or something blockingaccess, that would prevent the emergency vehicle from reaching a home inlhis case rea]Iy hasn't been an issue in any ).ocation in the city, tJhetherit be a cul-de-sac or even on a thru street ulhere the emergency vehiclecomes in this ]ocation, finds they can't make it and has to travel backaround a differenL direction to get to a Iocation so. I guess if you haveany questions of us, we'd be glad to spend some time and ansuer them foryou. Thank you. Emmings; Thank you. Now is there anybody else? Frank Kurvers: Just real short, Hy name is Frank Kurvers and f'm one ofthe developers, I think a development should do three things. Number one,it should be good to the cily. Number two, it should be good to the people who buy the lots. And number Lhree, it should be good for the developer. Emmings: Sounds fair . Erhart moved, Ahrens seconded to close the pubtic hearing- AII voted infavor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Emmings; I don't think anybody's too upset about going from 1s to 14 ]ots.I don't suppose ue need to spend a lot of time on that issue. Tim? Erhart: I unanimous? assume that the 20 members or that the opinion of this is Har k Senn: Yes, Erhart: I guess much co ns i ste nt Iight of that factother cul-de-sacs and the fact that this betr^reen Choctaw Circ Ie i.n with and pr et tyothers in PlanningApril 17 Commission Meet i ng 1991 - Page 10 Resident: 4L . Erhart: 41 on lhis one? t,lel] even with that , I trould be in f avor of changing the plan to the cul-de-sac and not pursuing any of the other thru street proposals. I have no other questions on any of the other issues - IL looks Like a very good develoPment. It's an extension of u,haL started out as a very nice development. Emmings: Okay. Ladd? Conrad: As we grade, if we were to follow through grading of TH 1o1 would change - How much tlould we do you know in terms of what grade difference? he ave t h originalto take design, off? Pau I , Krauss: Hr. Conrad, we're not sure actually. This was a Proposal originally made by the applicant's engineer and we're wondering if happens to have that information ' that Has he Scott Harri: I do. To create the ProPer intersection approved would have required 3 feet. Three feet for 15o-2Oo feet kind most - .. sighL disLance at the TH 101 to come dotln aPProximatelY of variable- Three at the Conrad: It wouldn'L change the berming a great deal then- It might change it a Iittle bit the necessity to screen a neighborhood. By Laking, as I've driven through there so many times, a big concern that I would have r^rould be opening up the neighborhood to the communiLv to TH 1O1 - I think it's really important that it's screened and that there be a berm there. The 3 feet I guess doesn't bother me a great deal. I think it's not that significant and I think the neighborhood r.lould still be able to be bermed and screened significantly. I think it tras clear r'lhat their original design was and I guess I'm not overly concerned. I hear the neighborhood Lalking about safety concerns but I think there are u,ays to deal with that. Obviously every additional car in !he neighborhood is probablv, that shouldn't be there, is probablv one too many but just a couPle things - PauI , you ruled out an access that would only be in an emergency access simpiy because of maintenance. I'm having trouble with this one myself because on Lhe one hand I really Iike the neighborhood having one access. I really Iike thaL from a small community st.andPoint. It's the u,ay I'd Hant to have it. The way I'd tlant to ]ive. It builds a community in there and I struggled to figure out a solution to make that haPPen. on the other hand, we've always been committed to when we have oPPortunity on the the city, I guess I don't see, I don't have a Problem Nilh Lhe revised plan. I Lhink it would quite fr:ankly, as much as from a planning's Point of view, I understand slaff's view on this. It's not a new development anymore. t"le have to live tri.Lh the 20 People on there and they're unanimous on their opinion that they would want it changed. I don't think Probably the 14 new people are going to have any different opinion, In driving down there the densily is, quite frankly I bJas surPrised at how low it is. There just isn't that many houses on there. tlhen you comPare that to the one up choctaw Circle, I counted 43 but I think someone had mentioned it u,as 45 houses there and this one will have, I believe a total of 34- Planning ApriI 17 Commission Meeting 1991 - Page 11 Planning Commission and City Council to make things as safe as Possib]e. on the one hand we're talking, the neighbors are talking safety from traffic and accidents. The other side of it is, in an emergency, an emergency vehicle getting to a burning house. Getting to a tornado victim. Tornadoes have gone through this area. It's one of those things that we've always supported if we had our, if we could. And it's Lough to Put a value on that. I think Lhe neighbors don't think anything's going to haPPen and one access is not a big deal. I think our public safety deparLment might say something different and may have some experiences where one access is blocked and a second one is open and the fire trucks, Lhe emergency vehicles, the ambulance gets to a house when there is an emergency. That's my problem. I have two solutions. one, if somebody convinced me that we're prelty safe in this 1,600 foot cul-de-sac. That's what I want to believe. on the other hand, I keeP looking for a solution where we have a Limited access in case of an emergency. [.le have an oPPortunity to do that. There is the one where there is a way to make that haPpen if we feel that that's significant. So I guess the bottom line for me is I'm struggling with it because I want to make that a small neighborhood and I don't like the second access yet I feel real responsible for providing emergency service vehicles a secondary access Lo that location. It is Possible to have that happen now. I believe in some of Lhe other longer cul-de-sacs that r^Je've allowed in the city, it wasn't easy to make haPPen. In fact, it was almost impossible to make hapPen and therefore uJe gave the develoPer Lheir right to develop the property. In this case it's easy !o make hapPen and I'm struggling with that. Paul ' you were going to say something? Krau6s: t,eII a couple things. First of all, nobodv should be, well I think everybody needs to come to griPs with the fact that traffic on TH 1O1 is building. It's beyond our control . It's an issue that confronts a State agency and two counties and a number of municipalities and we're lrying to get the baII going for people to look at what needs to be done on TH 1O1 . It's a real tough issue. But I think we have to really come to an understanding that traffic is going to be building there and I'd hate to have to be the one to say it and it's not a city road, but like it or not, it's going to have to be a 4lane road at some Point. I think you're all aware of the fact, in fact some of you said you're from Eden Prairie, that Toun Line Road is supposed to be a 4 lane road uP to the Minnetonka/ Chanhassen line. That is going to introduce a lot more traffic out here. In fact, one of the reasons they're buildins that road is thev're blaming it on development in chanhassen. Curiously enough. But a fundamentalpoint here is that we trould never propose that a IooP street go through if we thought this was a shortcut to someplace. t^le don't do that to residential neighborhoods. If this cut 30 seconds off the trip to downtown or if this was a shortcut to a lake access, a legitimate public landing' u,hatever , ure would never ProPose that a looP street be done. That just goes against all good professional iudsment and wisdom. The fact is that ue have a loop street here that is a much.Ionger curvalinear route than TH 1o1 is. I can understand how peoPle blunder into this neighborhood once. I can understand people looking at the lake or looking at the very nice homes that are in there. r mean my wife and I do that on weekends ourselves. But there's absolutely no reason for anybody to transit this neighborhood more than once. It just simple doesn't make any, it doesn't fit the conventional r.risdom as it applies to traffic management. Nobody would PlanningApriI 17 Commission |.4eet i ng 7997 - Page !2 choose, un).ess they're ]ooking for a Sunday drive or something I suppose. Nobody chooses to go the Ionger, more curvalinear route when Lhere's adirect route to the same place. [^re understand there's a question aboutpeople trying to shoot across TH 1O1 and I'm sure that happensoccasionally. It's a very tough inLersection. I don't know what more Ne can say about that. Just to clarify that, we uould never, under any circumstances, Tecommend a thru street through a residential neighborhoodif in fact it would introduce non-area trips in any kind of a significantway. One thing also has to be recognized here is that this developmentalone is going Lo generaLe 4OO trips a day. Emmings: The second? Kraussr No, the entirety of this plat is going to generate 4OO trips aday. That's nobody from Eden Prairie- Nobody from anyplace else. That'sthis development. Nith one curb cut, every one of those 4OO trips is goingto pass by those homes aL Lhat entrance. ttith two curb cuts, you share theIoad and I think that's a fairly reasonable proposition in terms of safety.In addition, most of the homes in there are 9oin9 to be on cul-de-sacswhether this is a looped road or not. You know most of the homes are designed to front onto cul-de-sacs. f was in there Loday, I think there,s5 or 6,5 now that may not. There's some more Lots that will be developedthat won't but again, they're going to have a cul-de-sac irregardless. There was a point raised that there Are other cul-de-sacs of equal lengthor Ionger. t,elI, thae's certainly true. Sometimes it u,as because, in 2O,z2O hindsight it wasn't a great decision. Sometimes it was because ofenvironmental issues or topography. There simply was no alternative. Butthere are several examples immediately north of this subdivision wherethere is a thru street connection and I think it's Lhe Colonial Grove andFox Hollow are both served in a similar situation by looped streets. Soagain I mean, we do undersLand uhere the residents are coming from and Ithink the Planning Commission and most members of the Council are familiarwith the fact Lhat this is not an uncommon issue. And I don't mean todiminish it because it's not uncommon but this kind of thing happens a lot.tlhere people are brought into a neighborhood either because they,re notinformed or they don't want to believe it's going to be extended orwhatever, that they oppose the second phase addition. Now I think you,re aware that since it crops up so much, wherever this happens from now on,what we've been doing is we've been requiring notices to be placed in thechain of title that say that this is going to 6e extended and we've beenputting up barricades at the end of the street with a sign on it that saysthis street is to be extended so there's no way anybody could say that theywere not aware or the realtor didn't teII them or anything else. This pre- dated this policy and I think this is an unfortunate consequence of it.Again, I just uranted to clarify lhough thaL we uould never, under anycircumstances, run a thru trip through a residential neighborhood. Conrad: And I hear what you're saying Paul. I think you,re making your recommendations by real sound planning background. My bottom Line is, Ithink it's a better community uithout that second access. I don't care ifthere are 2 or 3 cul-de-sacs inbetueen. The better community if we didn't have it there. The second access. But I am struggling. I hear what the neighbors are saying. I'm not persuaded as much as I, by their concerns, PIanni ngApriI 17 Commission lleeL i ng 799f - Page 13 as what I am for making it a better neighborhood. That in my mind is not having that second access. Hourever, houever, I feel accountable forproviding a secondary emergency access. .That's why if I were designing this, that second loop towards the south or the sLreet, I would have madethat a cul-de-sac right very close to TH 1o1 with an emergency road that would connect to TH 1O1. If I were the designer. I'm not the designer andLhat's not what's been presented tonight but that's what I utould have done. Emmings: Norr, you've defined the issue for come down on this issue? The issues you've you tell us how you Conrad: I'm waiting to be persuaded Commission. by the rest of the Planning us. can def i ned? Erhart:4 houses Erhart: Becausepeople Iiving in south exit. Steve, I have a question. Is there anybody here like on Kurvers Point Road? Have a house right on Kurvers of the f irstPoint Road? al I a going AIex t^lagenaar: I 'm the f irst on l^lil low View Cove. Barbara Jacoby: I'm the first house on Kurvers Point Road. Erhart: And the idea that you're going to actually have more traffic in front of your house from the local people, the people who Iive in Kurvers Point Road, if it doesn'L 9o through doesn't bother you? Barbara Jacoby: I don't understand. if it goes through, the people, more than likely the Lhe south half of the development are 9oin9 to go out the Barbara Jacoby: I'm Barbara Jacoby at 7251 Kurvers Point Road. tle have been chere since November so as far as the traffic aoes, I'm not that sure. But r can see that if it does open, people coming from Valley View who live as it goes to the south, Kurvers Point goes to the south, all those Peoplethat live there are just going to cut across TH 101 from VaIIey View to Kurvers Point and 9o in front of my house to get to the ones, the other houses- Do you follow me? conrad: But what he is saying is, in the new proposal . No, if it's cuI-de-sac and only one entrance by your house, aLL 42 homeowners are to go by your house every day 3 times, or urhatever the average is. Barbara Jacoby: Okay, and we could get that same thing. conrad: And whereas if you had a second cul-de*sac, a second entry, you're going to split half of those 40 homeowners. 20 will go one waY, 20 tlill go the other way. Barbara Jacoby: I think you're more likely to get them crossing from VaIIey View and coming right on by if they live on what would be, unl.ess they're coming up TH 5. You know, anyulay. Planning Commission Meet i n9April 17, t99f - Pase 14 Alex t,lagenaar: Can I speak in regards to this? The premise here is if you move the dead end sign, which is now located there, you,re going to have more traffic coming through. The situation right now is uhen theseindividuals see this dead end sign that's in place there. . .actually do turnaround by the tJilLow View Cove intersection... If that sign's removed,you're going to have a Iarge increase in thru traffic coming through there. Emmings: l.Je]I, I tell you Ne're getting a little loose here. t.,e closedthe public hearing and I think what we're going to do is go through andfinish with the comments from up here and then maybe give you another shotwith quick things. So we'Il just continue up here for notr. Jeff? Farmakes: l,ly comments on this are pretty much the same. I guess I'm aIittle at a loss for words between Lhe difference of opinion of publicsafety. Pubric safety here or concern for your public safety and accessingyour homes in case there is an emergency. rf somebody has a heart attackor whatever, there's a disaster and you're concerned about your chirdren.several professionals who came up here and tarked about concern for yourpublic safety of your children, rt sort of seems to be a trade off betueenprivacy. Your concern about the traffic Lhat comes through there, which m not quite convinced that these peopre are interested in putting theirboats in. rt seems like thev're interested in finding rake aqcess which isf guess a ]ittle farther to the south. The days are Iong gone in the lakecommunities around here uhere you can put your boat in inbetween a coupreof trees. Somebody's property or land inbetween. And other than ifthey're out looking at nice homes, which this community certainly lookslike it'd be worth driving through just to look at the homes. I'm stillnot quite I guess convinced that unless there has been problems on oLhercul-de-sac communities that are up on TH 1O1 , that this is 9oin9 to be amajor issue for public safety. I can understand the concern but Iguess I'd be more inclined to Look at the neishborhood and what theirbelief is of the use of their property. I'm not sure that putting thatsecond opening on there is realIy going to change anything. I don't thinkit's going to add to the traffic really, of your property. Bu! I don'tthink on the other hand it's going to hel.p people driving through that areIost or are coming on there from Valley View Road. They,re still 9oin9 tobe there and I agree with staff that I don't think people are going todrive through there simple because Lhere's another opening on lhe otherside. It seems these people are lost or out there viewing your homes.They turn around and drive right back through the neighborhood again. Ifthere was an opening there, they would drive out of your neighborhood but rcan't see where there's any time saved or any justification to say thatputting that through Lhere would increase t.hat traffic. And I,m not sureulhat could be done to decrease it no matter what option is gone with here.It seems that it's either confusion or sight seeing. I'm still, I guess inthis situation d defer to lhe homeouners - r don't see uhere there's any,there are other cul-de-sac communities here that, unJ.ess we,ve experiencedsimilar problems, I guess I would be incl.ined to approve it. Emmings: AIriSht. Joan? Ahrens: I guess I'm a little surprised at some of the comments made by thecommissioners because since I've been on the planning Commissiont every long cul-de-sac that's come up for discussion most recent one was when , just r,rest of Galpi n remember the name of the sLreet but there was developed over Lhere. has been turned down. The Lake BIvd.. f don't evengoing to be a cul*de-sac Krauss: ft wasn't Tanadoona? Emmings: No. I think she's thinking of where we eventually connecLed back up to Pleasant Vietr? Conrad; Troend]e. Emmi ngs: Yeah. The Troendle Addition. Minnetonka Intermediate SchooI . Back upAhrens: No. This was over by into there. Krauss: I think it's the one from Tanadoona. Ahrens: Yeah. And most of the Long, all of them. AII of the ones we talked about since I've been on the Planning Commission we've been very careful in evaluating that the safety issues and we've discouraged developers from pursuing Iong cul-de-sacs. l^le've basically sent them back to redraw their plans so I'm kind of surprised at the willingness to accepL a 1,7oo or however ]ong it is, cul-de-sac in this situation. I guess- I kind of like the idea of the no lake access signs. If that's the problem. I'm not sure that's the problem. I don't think anybody's really sure. I mean it's a public road. People have the risht to drive dot^ln a public road. f guess I'm really not persuaded that having a thru street is going to create a big safety problem. I think that when there are emergency cal]s, we're not talking about one fire engine or one ambuLance. tle're talking about 3 and 4 large vehicles going down a road. And if there's not enough room, it can be a big problem, I guess I'm persuaded by the staff recommendation and I'm going to go along with it. Emmings: Okay. As I remember this proposal when it came in front of us originally, one of the, I remember several issues from it but getting that hill cut down on TH 101 u,as one of the big issues that we all saw. When you talk about public safety issues, getting rid of that hiII on TH 1O1 ,especially at the deve.Loper's cost rather than our oh,n, Has something that really appealed to us. And I reread the Minutes from the City Council meeting and they a]I were very surprised that the developer uJas willing to do that but very happy about it. And the same sentiment was exPressed in the letter that Ne got from the Sosin's. It sure would be nice to see that hill cut dourn for everybody's safety, particularly the people that Iive out near there. But I have, I really am kind of torn by this. I'm tending to come out in favor of the staff recommendation. I guess I don't feel, I don't think that the traffic, I hope it's not. I don't think the traffic, the thru traffic is going to be the problem for you that you're afraid it is soins to. be. But that's not based on anything except my olrn opinion as a guess. I think two accesses wiII actually have an affect of decreasing traffic for the people who Iive close to the entrance, if it has any affect at all. As far as Lhere being other cul-de-sacs that are long. To the Planning Commission Meet i ngApril 17, !997 - Page 15 Planning Commission Meeti ngApril 17, 1997 - Page 16 extent that there Heren't reasons that !.,e wound up having to do it Nhen we didn't want to. We certainly don't have to repeat that kind of a mistake. tJe've had information in the past. I know it's been the general wisdom here on the, at lhe Planning Commission level at Ieast, that we HanL to discourage Iong cul-de-sacs for safety reasons and that doesn't come from us because we're not people trained in that. That comes from people onCity staff who have told us that. So we have pretty consistently refusedto do them except uhere there was no choice. But it's hard to say, wiLhthe entire neighborhood in here, except of course people who wiII be livingin subdivision 2. tlith the entire neighborhood of one mind that they'dlike it ]eft the uJay it is. It's hard to say we're going to force this onyou when you don't want it. And I kind of agree t^rith Ladd and I think I agree with the neighbors. I think if I were ]iving in there, I think I'd want it left as a cul-de-sac but that's not what you bought. It's r^,hat you think, I think what a lot of you thought you bought but it's not what you bought because Lhe plan aluays existed thaL connected Lhat road back out to TH 1O1 . So when, well I have a guestion. PauI, when I read the conditionsof the first approval. They're on page 114 of the City Council meeting onJuly 20, 79A7. Those conditions that the City Council atLached at thattime applied to the entire subdivision, not just phase 1. Hould that beright? Or would those just be to phase 1? Or first addition or whatever. Krauss: I think, I would be guessing aL this point looks as though 18 should apply uniformily.Hr. Chairman but it Emmings: That's the one that caught my eye. And when I saw that one, because there's a Lot of trees between th6 upper part of this that lookslike it had been farmed and then on that slope that goes down Lo the Iake.There's a Iot of trees in there and where I see them putting houses, Idon't know. Can you teII me wheLher or not these conditions apply to the whole thing? The plan stamped 'Received June 4, f9A7 " but I don't know ifthat would be the whole. Frank Kurvers: I think I can ansuer that question because...DNR had checked the property out and they didn't have any concerns. Emmi ngs: I don't think timber management plan. Krauss: But your Addition. So the they did their job. You'reIs there no plan? supposed to have a Frank Kurvers; There isn't any plan as far as the DNR is concerned. Krauss: To the best of my knot^rledge when somebody comes in for a buildingpermit in there is we require that they give us a tree preservation, treecuLting plan with the house plan. Then ule walk t"rith the site with him andhandle it that Nay. Emmings: Okay. question answer is as to does 16yes. It was apply. Block 3 was in the 2nd intended to. PauI Kurvers: I think those Blocks are incorrect - Block 3the 1st Addition. At least in the plans that I have. IS actua I I y ln Krauss: t"le L I t hese Wel IPaul Kurvers: Emmings: My concern here Paul of new conditions here in what what extent they can...or fail imposed or if ue care. Timber Krauss: I think that would be Emmings: Okay. And then the at the property this morning,lake here, at least number 1 Without fill in there? are the plans dated the date that r.ras cited. there was a mistake made somewhere along the... is that if there were, we've got a whole setue're looking at tonight and I don't know toto include conditions that were already management plan seemed important to me. worthy one to carry forward. only other question I had is uhen f was outit Looked to me. The lots that go along the and 2, can those be built uithout filling? Frank Kurvers: t^lhich Iots are you talking about? Emmings: Lots 1 and 2if I point. There you there and maybe. and 2 that are closest to the, well There seemed to be kind of a steep .1 go. here, Maybe bank a Iong Frank Kurvers: engineers. . . Emmings: Yeah, It doesn't much on paper but boy, r,rhen I think as far as Iooking at the elevations, the Iook Iike much, I looked at it. drop off doesn't seem to be Iooked pretty steep. the It Frank Kurvers: You mean Lots 1 and 2? Emmi ngs: Yeah. Scott Harri: There will be a requirement on al} of the lake lots becausejust to the physical fitLins of the road, Kurvers Point Blvd...east lots and the west lots. There will be a down driveway that wiII have to be made off of Kurvers Point Road to access most of the lake lots. Emmings: okay- So they'Il be built down on that lower level? Scott Harri: Exactly. Most likely. And because of the nature of the lot and the topography, you're not going to find anything but a custom designed home to fit the trees and the grades and things ouL there. Otherwise it *on't fit. Then you'Il virtually have to cLear cut the whole thing. Emmings: But it's not so low do!.,n there that it has to be filled? Scott Harrir tJel] portions may. In getting access to the driveway and stuff and right in front of a home but how the house uill fiL in to thegrade, they can simply be notched into the hillside there so the walkout Ievel at the lour leveI t^riII f it r.ri.th the existing ground there - Planning Commission Meeti ngApril 17, !99r - Page !7 PauI Kurvers: There is some drop there. I think based on the elevations that are proposed there...two lots. Planning Commission Meeti ngApril 17, l99t - Pase 18 Emmings: l^lell, there's a ]ot of trees in there. The felloul that livesright on the end there came out and talked to me and was telling me abouLthe, that there are owls nestj.ng in the big dead tree that's in there andaII kinds of nice lhings going on. I would think that having the DNR outthere to look a! that and making sure we preserve what u,e can of what's there urould be an important and valuable thing to do. So anyway. AlrishtI said that after we made our comments we'd give folks another round. Sothis doesn't go all night, Iet's get real focused and try to say stuffthat's new if you wi. ll. If you want to come up and add something. Emmings: There's no doubt about that and your comment about decreasing access points onto TH 1O1 is ulell taken. And your 4 years is probably moreIike 4OO years. The only reason I say that is because it's TH 1O1 andthaL's a road that anybody who's got even any suggestion lhat they might be responsible for that road quickly passes it off to somebody else. Nobody wants it. It's like a hot potato. Nobody wants it. Is there anybody elsethat wants to say anything? Hel Kurvers: I want to comment one more time.- tlhen we talked about thesecars coming in from VaIIey View. I mean we see them. I!'s not somethingthat we're picking out of the air. tle do see them and they do come inthere. There's some real fast people lhat come in there and I thinkthey're irritated because they got in there and they don't know r^rhat to doso they turn around and they just really wheel And if they come throughthere, you know like you were stating, someone was stating that if there was another exit, that ure would only have half the people going this way and half would go that uay. I don't think hre can predetermine which waythose people are going to go. If a road was put in and say it uas aright-in/right-ouL, it would have to be the people going to Chanhassen- Nb!to VaIIey View Road. Not to TH 1O1. Not Lo 494 9oin9 that way so I don'tthink we can state that fact that Ne're going to split them. Andpersonally, I've lived Lhere all my Iife and I'm probably an old fashionguy but I'm going to go where I can see the best wa)2. Both directions. So AIex t,lagenaar: I just have a quick question and it was sponsored by thegentleman's commen! about TH 1O1 being improved and widened to 4lane andthe straight thru road and so forth. If I undersLand that right, when that happens what they're going to want to do is minimize the access points to TH 1O1 . And in fact we may be in a situation 4 years down the road whenthat happens or whenever. I don't know. I'm just pickins a number out ofthe air, that we may have to close one of these access points at thatstage. So then we have an access point with the berms and aII the houses have been built and they're in place and we have one too many access points because it's a State thru highway. And anytime they go through improvements! we see Lhat going on on TH 5 now, they want to minimize access points and bring aI.I the access' to a relatively small number ofpoints. So that's just a question. And then the other comment in thistrade off in terms of safety. There's a person being killed in thiscountry every 10 minutes in a car crash. Now that's not to minimize the dangers of tornadoes. The risk of heart disease and heart attacks and aIIof the other health problems that we have as society, but if there's atrade off, after studying this area for over 10 years, the risk of kidsbeing kiIled on their bikes rates pretty high in my standard. Thank you. Plannj.ng Commission Heet i n9April 17, 1997 - Page 19 r^rhen I make a turn, that I can see a car coming. AIso, when bre agreed toIower that hill, we agreed to Iower it to get sight disLance. Now sightdistance, you take 3 feet off of that hill and you've still got a hilllhere. tJe did not agree to make it a flat road urhich there was a statement made that oh, it would be really nice to have a flit road. t,lell we're notin the business to be lowering the roads to make it a flat road. And wedid put a ]ot of thought in this here. f mean it wasn't something that's done overnight. It's 4 years and I also would like to address your question on trees. tlhen we designed the project, u,e made roads. You cango out there and look. tJe routed them around trees. HeI Kurvers. And we also LeIl. the people when they're building that we donot want to see any more trees taken dourn. Emmings: The guy I ta] ked to in your subdivision, he lives out on the end there, he said, he told me that you were very fussy about how things were done and it's a beautiful subdivision. Everybody thinks so. I think. HeI Kurvers: But I don't think Lhat people are really realizing what weare seeing about the cars coming across. I guess I didn't either except it seems to be that people, when they come across or stop aL that stop sign onValley View Road, Lhey think that they can jump across much faster than to come out and make that Lurn to the left. I don't knor.r if it's just in their head or what but they do come across. Emmings: Even with Lhe dead end sign? Mel Kurvers: With the dead end sign. And if you open that up, those cars where are they going Lo go? The dead end sign is gone. The fact of the matter is, I was thinking of asking Lhe City to put a dead end, no outlet. I thought maybe they couldn't read dead end. Maybe no outlet would be better because I've seen that in some places. But I really want to push this real strong that there are these cars coming in there. I mean peoplejust, when you say that you've got Valley Vieu Road which is funneling inthere and if you open that up, they're going to come Lhrough. Emmings: You and I just disagree on that. I don't see that the fact that, if they come across urith the dead end sign there, they don't care apparently whether there's an opening at the other end or not so I don't know why having that opening is going to make a difference. That's a problem I've got with this. Nor., I think you need some help out there to keep the Valley Vieu, traffic out of your neighborhood but I don't think not having the other access is the thing that's going to do it for you. Ilhink you need help of some oLher kind. I don't know urhat it is but maybe. WelI wait a minute, are you done? l*,le I Kurvers: No , I jusL uranted to make one more comment saying and that is, that the people do see this dead end still come across so they can turn around at t^lillow View and go back out. You're not going to stop those people. uhat they're doi ng on what you uier e sign and theyandmakeaUturn They know exactly Emmings: I noticed it. PlanningApril 17 Commission Meeti ng 7991 - Pase 20 Emmings: Okay. So they're coming back and then taking a right and going south on IH 1O1? MeI Kurvers: Right. Emmings: Oh, I think you ought to shoot those folks. Somebody ought to stand out there with a gun. Ken l.lestenberg: No I have not . Ken l^,lestenberg: My name is Ken ]^Jestenberg and I live in l"lillow VieN Cove.I urant to address one point that, or a question that was sLated to one ofour residents about whether she'd rather have all Lhe residents coming past her home or half of them coming past her home with the presumption theother half would 9o the other way. I lived in a project of 55 homes prior to moving to r{here I now live. I Iived next to, or I was the second house f rom the exit. t^,le had everybody coming past my home. tle had some problems but we knew who those people were. tJe dealt with it and we stopped it andit no Ionger became a problem. tlhen you have aII these people coming fromVaIIey View, ue have no idea who they are. t,le have no b,ay of tracing Lhemdown. We cannot stop the h,ay they drive. That is a big key factor. The second thing you have to understand is, the people that are shooting across TH 101 and turning around are frusLrated and angry. They have sat behind 2or 3 cars trying to make a left turn. tlhen they pull over to the right, shoot across, they are driving very eradically and dangerously. tJe havekids beins picked up 20 feeL from that point every morning and you talk abouL the safety factors. You talk about tornadoes and heart attacks andall that, those are 1,2,3 occurences in 10 years, if ever. l^lhat we'retaLking about is a danger every single morning of many, many lives standingby those bus stops. Emmings: oh,you mean they u,ant to do that? l,Jell sure because they can come across faster than theyl.1ef Kurvers: make a tur n. Emmings: Didn't the school district also change the bus stop forpeople? That's what Ehis fellow I was talking to out there todaygot the school district to come out and they saru how dangerous it 1O1 and prior to that time the bus uasn't coming dourn your streetit does? can you said they was on THbut now Resident: It comes down Kurvers Point. Mark Senn: The point you're missing from earlier is that since the dead end sign has been up, the incidence of this has been cut in about half. Take the dead end sign away and we're going right back the wrong aay again. Emmings: I'm just wondering if we couldn't just leave it up there. Idon't see anything wrong with lying. Have you given your name before? Emmings: Do it now. Emmings: Yeah. And thaL was done because the school dislrict watched the cars. Dennis Kopfmann: It stops at Kurvers Point Road and tlillow View which isright Lhere. I mean it's what, Iike 30 feet? My kids go to Eden Prairie schools and Eden Prairie schools h,on't even stop on TH 1O1...because of thedanger. I mean the intersection, the danger is going across VaIIey View. You talk to Eden Prairie about their sight lines on their side, they're much more hazardous than we have on the Chanhassen side. Ken l^,estenberg: I'm sure you hrere jesting perhaps but uhen you said Ieaving the dead end sign up, I mean how long are He going to fool thesepeople. The first time they try it and find out it's open, they're going to make a regular habit of it every single morning. That's human nature. Emmings: Anybody el se? Emmings: I didn't geL that out of what staff said. Frank Kurvers: But staff stated Lhat in the city of Chanhassen. WeII, I'd would have to disagree too. it's have no to different disagree. lhan any I think other road you peop I e Emmings: Yeah. You don't disagree with what he's saying do you? Krauss: No. I wonder r.rhere the implications... Emmings: No, I didn't get that. Okay. conrad r you tur n one other quesLion. Frank, maybe you can answer Lhis. tlhy didn't this into a cul-de-sac? Conrad: Nith an emeYgency access? Frank Kurvers: Why? Conrad: Have the cul-de-sac out here. it, could you puL a cul-de-sac in there short emergency access? I guess another way for me to put and make it a viable project urith a to that , I'dFrank Kurvers: As far as the lot configurations and the changes walkouts and the berming and Lhe fact that ure lost one Iot to do Planning Commission Heet i ngApril 17, 1997 - Pase 2l Frank Kurvers: I've got just one comment. It seems Lhat your comment thatVaIIey View Road and Kurvers Point Road seem to be Lhe same street and itcarries the same amount of traffic. tjell I guess Kurvers Point Road is aresidential street. VaIley View Road is a collector street which collects many, many vehicles. It seems like staff says well they're the same. l^lell, I'd have to disagree. Ihey're not the same. They're different types of roads. I mean there's lateral roads. There's collector roads. There's major roads and there is a difference. Frank Kurvers: ...that plan that you have before you is a cul-de-sac. PlanningApriI 17 Commission l.1eetin9t99t - Page 22 have to say ityou see before certainly Does Lhat change ansu,er conrad: Tell me a Iittle bit more- There's more difference because why? Are you losing property or another lot by doins thaL? Frank Kurvers: Forget the property. This plan that you see up there,we're losing a lot so we're making frontages which got...and we're moving back from TH 1o1 which we have to berm to keep it cuiet. So all of these different configurations rlere puL into the scheme to make it, r^rhich we feel , uas even a better plan than the original one. It wasn't just anarbitrary decision. conrad: No, I can see why that wouldthat cul-de-sac closer to IH 1O1 t{itha viable alternative in your mind? the appearance to do that...than whatyour question? be an desireable but if emer9ency access, would you . you is did move that just no! 's har d cr est the was Frank Kurvers: You have to look at the total . You know that Iand arethere, if you look at it, it's very narrow so in that, if we were on theother end of the project, we'd have more room. tle have Iess room to makegood lots, sellable lots. tle need an area to build on and to change it,you have less frontage. It just Hon't fit the homes of the type of homesthat are bui]t. AlL those shifLs make each lot, it makes the berm the sound barrier, aII these things were taken into consideration. Emmings: You'd have to if you put a road out too. If you connect theroad. Same thing. Conrad: I! looked to me, and again when you visually ]ook at it, itto teII where things are. It looked like it h,as a pretty flat. Theof the hiII to the north is minimized as you get to where this, welLprevious access point was I thought. In other words, I though! thispretty flat. Frank Kurvers: It's fLat but it's low eLevation from PauI Kurvers: It actually goes down I would estimaLe 1O1 down to the property, it drops about 15 feet. the State Highway. from the edge of TH MeI Kurvers: From the perspective of buildins a cul-de-sac, you want to have dimensions to use that cul-de-sac also. So in effect what you're speaking of could be accomplished but it certainly wouldn't help any lotconfiguration. It would definitely disturb ulhatever you would try to accomplish. Conrad: l^,eII I'm trying to accomplish an emergency access. I'm trying togive the 41 homes the privacy and whatever ulith a second access that's not open other than to the fire trucks and the ambulances. That's aII I'mtrying to figure out hor.r to do. Nothing more. And you're telling me itdoesn't, my solution doesn't work for you and I'm just struggling with Paul Kurvers: t,le also had to match the elevation of TH 1O1 . In order todo that.. . Planning Commission l'leetingApril 17, 799f - Page 23 overriding something that rve been pretty consistent on for many years andthat has been, in aII cases we've tried to find an emergency access forevery smaller community within Chanhassen. Sometimes we couldn't do it.l.lost of the times He were able to do it. I guess as much as f.'m havingtrouble, as much as I'd like to make this a community all by itself, I justfeel Lhat we've had so much history of providing. you knou it's a casewhere we have been told by staff and we have tried for so many years. Infact we used to have a 5OO foot cul-de-sac limit and then we went up to a1,OOO. f'm not sure Hhat's right and I guess Ne have to listen to staff interms of what they believe is standard in not only the community but in theindustry and the safety of citizens. I hear what the citizens are sayingabout the safety and we have to address that issue too but on the otherhand, we have to address the issue of emergency access. I have to believethat staff urhen they LeII us you need a secondary access Lo something,they're not making that up. They're not trying Lo get people angry.That's pretty much the Hay Chanhassen has tried to develop over aII theseyear s . Brooks Myhran: Is this slill an open forum? Emmings: Yeah. I guess I uJant Lo make a comment first. Particularlyuhere this isn't coming in new this r.ray, I mean this isn't the way thething was proposed- It was proposed to be hooked back up. That's ourbaseline and rea]Iy you're asking us to change something that's already inplace that we're pretLy much happy with. It seems to me what Ladd issaying, it's something I could get behind because it seems to satisfyeverybody's concerns. It urould turn that, there would still be acu]-de-sac at the end. It would be closer to the highuJay and I understandit screws up the lot configuration but it gives the residents whaL theywant because they've got the cul-de-sac and it gives the city b,hat it h,ants because there'd a way for emergency vehicles to get in a! that end. So it seems like a real reasonable solution not being proposed to us I guess so we don't have it here to vote on but. Brooks Myhran: Let me give just two observations. Emmings: Did you give your name before? Brooks tlyhran: No, sorry. Brooks Myhran at 50 Twin Maple Lane. Tt^roobservations. One, the thrust of the argument here hinges on public safety,or at ]eas! much of il does. Our perspective is that our children inparticular and the neighborhood in general is better served by one accesspoint. Your argument is that public safety is better served by two. Eellit seems to me ure are the public in question. This affects nobody else in Chanhassen or anywhere else in the world for that matter and we aII have made Lhe Lrade off in our oh,n minds that the safety from natural disasterwith tr4o accesses is not sufficient to offset the risk that we aII feel to be real, never mind NhaL you think may or Jnay not be the case, that comes from increased Lraffic. And if it's my neighbor driving by there, f have confidence Lhat he'II behave reasonably than somebody else. So I think I can'L judge your processes but clearly the PeoPle that live there are thepublic that you're serving and you could think of whaL their collective decision making has Led them to argue and aII neur home buvers on that Planning Commission Meeti ng Apri] 17, !997 - Pase 24 cul-de-sac wiLl make that decision for themselves impliciL in that home purchase. Secondly, you're trading the decision as either or. Either it goes through or it doesn't. To me it's much more fundamental . Either Lhe subdivision gets built or the Kurvers may decide not to exPand because it isn't economically feasible and from a Pure dollars and cents point of view, if there's 14 Iots going in there with 14 new homes going in, we're Iooking at 4 million dollars of assessed ProPerty values and that could easily be $1OO,OOO.OO of properLy tax every year which might never materialize if what you say they have to do is inconsistent with what they say the market LeIIs them to do- And who wins in Lhat case? So to me it's guite simple. You can't deny lhem the right to make a profit on their properLy. If you deny them the rieht to have a cul-de-sac, they may choose not to develop because it isn't economically viable. And we have all expressed our opinion Lhat we urant it Lhat uray in Lhe first place and we're the public that you must be most concerned with, as far as I'm concerned. Emmings: Hy only comment Lhere would be, you know we urere deciding these safety issues, which you rightly lake very Persona.lly, in your absence when we originally designed Lhis thing or urhen we originally aPproved Lhe design for this. And that included a street that came out to TH 1o1 . So u,e take those into consideration aII the time. The other thing is, you've got to recognize lhat we're a recommending body - The main thing here is to get the information out on the table, l,le make a recommendation to the City Counci]. You folks vote for who's on the City Council. You don't vote for who's up here so you might wanL Lo follow this issue, however it goes, you're going to Nant to follow it up to the City Council MeI Kurvers: said? Can r make one additional comment in regards Lo r{hat Ladd had Emmings: Sure, You go right ahead. MeI Kurvers: I'Il put it this way. tle're trillins to look at a way to make an emergency access but we're noL going to commit to say that that should go where you pointed out. tle have to look at iL. If that's the bisproblem, we'Il take a look at that and we'II try to make some kind of a,but we have to have Lhem look at it. Conrad: I'd like to see tha!. And you know, f'd also like to have staff,they've got to educate us and they have to .educate the City Council in terms of what we're talking about when we talk about emergency access. Ithink ue follow it pretty consistently here', since I've been around. Itprobably, f 've never seen the secondary access do anything. But the public safety and the fire department's not calling me up and said it did somelhing so I'm not being made auare but I think we have a standard outthere. I think we have to know if that standard's valid or not and I thinkPaul has to !e!.I us. He's obviously tellins us it is a valid standard andit's nothing that you make up in Chanhassen. These are standards that comefrom the State and they come from other communities but I guess I feel westiII need a Iittle bit more information because we struggle ulithcuL-de-sacs a]I the time. l.le've struggled with trying to make aresidential neighborhood a real neighborhood. tJe Iike that. On the other hand we do, you know when ule make a commitment to Kurvers point, we're Planning April 17 Commission Meet i n9 1991 - Page 25 saying hey. A1l things are off for the entire city of Chanhassen. tJe justsaid you don't need a secondary access to anyplace in Chanhassen. I,mexaggerating but that's what we have to revien. If we said this goesthrough, we say basically we don't have d standard anymore. That's out thewindow. l^lhat should our standard be? Is it a 2,OOO foot cul-de-sac? Isit no standard at, aII? That sort of still bothers me a little bitbecause I'm not sure Ne've changed it in the past. tJe follow it because Ithink staff has given us good information but again, I think we need toknow the why 's'. Emmings: And a]so, following up on that. That's why we don,t set ourstandards but taking a poll of what the neighborhood wants. t^that theneighborhood wants is important but Ne do have standards that we do applyacross the board to the City. I'd Iike to know HeI if you,re sayins that.we only have an opportunity to vote on this plan that,s up there on theboard tonight because that's alI that's been presenLed to us and I guess doyou want- , would you Hant us to take action on that plan or do you blant usto table it to give you a chance to consider the other option or what doyou uJant us to do? Mel Kurvers; l,le don't brant it tabled . Emmings: Okay, so you h,an! us to vote on thaL plan? HeI Kurvers: l,Je'I1 work ulith that plan, Emmings: Alright- But then thaL wiII, if you,re going to change whaL Ladd has suggested and maybe others here might support, blouldhave to come back here PauI? That kind of a change? it to that Krauss: Not necessarily Mr. Chairman. If you so desired, you could put arecommendation in that an emergency access be provided and that the plat bemodified before iL gets to Council. That option be presented to the Counci I . Ahrens; t^,asn't the City also concerned b,ith maintenance of that road? Theplows being able to get done the Iong cul-de-sac? I mean the emergencyaccess would noL solve that problem right? Conrad: Staff is still not for an emergency access . m clarifying for myseJ^f , that's not going Krauss: Correct , Emminss: okay . Mark Senn: Just to comment on the standards. You're absolutely right. The standards are very important. I've served on a number of committeesLhat developed standards on issues Iike this and llhen you're developing standards, you're struggling with a lot of trade-offs and so forth and trying to provide guidance to any Iocal decision making bodies throushout Ahrens:to so lve No, I realize thaL but IthaL problem r ight? Planning Commission Heet i ng Apri] 17, !997 - Page 26 the country and nevertheless, despite the standard they need Lo be applied- You have the very difficult job regularly trying to applv these and take into consideration locaI conditions and the specific situation of any given decision. And I really appreciate how nice you've been allowing us to interrupt and be a littLe bit out of order and so forth. Thank you very much. Emmi ngs r have? Okay. Does someone u,,ant to make a metion on this? Does anybody Ahrens: I'Il move that the Planning Commission recommend denial of Preliminary PLaL *87-L4 for Kurvers Point 2nd AddiLion as shotln on the ilans dated Harch 18, f99! for the reasons stated in the staff rePort. Krauss: Certainly. Emmings: f'm going to second it. Is Lhere any discussion the motion?on ofConrad: t^le're denying it? I'm trying to follow the logic motion's going to do. The denial wi]] just simply deny it. some recommendations to go along with that. uhat the l^Je will have Emmi ngs: tleI I as I denying the changes understand it. !^lhat a denial here wilI mean is we're they wanL to make to a plan tha! already exists. Krauss: That's true and you can let the denial would consider , if you did recommend denial, if see ki ng . Emmi nss:plan that Krauss:plat for conr ad : stand but I would, you clarified r^rhat if you you were Krauss: That's correct . Emmi ngs: to do it So u,e're not saying he can't develop this. [.le're saying he's got the t^ray he said he was going to, Let's go back a second. Am I right to we're denying changes to a already ex ists? That's true. The Kurvers could come in tomorrow with the final lhe original proposal , yeah. And that wouldn't come back to us? Krauss: No. Conrad: So Emmings: Is this would go up to City Council. Okay. You seconded it. there any discussion? Ahrens moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommenddenial of Preliminary Plat *A7-14 for Kurvers Point 2nd Addition as shown on the plans dated ]larch 18, 1991 for the following reason: Emmings: Is there a second? AIright, time out. Can I second something? Planning April 17 Commission Meet i n9 1991 - Page 27 The proposed plat deviates from the approved preliminary plat andplat for the first phase by replacing the secondary street access TH 101 with a cul-de-sac. final to Ahrens, Emmings and Conrad voted in favor, Erhart and opposition- The motion carried with a vote'of 3 to 2 Farmakes voted in Emmings: Do either of the people who voted against it b,ant to state Lheir reasons for voting against it or do you think the record's? Erhart: I'm okay triLh the record. Emmi ngs: Okay. Farmakes: I 've aLready spoken. I'd just be repeating myself. conrad: Are you going to give staff direction? Krauss: I should add that the applicant has the ability to take this as adenial up to the City Council and still ask for what they're asking fortonight. Again, it might be wise for those on the prevailing side to clarify urhat, if any modifications you might find acceptable Lo serve as guidance to the CounciI. conrad: I would go along with what eJe saw if I felt comfortable there was an emergency access to the site. I really Iike how it looks and Lhe senseof community it's buildine there. It has nothing to do uith what the neighbors said in terms of emergency, in terms of the traffic. I think the traffic is stiIl an issue regardless of the second access. The traffic is a problem that the City should try to help solve. tlaybe there's, thesign's got to stay up. l.Je've got to lie on signs. I don't care what we have to do but r,:e've got to solve Lhe problem if iL's that great, and I uasnot aware that it uJas that great. But I woul,d like staff to make sure. nypoint is, and the reason I voted negative on this is simply I want the emergency access reviewed. Developer and staff, I think that really makesa IoL of sense. It's consistent t^rith my posture over the years but I'dalso like staf to present City CounciL with the rationale for Lhe qecondary access for emergency vehicles. And f'm not talking snowplows. I don't care about snowplows and if they have to make 3 oy 4 trips through. That'snot a concern that I have. I'm talking abouL emergency vehicles. Firetrucks, ambulances - Safety type of things, I think we've been realsensitive to that and our departmenL in tshe past but I guess I'd like to make sure City Council, I think they need to know a little bit more aboutthat from staff Lhan maybe ue held in common here. 1 Emmings: I could geL behind, as far as adapting. As a compromise between the orisinal plan that was approved and the plan that they are asking for, I could certainly get behind Ladd's suggestion. As long as the, you knowif snowplowing is still a problem, I'd uant Lo make sure that the folks that handle that stuff in the city, make it clear to the City Council what those problems are. or any other problems that that proposal uould raise,I think that's a real nice compromise that Ladd's come up urith and I don't know r,rhy it can'L be done. I think it could be. PIanning Commission l.leet i ngApril 17, f99f - Page 28 Emmings: Anything else Joan? Ahrens: I could go along with a plan for emergency access. However, Idon't know, I still don'L know if we should be in a position of trying to keep everybody off of a public road so that nobody is able to drive throughthere excepL for the people that Iive there. f mean I don't know if it'sthat bis of a problem. f mean you sai.d we should give them, give staffdirection or have them lake some action to decrease Lhe traffic on LhaL road. Emmi ngs : View that back out. tlell it's the traffic that's shootingis doing it intentionally and using itThat's a problem. over from the end of as a turn around to Valley 9o Ahrens:gate up? I don't see how r^,e can ever prevent anything like that. Put a Emmings: You ought to ]ook at it and try to figure out somethingthat's a terrible problem. But anyu,ay, for those of you who wantthis up to the City Council, it will be front of the City Council13th. And you should. beca u seto follora on May Resident: Do you k nour Emmings: t^leII, talk to 6th - what time? them. The meeting starts a! 7:3O but. Okay, May PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING ORDTNANCE AMENDHENT TO CLARI FY ZONING ADHINISTRATOR AS PLANNING DIRECTOR. Emmings: I don'L think r^re need to have a staff report on this. It'spretty straight forward. Does anybody have any comments on this? Oh ulait.It's a public hearing. Is there anybody here that Lrants to comment onthis? Conrad moved, Emmings seconded to close the public hearing- All voted infavor and the motion carried- The public hearing uas closed- Conrad: I Iike the idea. I think it's great. Ahrens: I didn't know that you u,eren't already the Zoning AdministraLor. To tell you the truth. Krauss: I don't think that Don Ashworth knew that he was. It Nas one of those quirky things and Lhe ordinance has been around forever- Erhart moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of an amendment to Section 2O-1 , Definitions, to state that the Zoning Administrator means Planning Director- All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously - Planning Commission HeeLingApril 17, \99f - Pase 29 Krauss: That has . Emmings: Okay. But I don't remember whether or not He voted on the monument sign on the front yard? Krauss: Thal was denied. The expansion of the monument sign by uhatever bras to include a tenant space which Has recommended for Emmings: And that was recommended forjust have the name of t.he bui.Iding? denial so if they have one, iL will Krauss: It wiII be the 10 feet or denial . sign jus L that uras originalLy approved, to Iooking at t.he band in Lhe yes . middle?Emmings: So we're down Krauss: Exactly . Emmings: Okay. That helps me. Another thing I'm a IiLtIe confused aboutis why is it back here? The City Council, we took action and the City Council has taken action but yet it's come back here and I'm a Iittle confused about the procedure. Krauss: Okay. The City Council could have of course acted on itunilaterally. I think Lhere was some concern on their parts that whilethis seemed to maybe making a Iot of progress and while it seemed to be consistent with a Iot of the Suidelines that you had Iaid down, that you had never seen it and it was a completely different p1an. Emmings: This plan that we're looking at now? Okay. Alright. This isold business. It's not a public hearing but we've got at least two guys out here that look like they might wanL to talk. Is there something you'd Iike to say to us because Lhis would be an appropriate time to do it? Bob Copeland: tle don't have much to say. You've heard a Iot about it.tle're a]I getting tired of talking about it I guess but I just want toclarify a couple things. First of aII, it's a sign area. In other u,ords,there wiII be lap siding, Iike the rest of the buildins, just in this area and we won'L have a plywood panel that's Bainted a burgandy color in'here. So there will just be the individual letters on whatever signs there be forour 3 tenants . That r.re would put i n this area . Emmings: And you're only asking for there ever to be 3 signs in there? AHENDHENT TO SITE PLAN APPROVAL AHENDING THE STdNAGE FOR THE CHANHASSEN }IEDICAL ARTS FACILITY LOCATED AT 47O I.IEST TATH STREET. Paul Krauss presented Lhe staff report on this item. Emmings: Okay, clarify one thing for me. tlhen they came in here we talked about the little dirctory sign in back of the building and my recolLectionis thaL no one had any trouble u,ith that and that's been passed? Planning Commission Heet i ng April 17, 1991 - Pase 30 Bob Copeland: That's right. And we're asking for approval to put in 3 signs within Lhis sign area. And the maximum height of the area is 4 feet and I think it's about 58 feet ]ong. The covenants that we've developed with the staff have a maximum Ietter size of 15 inches if there are turo. In other words, two lines like Chanhassen Dental. One Line above another one. The maximum size letter there is 16 inches. Emmings: tJhat are the letters that are Presently on the ends of the bu i ldi ng? Bob Copeland: 10 inches. Business Hea]th Services is 1o inches. chanhassen Medical center is 1o inches. Goldstar Mortgage is 15. Emmings: And so any signs in the middle r^rou]d be a maximum height of 15 inches if there are Lu,o lines. tJhat if there's one line? Bob Copeland: It could be up to 3 feet. And then we've allouled for a provision in there urould allow a logo to be added. Emmings: And color in that area of the building and no letter? Bob Copeland: There'd be no restrictions on color. In this area. Emmi ngs: In Area C? Bob Copeland: Right. Erhart: Can I ask a question? Emmi ngs: Sure . Erhar!: The sign band on the two sides, what's the height of that? You said the letters $,ere I believe 10 inches? Bob Copeland: Here? Erhart: No. Yeah, right there - Bob Copeland: The band itself, the piece of pl^ywood that the letters are aLLached to is about 22 inches. Erhart s Okay. Thanks, Emmings: AnyLhing else you r,Jant to tell us or does anybody el.se have anyquestion of him go right ahead. Ahrens: Are Ne just going to talk about it? Bob Copeland: If you have questions of me. Ahrens: No. Planning ApriI 17 Commission Meeti n9l99t - Page 31 Bob Copeland: Not right noN. Brad Johnson: I can add one thing. You a]l kind of liked the Town Squaresign plan and in there we have I Lhink 3 or 4 fooL sign band that runs aIIthe way across the top of the buildi.ng and gives the freedom to do Iogos...and aIl that sort of stuff - And we have maximum letEer height, singleIetter height of 18 inches. I think if it's double lined, it's a differentsize. That's how that was able to be done and it didn't have Lherestrictions, So you have the area that you puL the sign in there. Soyou'd bring a sign in, they simple look well is the sign letter the rightheight and does it fit that area, and that's r,rorked. This is an attempt toduplicate what everbody said they Iiked. Liked the signage over in Town Square - Brad Johnson: I think he said that seemed to work over there. It wasn'tthat they Iiked it. It was resulatable. Ahrens: WeII, ue talked a Iot last time about the importance of thevisua.I impact of this buildins. It's the first building outside of the gasstation that you see coming into Chanhassen and I think it's real imporLantthat this buildins ]ook nice. I mean we tal.ked about this over and over and over again. I think the monument sisn is fine in front. I don't have any problem with the length of the sign or the names but I do have aproblem with the 4 foot color signs on the front of this building. I thinkthat if we accept this, we're accepting a second best apperance on thefront of this building. I think it should be consistent with the oLherbands. Hy comments are the same that they have been the last two times we've discussed this. I Iike the 2 foot heisht of the signs and I think the letters should be similar and I think. Emmings: Simi Iar in size? Ahrens: Similar in size and I don't think there should be colored logos oniL. I think this is a very different building from Town Square. Those are my comments. Emmings: Okay. Jeff? Emmings: Yeah, I just urondered if anybody had any question of him right now or if you had anythins else you'd like to teII us. Emmings; t^le]I, be careful of thaL because there may be some people up herewho'd Iike Lo see less signage on this building. tlhen we talk about just what people Iike. Emmings: Okay. hlho wants to, Iet's ask you what you think. It's tough. Farmakes: I realize that this buildins has a ]ong history here going back Lo I think it was Hhat, 1987 or something? From some of the earlierdiscussions- It seems that we've taken everything that's objectionable andput it into the Area C and I believe that the last proposal that ue had uras a litLle bit more monogrammanic and now that a compromise has been made on the monument sign and brought up into that cenLer area like tre talked P]anning Commission Meet i ng ApriL 17, l99]. - Page 32 about, nour aII of a sudden colors, there's no restricti.on on coLor. f have a real problem with using commercial buildins for adverLising and there's really no regulations as I understand it in our ordinances nouJ for that. If I had my druthers and if I could iust sit here and say this is what I'd Iike to see, it'd be a major tenant sign only and no confusion between retail, which is really what signage Area C is. This is a comPromise however and I still would like to see that signage lower impact. If it involves perhaps rethinking the color .restrictions, I iust don't think it fits in with that building. And you come uP with a situation where vou're stiII allor,ring some idenLification but toning down the advertising asPect of it. Emmings: Did you 2 foot or size of have any feelings about rohether it ought to be 4 foot or letters? Farmakes: I think that right now a major objection is the backlit color being Lhat size. I don't, Iayout wise I guess I could feel thaL we could make, or I couLd make some compromises on issues of logos but I would say that the building would look best obviously by conLinuing the same tyPe style across alL the way. But I guess I'd be oPen to comPromises on that. Ahrens: Is there really a possibility this building? 0r nhatever that is? bui ldi ng . we could have an I don't need any ear oil the front of body parts on lhis Emmi ngs: No body parts. Farmakes: The point of whaL I'm trying to say is that if the imPact could be lessen from the retail aspect of the buildi.ng. And I think Part of Ehat perhaps is continuing the type on or ]ooking at a more monogrammic scheme Iike Ehe signs in Areas B and A and perhaps compromise on the si2e. conrad: I think lhis is really fun. tjell we're getting back to thissubjective stuff that's compromise and uhatever. t^lhat I'd Iike and what Ithink is clean is what is there right now. As you drive by, the Business HeaIth Service. The Orthodontist. The Goldstar Hortgage. TheHedical Center. Those pop. They pop off the board. They're u,rhite againstbrown. Fhey are very directional. They realIy r.rork. They're on aprofessional buildins. l,lany don't like sj.gnage on a professional buildins.I do but now it's my personal standards coming into play. I like hou itIooks right now. I like the consistency across there. So if I Nere togive any direction, I would just continue with what we already have in terms of, I think I could sell tenants. Haybe not seII Tom but I could sella lot of tenants into hour clean, how professional the building looks withthe signage that's up there right now. I really like it. It's on]y,I don't know what the setback of the buildins is. It's maybe 15 feet.tJe're not talking about 1OO foot seLback like Tor.rn Square, and I like thesignage on Tou,n Square. I like the action of the color. I like thedifference. It's entertaining. It draws you in. On a professional building those are not my standards. On a professional building I'd Iikethe cleanest and I work with a lot of professional cLients. I like thecleanest. You can't go by the building and not know thaL the medicalcenter is there right now. You can't go by the buildins and not knouJ that Planning Commission Heeti ngApril 17, f99L - Page 33 the orthodontist or whatever is there. You can't. It's really, it's inblack and whiLe. Therefore I feel real, you know but we're in subjectivenever, never land. Absolutely I don't like to have different signage requirements for different ends of the buildins or different parts of thebuilding. That doesn't make sense to me. It realIy doesn't and maybe we're solving some problems but I want uniformity across here and if wedecide that everybody should have multi-colored stuff and it's a 3 foot band, I think everybody should have that right to do that. That's not HhatI see for this building. I ]ike the 2 foot band or whatever we've sotestablished. It really works and that's what I'm most concerned with is what works for the tenants in there. In my mind that really works, I'mnot urild about the change in the middle. I u,ant everybody to have signage,weII I i.,a nt the 7 signs or urhatever. I just see some lack of uniformity and lack of professionalism in Lhe way uJe carry it across the building. Erhart: Question. Mor tgage? t^lhat do l.lhat do you cal I theyou caII Lhe doctor? doctor's that work at GoldstarIs it Dr. tlor kman? Erhartr It's not a medical building. building is what people have been saying. NotEmmi ngs : medical . oh, pr ofess i ona I Erhart: Is the issue at hand here, what's remaining toheight of these signs? Is that what I'm understanding? Emmings: No. ErharL: Or is this open? be decided is the Krauss: They can have the one slgn. Emmings: Right. For one business. Right. size as the other signs isn't it? Okay. Sojust got done with. And it's limited to the same Lhis is not unlike the one we Erhart: Oh, I understand but the question herethe Council decided eveYything except the heighL misinterpretting that? is,of it appeared to me thatthe sign. Am f Krauss: t^,ell, to the extent, I mean the Council. Let me see if I caninterpret this correctly and there's some Council people here. Maybe they can correct my interpretation but the Council did not formally act on this. tlhen they remanded it back to you though they preLty much indicated acomfort level with the idea of 3 signs and I interpret that to say that Emmings: Tim? Emmi ngs: tlhat? Emmings: No. Now again, for clarification here Paul , right now under the agreement, under the signage package approved for that buildins already, what can they do in what is on here as Area C? Pl.anni ng Apri I 17 Commission Heet i ngl99l - Page 34 they had a comfort level with the introduction of color. being sent back to you. Emmings: Okay, but it's wide open in terms of. Krauss: Sizing was clearly a concern and then you might concer ns . Erhart: Okay, so it is wide open? back there?Emmings: Are we r ight Bob Copeland: That's Can you teII us Don? And have t hen your it's own Erhart: The question is, are we here tonight or are ue supposed guess Nhat do you guys brant? not what I hear d - just decidi ngto open it up on and the heightstart from of the signscratch? I Councilman tJorkman: tlhen I came tonight I thought it uas the height - think that's aEmmings: trel I if that's waste of time. all we're going to talk about, I Erhart: l^le]I, I have an opinion about that. know why they'd uJant a litt]e skimpyEmmings: I don't us to decide. issue like that for Mayor Chmiel: Somebody's got to decide it. Emmings: t,lell that's the Council's job. I don't knour why, if this isn't wide open, then u,e can do this real fast. Erhart: I You're the Emmings: Go ahead. As far as I'mcerLainly intend to comment and so everybody's qommented on the whole too . m suggesting we do. f 've got some opinions if it's just that. chairman, decide. concerned, it's r.lide open I guess. Ifar we've gone through the trhole, range of issues so you might as well Erhart: Okay, fine. t,eII, just to repeat what I said Iast time. I Iikethe color. I like Iogos because when you drive and you're Iooking for something, they spend a ]ot of money to plant that logo in your mind andthat's what you're looking for. And r.rhen you start seeing continuous, samecolor of lettering across h,hat's going to be a very Iong building, i! becomes difficult to do Lhat uhen you're driving. And so in my opinion, Ilike those logos. On the other hand, I'lI state that, can I ask? l.lhoever drew the ear in, ulhat in your mind is the height of the ear? Bob Copeland: First of a1I, l'liracle Ear is not a tenant in the buildins. Ahrens: Theoretically it could be. Planning Commission Heet i ngApril 17, 1991 - Page 35 Erhart: Yeah, in this representation,is that ear do you think? have to get out a scale 6ut how hi sh hand . I'dBob Copeland: I don't know right offa loso could be 4 feet high. Erharts No, I understand but, okay. tJell if I t,rere to Iook at that scaleI would say it looks Iike about 2 feeL high. Bob Copeland: tJell it clearly isn't 4 feet. Erhart: I guess in terms of the heighL, the height would seem to me forconsistency throughout the whole buildins, that you match the overallheisht to t.he band widths which are you said 22 inches. So maybe it's 24inches and make that the maximum height of the signs in Area C. I think 22or 24 inches. And also, I think the leLters ought to be consistent when westate that no letters can be, if'the other ones are 10, r^rhich I thought yousaid, then make the letters no bigger than 1O inches but of course you can have tuo rows. To me that would be enough restriction to make itconsistent with what's there. That's rny opinion. Krauss: There's other things in this motion but goin9 backissue, that's conspicuous by it's absence. I did interpret be saying, without a formal motion, that most of those that comfortable r^r i th color. to the colorthe Council to commented were Emmi ngs: Oh !in Area C? But they haven't taken action and said there will be color Krauss: I don't recall it coming down thattrying to expedite this thing quickly so we bray. don 't Unfortunately we're have Minutes. the monument sign, that's a totallyof this motion. Have they already Emm i ngs : separ ate acted on And the di rectoryissue? That's not t hat? and Par tsign any Emmings: Okay. I think that there should not be a 4 fooL hiSh band. I- agree with basically everybody on that I guess. I think it should stay the22 ta 24 inch height that they've got already on the building. I can't imagine seeing a 4 foot high logo on that building. I think it would lookterrible. t,lhen I asked u,hat size the letters erould be, they said they'd be 15 inches if there's two lines and up to 36 inches if there's one line.That doesn't seem reasonable to me. So I guess I agree u,ith Tim's statedit Iast but the band ought to stay the sarie size- The letters ought Lostay the same size as the rest of the Letters. They ought to be 10 inches.I think this is a very different building than Town Square and ifbusinesses Nant to go in this buildins that need the logo and the color andaII of that, maybe they u,ant to be someuhere else. f,laybe they don't wantto be in this building. Maybe they want Lo be in Town Square or somethingIike that. I don't have any problem with there beins 3 signs. ThaL'sall I've got. Now, where is the action on this? Looking at the motionthaL you've put in our packet PauI , iL states.that the, it Iooks Iike we'reoperating certainly on more than just sign height. There's a Iot of otherthings included in this motion you've given us. Planning Commission Heet i ng April 17, 199t - Pase 36 Krauss: No, they didn't but basically everybody was in concurrence and that urould be written into the covenants allowing that 6 inch addition to the back sign and keeping the monument the way it was originally approved. Emmings: Should Lhere be action on that? It came before us and we discussed it. I think we already passed a motion. Krauss: You already did do that, yes. Emmings: So that's kind of riding along parallel then? Krauss: Risht . Emmings: Okay. l,Jell, are there any other comments on this issue or does somebody want to make a motion? Erhart: Is everybody comfortable with essentially 2,3 and 4 as is? There wasn't any real commenLs on that. Conrad: I don't find that 2. I'd prefer Lo keep the height ]ess than 4 feet . The band. Erhart: l.JeII I'I1 do that in 1. conrad: But, you have Lo allow enough space Lo put Ehe name and I'm not sure that !2 feeL. Krauss: If I could. l.,e just divided the area into thirds figuring that nosign should be bigser than one third the space- Farmakes: But the other difficulty of the height is that if actually the type is in the 1o9o, pre-determining the size of that tyce by how hish the Iogo is. The type can be, what is it 10 inches? Emmings: Yeah. Farmakes: If it's smaller than that in the logo and it's got a lot on top of it, it may noL get to Lhat height. Bob Copeland: Can I say something? Emmings: You go righL ahead. Bob Copeland: Okay, first of aII 12 times 3 is 36 feet. l.re've got 58 andyour point is. Ahrens: AIIowing for space inbetween. Bob Copeland: We're going to allow for space inbetween. I mean I think.you can grant us a little judgment on this thing. I mean we're not going to put one sign on top of another. I mean goodness. The 12 feet is not enough. ]^le could not put Business Health Services or Chanhassen Medical Center in that center area in 12 feet. Can't be done. Either having one above another. You know two lines or single lined. tle wouldn't be able todo it. If we come in urith a tenant that's got a name like that, there's no room for them. So I would ]ike to suggest to you that you're allowing 3tenant signs and that you don't need to r{orry about the width of Lhe sign. Now you've expressed concern about the height and ue feel we've been compromising right along on this thing and we'II compromise some more andwe'I1 restrict the height of the Ietters but I think the coLor is not anissue, as far as I'm concelned right now. t^lhat I heard the Council do isthey approved the concept and one of the Councilmen mentioned what aboutcolor and the motion uas made that color could be, that color would not be an issue. And it uas specifically addressed and the motion was approved. Emmings: t^lell we can make it an they'I.1 do what they will . issue and they can ignore us. You know Bob Copeland: Sure. That's fine. But there was a lot of di.scussion about what was or wasn't discussed. tlhat we're willing to do is, it does say that a letter , a single letter could be 3 feet high. l^le aren't going to have a single Ietter Lhat's S feet high. That's just too high. l.le agree with you. Emmings: Then why do you wan! the possibility? backing off that. AIr ight?Bob Copeland: [.Je 're Emmi ngs: Alr ight . Bob Copeland: tJe just think there's too much restriction overall on the whole building but tha!'s not, that's for you people to determine that. So we just want the freedom to do whatever we could do within the 4 foot signarea. BUL we'Il restrict it furLher and we'II make the height of anindividual }eLter 16 inches. So even if we have a single line, those letLers cannoL be higher than 15 inches. Erhartrsign is? can you tell me what the ]ength of the Chanhassen Medical center Bob Cope] and: Ahrens: And Bob Cope.I a nd : Emmings: Tim, you can see from the number, the windows look likeaII even spacing and iL covers 3 windows and there's 7 windous init'd be almost half. Brad Johnson: Each uindow is 10 feet. Emmings: Yeah, so you get an idea from the windows. Not exactly the heisht of 10 i nches - but I Lhose can teII you it's around 22-23 feeL- Ietters is what? they're Area C so Bob Copeland: Center Iine of uindow to center back off that 3 fool individual letter height. Iine of windoul? 50 let's tle 'l I change that . Planning Commission Meet i n9April 17, 7997 - Page 37 Pl ann i ngApril 17 Commission Heet i ng 1997 - Page 38 Emm i ngs : wa nt? ' I think a motion ought to, have you had a chance to say what you Bob Copeland: Yes I have. Conrad: Boy, it's toughIt's so subjective. for us to get involved in some of these issues. Emmings: But so what? Ahrens: That's what we do. Emmings: They're asking do it. Emmings: Let me tell you why. have to us Lo Conrad: Because we haven't thought aboutjust sort of like we're making something that for the city. You knor.l it's uP. Conrad: Okay, and what they've got is a right to put Iogos on? Emmings: No. Ahrens:No. That's not the uay the original sign plan was at all. tle didn't approve any logos for that buildine.Emm i ngs : Emmings: I don't want to cuL you off. I think a motion ought to addressIetter style. t^lheLher or not they're consistent with r^rhat's on thebuildins. It ought to address the height, the maximum height of theletters. The height of the sign band itself and the number of signs on the.band. Un]ess you don't care about the number of signs on the band becausei.f it gets long they'll just lose their ability to put anymore on. Okay. Conrad: t^lell ure've got to do it but again, we don't have to do more than we have to do. In other words, we can give some minimal guidance here. tJedon't have to you know, talking about color. tle don't have anything toguide us on color standards. Should they be multi-colored? Singlecolored? I know urhal I like and I'd prefer to see it exactly the way it isright now but I don't know that I feel comfortable imposing a color standard on tha!. Emmings: No. LeL me teII you uhy it doesn'! bother me at aII on this one. These folks have a sign package for their buildins. They have come in andsaid ue want to change that. I don't feel at all uncomfortable sayingfine. If you want to change what you've already got, we're going Lo imposeconditions on that change and because we don't have an ordinance thataddresses these things, we have no choice but to resort to our subjectivefeelings about it. I don't see any problem uith being upfront about that.I think our ordinance is inadequate but we don't need it here. If Lhey're coming in fresh, then I think ue've got a harder problem. But here itdoesn't bother me aL aII. Because Ne can just say to them, take r.lhat yougot and go aday. [.,e're going to leave iL the way it is. Bob Copeland: [^le can Conrad: If it's withbelieve they could do Emmi ngs: t^leI I maybe .tal ked about puLti ng put a logo in. in the sign band,that. If they did, it words on there. If it's urithin the sign band. I would have Lo Ahrens: Yeah, we never Conradr If they ulant to ErharL: t^lel l they Krauss: Ihey did Conrad: So in my and the colors. Lhey can do that. was an oversi.ght because ue only discussed that. put in colors, I believe they could do that. did. and that was consistent. mind those things are their rights right now. The logos Emmings: Fine. Then I'm killing to say, then 9o do it. Erhart: There is a restriction on the band right nour, is there noL? Conrad: Number of signs and heig,ht. t^le have, Iogically we have somecontrol over the height of this. I urould have liked to have control bver,again. I said it before but I really, llhat signage is there is reallyclean and professional and I wish that urould be carried through. That,s mywish. I just don't knotr Lhat I can, at this point in time, irilpose my wish. Emmings: If you're uncomfortable imposing your Hish, then we should leaveit with what they're got. And that's fine with me because they're here fortuo reasons as I see it Ladd. One is they don't have enough signs for the numbe)- of lenants they have because the use of the bui]ding, has changed aIittle bit. The second one is, American Family brants to put Lheir regularsign up there that doesn't fit, It can't fit so those are the tr.lo thingsthat bring them in here. They really want to change Lhe package becausethe use of the building has changed and because they've got an interested tenant who wants a specific sign. And I feel no conpunction whatever to tailor, to go back and change the sign package for a particular tenant. I don'L think that's, I feel no need to do that whatever. If they can't fit it in with what they've got, I'm sorry. But r.rhat'6 up there now doesn't bother me at aII. I think it looks good and I wish thev'd iust carrv through with uhat's there. Like you. I agree with that. conrad: I just want to make sure the right to control . we knouJ uhat ure should control and have Emmings: t"le need to rework the sign ordinance - the neck. They real IY you were 9oin9 to make sign Pain ordinance is in the neck. a Parn okay, are. Even a motion?conrad: Th.e a new one. 1n I lm Planning Commission Meeting Apri. 1 17, 799t - Page 39 Planning Commission HeeL i ngApril 17, 7997 - Pase 40 Erhart: Let me give it a shot here. I'II move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan Amendment *88-17 to amend Lhe signage plan for the Chanhassen Hedical Arts building subiect to the foLtowins conditions: Number 1, maximum of 3 signs in Area C. Number 2, that the sign, maximum total sign height would not exceed 24 inches with no individual Ietters higher than 10 inches. 2, that Lhe sign length be no more than, I'm going to take a shot at 24 inches. I'lI make 24 feeL Pe:-sign. I think there is, and the reason I put that in there because I think there is a maximum thal you want these things spread ou!. 3 as is. 4 as is" 5. That colored signs and logos will be permitted. That's it. And the reason I said Lhe 24 feet, I just can't imagine one whole sign going across Lhe whole thing. If you've goL a sign on the rieht Lhat's about 24 feet. l.lhy did ure have f2 f eel? conrad: They should do whaL makes sense for shouldn'L do anything tha!'s dumb. And they Erhart: I'm trying to understand nhatFamily have the logo but it be r^rhite? Ahrens; Yeah - Conrad: It'd say Amer i ca n that hou the business and they won 't . Emmings: So colored signs and Iogos, inch sign band, they can have it.as long as Lhey fit within the 24 Erhart: Yep. Con)- ad : Mot i on 's been moved. a second? It hasn't been seconded.Emmings: Is there Conrad: Another motion? Emmings: No, I'm going to second it, for discussion. t^le've already discussed it some. It's got most of what I'm interested in and the onlything that hangs me up is the colored sign and the logos and I have been against those but when I think about it, the only trouble is then you get the r^rhite and the while and then color in the middle and I'm not surethat's good. Ahrens: I won't 9o along h,ith that. No way. I think we have the absoluteright to say what goes on the front of these buildings. Subjective as itis. [^le're going to live with the signs on those buildings for a ]ong, Iongtime. Farmakes: tlasn 'tmore monogrammic? you r.rould propose 1i ke the Amer icanIs that what you're saying? Fami Iy . It r.,,ould not be the Logo type . it uras proposed on the monument sign? It ulas Hortgage moves out Right? Ahrens: Yes, Ue've already said that when Goldstarthat that sign wiII change to a black and white sign. PIanni n9Apri1 17 Commission Heet i ng !997 - Page 41 Brad Johnson: No. tle said agree to that if I think the sign you 'd agree to this. uriII come dourn. I don't we 'd outEmmings: t^Jell, ifthink they'II keep they moveit up. Ahrens: No but f mean we said Hortgage sign. This bis gold everybody said it didn't ]ook that r.resign in 9r eat . ob j ected the front to the ]ook of the Goldstarof the building. I think Emmi ngs : that. [ell I think Lhey've said that too. Yeah, they've agreed with Ahrens: tlhy would we go along with colored signs in the middle of thebuilding? I just don't understand that. I don't ever want to Ieave it open that there coul.d be an ear on the front of the building. I know they're not a tenant but you know and I'm being somewhat facetious but Idon't ever want to leave that possibility open- I mean this is supposed be a nice, classy looking buildins. It's not supposed to be ToNn Square if somebody comes in and the),'re going to do finger nails, they put a big finger up there. tlell you know, it's ridiculous but it could happen and there's no control at alI. to or if Erhart: I guess in my motion I'm thinking that really, if they brant to put an ear, replace Chanhassen Hedical center uith an ear to me, this pattern would be ultimately be consistent through the whole building- f don't have this vision for these white consistent signs at alI. Ahrens: I guess that's what we originally approved and I And I can go along with the 3 signs if they're consistent along with lhe logos and the colored signs..- I i ke that idea . but I cannot go Brad Johnson: I've just got to say approve the signs. You approved a Ahrens: Yeah, that's what I meant. something for the record. You did not band. Excuse me. Brad Johnson: And could have signs. white ]etters. no Ietters Nere tlhoever did the approved by you. All you said first sign selected, happen to is we se Iect Emmings: He did a good job. Brad Johnson: And we happened to approve. Nhoever selected the secondsisn did trhite letters. tle approved. And we're not sure thaL Has the right thing to do number one because it made it too consistent and we're dealing with the issue at the present time. Okay and uhen you talk about sign ordinances, there are people. Miracle Ear for example has spentprobably only 50 million dollars advertisi.ng the ear and uhen they cdmeinto a building and they're professional . You knoul the hearing business, they want their logo on Lhe buildins. Ahrens: ].Je get that argument all the time from. Planning Commission i4eetingApril 17, 1991 - Pase 42 Erad Johnson: Who's ue? Ahrens: The Planning Commission. That fast food restaurants, they have their, they have to have golden arches or Hhatever it is theyhave. Tha!'s not true. have to have to Brad Johnson: l.JeIl see, my problem with this and I'm sitting through these meetings for one purpose. To see if you're pro business or anti business and whether we should develop in this city or not - Okay? And what I hear from this Planning Commission is a concern of mine and I hear control . l,.iedidn't have this problem in Town Sguare. Okay? We don't have the problem in any other buildings we've ever built in this particular community because you nve always just allowed us to say the ]etters should be this. t"Je al low this and give us . Emmings: [,Je don't have a prob]em urith Town Square either Brad- Brad Johnson: I'm talking, and Lhis is in the CB district. You guys havegot to realize, this is not a business park- This is a CBD district andthat's the principle you have to go by and these are prevented things. Emmings: I! isn't permitted. lllhat's permitted on this buildins is what's been approved for the buildins, Don't talk to me about our sign ordinance which we'11 aII admit is inadequate. Brad Johnson: I think it's adequate but. Emmings: But r^rhat's permitted for this building is what was... Brad Johnson: Yeah, and our issue which wiII ullimately if this is notpassed, sooner or later ule're going to go back to the original discussionson this building and then we're going to have to go through the urholeprocess one more time because our contention is that we were railroadedinto the current situation. Okay? And that's where we stand. Ahrens: That's all the comments I have. Emmings: Okay. Ooes anyone else have any more discussion on the motionthat's on the floor? Otherwise I'Il call. the question. Erhart moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommendapproval of Site Plan Amendment *88-17 to amend the signage plan for the Chanhassen Medical Arts./Ridgeview l,ledical Arts Auilding subject to thefollowing conditions: There will be a maximum of three signs in Area C1 2 The maximum total sign heightindividual Ietters higher than not exceed 24 inches with no i nches . 3. The sign length in Area C will will 10 be no more than at 24 feeL per sign. PlanningApriI 17 Commission Meet i n9 1997 - Page 43 4. The sign covenants shall be revised to prohibit temporary signage,either walI mounted or ground mounLed, excepting temporary lease signsfor which criLeria wiII be established by staff. 5. The sign covenants shall be revised to include a statement that all signage must be approved and permitted by the City. 6. Colored signs and logos r,liII be permitted. Erhart voted in favor and the rcst opposed. The motion failed sith a votsof 1 to 4- Emmings: Another motion? Conrad: I make a motion that Planning Commission recommends approval ofSite PIan Amendment *88-17 Lo amend the signage plan for the Chanhassen Medical Arts,/Ridgeview Medical Arts Building with the following conditions: There wiII be 3 additional sisns allowed. ThaC Lhe total sign band height be 24 inches. That the maximum size of the Ietters be 10 inches. Emmings: That's it? Conrad: I'm done. Emmings: tlhat about, nothing on. Erhart: None of the other conditions? Conrad: tlith condition 3 and 4 of Lhe staff report. Erhart: Okay, I'll second that. Krauss: tlould it be impertinent Lo ask for a clarification? Emmings: Yes. Since you'rc Planning Director and Zoning Director, you cango ahead Krauss: I can be impertinent. Does this allow color? Conrad: I'm not addressing thaL. Krauss: Okay. And logos are also not addressed? Conrad: That's it because I don't have a clue how to address them. Krauss: Is the Iogo subjected to the sign band height? Presumably it uould be. Conrad: Right. Emmings: Everything's got to be within the sign band. l.lhen you say a maximum of 3 signs, you mean between the two porticos in what's being described as Area C? P I anni ngApriI 17 Commission Heet i ng 1991 - Page 44 conrad r Erhart: Emmi ngs: Erhart: A maximum I seconded of three signs in Area C. Ask for a second. iL. one. l.,lant that good. so what docolor and two seconds?You got It wasn't Emmi ngs: AIright, You're thi nking onposition on it? you see them. Let's go logos , you're just simply over not it agai n.taking any Conrad: I'm saying I'm going to control it through the sign band which is2 feeL in heighL. And I basically, I do not recall that ure ever addressed logos or white in the original deal . I think we could possibly get backinvolved with that issue. I guess I'm just ignoring it. Emmings: Okay. Any other discussion? Conrad moved, Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan Amendment ta8-17 to amend the signage plan for the Chanhassen l,ledical Arts./Ridgeview Hedical Arts Building subject to thefollowing conditions: There will be a maximum of three signs in Area C. The maximum total sign height will not exceed 24 inches with noindividual Ieeters higher than 10 inches. 1 2 3 The sign covenants shall be revised to prohibit temporaryeiLher HalI mounted or ground mounted, excepting temporaryfor r^rhich criteria wiII be established by staff - signage, Iease signs 4 The sign covenants shall be revised Lo include a statement that aII signage must be approved and permitted by the City. AII voted in favor except Ahrens and Farmakes urhocarried uith a vote of 3 to 2- opposed and the motion Emmings: Those who are opposed to the motion I think should state whatevethey want to in terms of their reasons. I guess go ahead. Ahrens: I 've already said. Emmings: Do it one more time just so. Ahrens: I cannot go along with, I don't think we should becolored signs or Iogos for that band- That r.ras not h,hat IaII that we approved before. aPProvr n9 envisioned at Farmakes: The intent of my objection is not to be opposed to business or business owners. I feel that this building is sort of in a twilight zoneof purpose. If it is a professional. buildins, it's different than a Town PIanni ngApriI 17 Commission tleet i ng l99L - Page 45 Square. I think that the signage should be consistent. Should be lowimpact, If you put color into something, you give it impact. If you backLight it, you give it impact. And the purpose of signage area C is toadvertise. It's not to identify. It's to advertise and that's great in aretail area but there is no restriction in a business area. If you get abuildins t.hat's 3 or 4 stories high, each and every docLor or each andevery lawyer or each and every insurance airency can put a sign out, and ifyou get 2OO or 3OO tenants, you 've got a pretty silly looking development.I realize that there's a LoL of additional baggage with this thing, as Isaid before but I would rather see it the way it is now than make one thirdof it a retai.I area, Emmi ngs: ALright.does this go to the City Council? weeks from Monday - APPROV AL OF I,IINUTES:Chai rman Krauss: That uould t^l he n be2 Emmings noted20, 1991 and the 1'1i nutes of the Planni ngApril 3, L99L as presented.Commission meetings dated Harch Krauss: t^le have two gentlemen wailing to give us a report. If I couldgive a brief introduction. I think you'lI find this quite interesting.Mr. Dean and Mr. Roth came to talk to Todd Hoffman and myself aboutpreservation of Bl.uff Creek as an environmental, sensitive environmentalarea. They grew up in this area. Have been hiking it for years and areintimately familiar with it and basically have begun naturalists with good knowledge of this area. I Lhink it's very timely. I discussed with them some of the initiatives proposed in the Comprehensive Pl.an. Vis a vispreservation of Bluff Creek. AIso with the bluff Iine ordinances thatwe've been discussing and several other environmental issues that we'vebeen looking at- Their goal is for this to be Iocked up in some sort ofpermanent protective state. Either publically or privatefy and to I think make it someu,hat accessible or knowable to those who want to experience it.They'd Like to pursue this matter. Ne're going to have them give a similarpresentaLion to the Park Board. They do have a slide show as I understandof the corridor and we've been talking to them about having them ]ead awalking tour of the creek. Hopefully before the bugs come out which Ithink uould be a great experience for aII those rho can join and we'II openthat up to interested people on the Park Board, City Council and PlanningCommission. And with Lhat, I'd like to pass the meeting over. Perry Dean and Eric Roth gave a slide presentation showing the hist"ory andpresent state of the lower valley bed of Bluff Creek stretching roughly amile and a half long from Pioneer Trail to TH 1O1 . They demonslrated it'sunique qualities which they feel need to be preserved from development,either privately or publically, for future generations being it's one ofthe last remenants of the "Big l.Joods'. OPEN DISCUSSION: PRESENTATION,/SLIDE SHOII ON BLUFF CREEK BY PERRY DEAN AND ERIC ROTH- Planning Commission Meet i n9April 17, t99I - Page 45 Emmings: What can we do about this? I'm going to go there as soon asI can. LeL Tim guide me through it. Krauss: t^ie're talking about setting up a Lour probably the second or week in May. t^le'Il try to clarify that date and get an early noticeIt wiII probably have to be a Saturday morning I think for everybody. third out . Erhart: Let me just throt^r out a couple things. I live down there andI hike down there and I've always been real at the forefront to try andpreserve that land. I almost lost it there for a minute on the Bluff Creek Greens thing there. That's when I recognized the resource. The thingabout the whole thing you knou,, the City does down a substanLial part ofwhat you've shown and it owns it because there was development. Emmi ngs: How? Erhart: tlell because when Hesse Farms came in with their subdivision, theCity said we u,anL the valley in Lhat area and they gave it to them. NowNhat's happening is we don't al]ow, since we don't allow any development inthe area, what you're complaining about and I don't know that, I Iooked atthat house and it's not any different than the Hesse Farm ones. Theproblem today wiLh it is that the guy who o!.rns that house also owns thevalley. Okay, and it's because we don't al]ow development. So Ne,ve got no uay to, when a subdivision comes in, to say okay now that you'redividing we want that valley. So now !.re have a unique problem. PersonallyI don't Lhink we're going to Iose it because it really is unbuildable. And r.,e've got it on the Comp PIan to show an ultimate trail connection al] the way from TH 5 down Bluff Creek and ever),thing. Hy vision is that yeah, when I get older and I have more time, I brant a hiking trail all the wayfrom TH we won'L set rid run downpatter n h of b of from the Arboretum and downtown aII the way dou,n 212. Hopefully ave these commercial things down there, i.,hich I've been trying tofor years, so when you get down there you don't get a bunch ofuildings but I wanted to say that because it's rea]Iy a complexthings. The problems you know. Sometimes development helps youin preserving things. Nor., that you can't, we're going to get these guys with Lhese big homes. That happens to be the Redmond. He oh,ns Hhat, 20acres or somethi ng? Krauss: ActuaIIy 80. Erhart: 80? But we're not going to lose the valley to that but r^rhat I'dIike to see us t.o continue to strive towards the City in the long runacquiring everything below the bluff line so that it's secured. And Idon't know that you can do that right now. Eric Roth: If I could jus! mention. In the 797O's, early 8O's, the suggestion that we were given abouL how this might be secured was through something called conservation easement whereby the owners of the property are forced, well none of this is by force. I!'s all by assuming you canget universal consent, the easement would allow them to still oun theproperty. StiII be able to seII it and pass it on to heirs. Hoh,ever, thatportion of the property that uJould be included within the easement Nould have some strings attached to it. Strings would be determined by their Planning Apri1 17 Commission Meet i ng 199L - Page 47 common consen!. That easement is site specif ic .and it varies and depending on what arrangements can be made certain, as I say, strings urould be attached to the property and one of the provisions would be that a non-profit organization...would have to oversee to assure that the rules aren'Lbroken. I don't make any claims to know aII the governmental tricks.-. to secure the preservation of the valley but that's a challenge... Erhart: It's possible that you couLd get people to sign up for thatprogram, particularly Redmond urho, he obviously doesn't want the valley developed because of his view- Eric Roth : havins the people. There are advantages !o that. There are tax advantages Loproperty under easement...so there are incentives to induce Emm i ngs : for us or her e? Iis wonder if Roger could give us somethis really a Park and Rec issue? ideas and is this an Are we stepping on r. ssue toes Kraussr tlhat we've found thus far, the general question of open space thatyou're, we've got you going on the golf course and some other things. It was also brought up to the Park Board and it wasn't a band wagon they jumped on to right away. The City Council's talking a lot about visioningthings lately and Steve you were at our goals session meeting. I thinkthis falls into that categ.)-y. You really have to get the community to understand ahat's down there and lined up and get some consensus that yeah, this is something that warrants preservation. It r.larrants doing something and it's for the common good. Emminss: Protect it first and then tell them it's down there. Krauss: tJell ideally you would do that and I think if there was a, you know an abused word, but a task force of people representing the community that was in a position to approach people and we had knowledge of what we could offer them, maybe some of Lhem would be cooperative and do that. Timpoints out a good point. tlhen we do have the opportunity to take it through dedication, that's clearly the easiesL route for us to go and mostdirect and then we have outright control over it but as Tim pointed out,there's not a urhole lot of development poLenlial right down there in the foreseeabl.e future. You know these things can get very sticky- There's aIot of property owners. The Redmonds may weII believe that it's inherently good to protect this thing but they may have a problem, and I don't know, but they may have a problem of having some sorL of public access to it. Ahrensi They may h,ant to protecL it while they own it. Krauss: Nord, protectins it just to have it there is probably has some merit in it's own right but as a communitr, as a local government, this is something that should be shared buL not abused I guess. I! shouldn't be roped off with private ties ideally in my view. So I guess we're at thestarting point here. I don't know r.rhat the answer is and we've got all kinds of things Iike this coming up lately. It's a ]ittle bit overwhelming PIa nni ng Apri I 17 Commission Heet i ng 199t - Page 48 because we don't have easy solutions. On the other hand it's kind ofexciting because everybody's starting to think about these things. Erhart: If I could share one more thing. I have a bisser concern almostfor Lhe Bluff Creek north to TH 5 because I think in that, where the areasyou showed, nobody's going to build there. It's just impossible. You can't get roads or driveways doun in there. My vision of this Eluff Creekcorridor, it goes all the way so when you walk from TH 5 to 212, you fee!that you're in a greenway. If you read your planning stuff. I have avision for a greenway. Hy concern is that since there's a lot of high landaII the u,ay up there and the creek is relatively narrow, is that how do weget enough width for this Lhins. Just because it's on our comp plan, that doesn't mean we're going to have a greenway because we haven't defined theboundaries, How do Ne get a greenway that's wide enough on this Bluff Creek to actually have a greenu,ay over that whole site? That's going totake money and some good planning. t,le really haven't started that. Eric RoLh: I think it's really a superb idea to think of it in thoseterms. Certainly this is an ecosystem and brhat's upstream is defintelygoing to impact what's downstream. I think it's r.rorth considering what happened in Minneapolis with Minnehaha Creek. At the city line, that's no longer a park and it's just gobbLed up by various private oh,ners. I'mcertainly not against private property but I Lhink it's important to try to convince people who own biLs and pieces of that to think in terms of, IrecalL back in the American RevoluLion time there was a symbol, a coiled snake that was chopped inLo sections. Each section t.las to be states and chopped up it's dead but together it's something. Likewise I think it may be something for a major landou,ner to have a portion of the valley but you can't protect that portion unless the other parts are similarly protected. So there needs to be some common consensus. I believe that needs to betaken at the highest level possibLe so everyone. Eric Roth: t^lel I yeah. Erhart: Only when it becomes part of a greater park system will people reaIIy appreciate it. Krauss: tlilderness is worthy of protection even if nobody goes there. Probably particularLy if nobody goes there. I don't know if this fits thetrue image of wilderness but my ou,n personal belief is that there arethings Lhat warrant proLecting whether or not we can access lhem. Ideallyit t^rou]d be a means for getting people down into here. Erhart: If you're within a metropolitan area . . . Krauss: Even if we be an easy place to something you couJ.d do develop an hi ke. I mean drive through access into the area, it's never going toyou couldn't reform it to make it so it'sor something. Erhart: f don't Ehink, if you don't have a greenway aII Lhe uay through southern Chanhassen, nobody's going to use it. It wiII just be... Erhart: Oh golly no. I could see, r.rould you ever see asphalt trails? I could see that. Eric Roth: There are deer paths now. But still, those kinds of concerns are uray down the road...deliberating over signage. They tre important butfirst is to secure the area as a whole. Emmings: Well we've got to find some incentive for the landowners tovoluntarily give up some of their right to access because maybe they vision too. Preserving it but the other thing that popped in my mind this existing neu, zoning stuff that we have. have ais Krauss: I thought of that too. Emmings: t^lhich is something that I thought ue might use on the whole bluff area but no one else seemed to be real interested in it but it would sure urork in places like this. Zone it to the use it's in right now and freeze it there. But I don't Lhink you can pick out spots and do that. I thinkyou'd have Lo zone the whole bluff area and then you get in a heII of a mess trying to find what that bluff area is. I think down there it wouldn't be a bad tool . AL least we wouldn't have anymore developmenL than we have although I think there should be more development... Erhart: Should be more? Emmings: Or woul.dn't be opposed to more development. Erhartr At the proper time there's just. No, I'm not saying you should orshouldn't. There's going to be development- The question is how do youplan for it and in return we geL the maximum benefit for everybody. Emmings: As far as I'm concerned, everything 1OO feet from the crest of a bluf f , all the way down over the bluf f and all the e.,ay to the l,linnesotaRiver ought to just be, thaL ought to be done to that. Erhart: [,le keep talkins about that. I'm not so concerned about those houses that are up at that ledge because the bluff areas, when you walk down you'Il see it. t^le r^ralk at. the botlom. [,le don't walk at the ledge. Planning Commission Meeti n9Apri] 17, !991 - Page 49 Ahrens : So what are r^re goi ng to do? Krauss: tleLl again, I don't have an easy ansbrer for you but there's going to be a similar presentation made t'o the Park Board next week. t^le're going to put together a hiking tour where I think representation from aII three bodies that really make a difference here and then I think we start askingquestions like r,:e ask Roger, what are the options on obtaining some of this. Haybe if u,e get direction, there's consensus in direction in whichstaff is told to contact the property obrners and see what can be arrangedvoluntarily. Tax benefits can be pointed out. Great. I don't know thatthis is the kind of thing that ordinances fix necessarily. A bluff line ordinance can be used to protect some of this stuff but this is, an ordinance isn't going to necessarily get you what you want to get out of this. So I don't know PIanni ng April 17 Commission Meet i ng 1991 - Page 50 Emmi ngs : Erhart: Krauss: Emm i ngs : Er hart: l.lhat ul i I I we ever do Somehow you're goi ng 212 is actually goi n9 oh it will? Not the ravines. r.,ith 212? to have to to br i dge have a trai I a portion of to get across 212. that. Krauss: t^lhere BIuf f Creek does cross though. It uJas going to go over .That's not really final design yet but. Emmings: You know farmers put these big culverts in forthrough. tlhy couldn't r^,e puL one of those under 212? the cows to wal k Erhart: I think we have to. Krauss: I think Ne want something better than that. I Nas in a position to work with Hennepin County when we designed the Crosstown Bridge over 9Mile Creek. Now it doesn't look ]ike much if you're on the highr^ray but ifyou ever get a side view of that from Bryant Park or Hinnetonka CorporateCenter, it's realIy quite attractive. There's sort of a flying buttress arrangement that holds the bridge up and there is a trail benched in alongthe side of the creek. Erhart: f guess I'm assuming here, and up before because Lhey're planning 212, across that. maybe we should have brodght thisthat ue r.lill have a way to walk Emmings: Under. Erhart: Under that at Bluff Creek.to that, to the State on this thing if r^re haven't voiced boy we ought to.our opr nlonAnd YEL, t hatKrauss: To be honest, I don't knou,it 's ever been raised- Erhartr Haybe we'd better do that. Krauss: In fact, coincidentally I uras at a luncheon meeting today over atVictory Envelope and the new Commissioner from l.lnDot announced that they were going to let the contracts for the section of 272 into Chanhassen in 1995 which is about a year or two sooner than He thought they uere going to. Erhart: from Lhe Haybe could we direct Council to Mnoot that draft something from a resolution a pedestrian crossing there? PauI to Ne bra nt You don't see those houses up there anyway. Hy bigger concern is when youget up in Lhe upper part of Bluff Creek, how do we make sure that we've got a couple hundred or 3OO feet of greenway through there? That's going to bethe real chalIenge I think. Planni ngApriI 17 Commission Meeti ng .1991 - Page 51 Krauss: tJhy don't you let me get the EIS out and teII you what they'rethinking. But at this poinL, we'll let you knot^r as soon as He can when we schedule this thing and hopefully we can get some good attendance there. Emmings: Great. Conrad: Has anybody been over to Minnewashta Park recently? Krauss: No. Conrad: It's realIy quite nice. They have done some major improvements. Ahrens: That is nice. Conrad: It's just terrific. Emmings: tlhat improvements are you talking about? Krauss: There was the grading that we approved. conrad: The grading. Remember the grading? Thatjust opened it, it just make it quite nice. Yeah. simple grading. But itI'm real impressed. Emmings: AIright. ..report from our Director. Krauss: I'11 skip thaL but there is one thing, if it's okay. There is onething I r^,ant to bring you up to speed on. I assume it's okay. I've beengoing back and forth to the Metro Council with a good deal of frequencyIately. Steve was at our goal seLting meeting and he... After workingwith the Hetro Council for 2 years and doing things like giving them ourpopulation projections in December of 19a9. Remember I told you this wasnot going to be easy- I Nas in a meeting with 14 HeLro Council staff and 3of us and they kicked the meeting off with Mike Munson. Mike uras being hisusual self. His regional model didn't predict what was going Lo happen and he recognizes that but he's not going to change it. And he's not going to change it until he rewrites his regional model for the entire Twin Cities. And he actually had the audacity to say maybe you should just have a oneyear HUSA ]ine amendment and then come back and ask again nexL year. In no uncertain terms and using fairly blunt Ianguage, I told him that that Has completeLy unacceptable and we basically uJenL at it a Iitt]e bit and Iaidthe issues out. I said this is a package- tJe've urorked on this for years. It's a plan that's for 10 years. It's exactly whaL you guys told us you wanted us to do. f can't help it that it came at an inopportune time foryour model . That's just tough. And in talking to the Hetro Council., I wonder if you read that article about the Hetro Council this ureekend. It'sall true unfortunately. t,hen you're in a room Nith 14 people, it's clearthat they don't talk to each other. And when l.tike l.lunson would tell you somethins, somebody else would go, Mike. You really didn't mean it that way did you? Everybody else was fairly complimenLary about the PIan. I mean r^re've been given a lot of credit for being on the cutting edge environmentally and even Dick Osgood couldn't fi.nd bad things to say and he always does. Not. very bad anyway. Anyway, I came away from there, I wasfurious. Came back and talked to the l4ayor. t^le had a meeting with Bonnie Planning Apri] 17 Commission Meet i ng t997 - Page 52 Featherstone hrho's our neuJ Metro Council representative. Bonnie is kind ofan interesting person. f mean initially we had some concerns because we uJere ]osing a representative from Chanhassen who Uas very vocal on ourbehalf. But Bonnie seems to have a good grasp of the issues. t^le took herout to lunch and explained where Ne were coming from on these things- She was very supportive. She also, her first run in with Hetro Council staff, she came away very angry on a particular issue dealing with the Shakopee By-pass so I think we have an aIIy there. The Hayor, if you don't knourthis already, Don knows everybody. He's met them and he's got a computerfile of Hho everybody is. t^lell it turns out that he used to be theneighbor of Hary Anderson in Golden Valley and Mary's now the net,, MetroCouncil Chair so we're having lunch with her on Honday. I also called back Ann Roberg ulho's a head of comprehensive planning. Hy meeting Nas on a Thursday and I called Ann on a Friday and let her know that I was extremelyupset- I had a second meeting scheduled last, when was it? This past week. tJednesday I think. No, Thursday. Sorry. And the tenor of the meeting was completely different. There was 4 people involved with Hike Munson this time. Myself and Mark Koegler and aII that Munson is willing toaccept from popu.Lation forecasts is Lhe 2\2 numbers which we had in ourplan as the Iow range. Now when I b,ent to grad school, the first book theygave me in statistics was a ]ittle thing that said, Hor^r to Lie withStatistics. My meeting with them was basically that book laid out. Theirposition appears to be now that they want to find a way to approve what we have in there because I think they undersLand that, this may be anexaggeration but the fundamental righteousness and reasonableness of whatwe've done. And the way they're getting at that is backwards but that's seemingly the way they do things. Basically we r^,er e so conservative in ourIand consumption forecasts that even if you use Lhe 2L2 population numbers,we're only 11 acres higher than they think we should be. So we should comethrough it with flying colors on that. Now they're still trying to grasp the fact that Prince won't develop his property and Jerome Carlson uron'tdevelop. I'm sending them copies of Minutes uhere Jerome Carlson has saidthat in a pubLic session that he's not going to and Eckankar but I thinkthose are aII things that ure can work out. On employment, it's a wholedifferent bag and it was kind of funny because they had no ability toproject employment uhatsoever. They don't know how to do it. Right noN we have 2,500 more jobs on the ground than they said we should. So Munson issaying, take his year 2O1O projections, 2,5OO jobs to it and that's okaywith him. And he Literally said I don' wrong when they say they're 9oin9 to ha anybody can do it, they probably can. and the short of iL is, I think we're nit and I Non't be resting on it until I them to come back and say since, you knpopulation forecasts. I mean they're g wilh their numbers. I'm going to refusto use and we'II use what we're going tdecide. But if we agree to disagree an w if Chanhassen's right or ,OOO jobs in.10 years buL ifo cares basically. The longg agreement. I won't believeit on paper and I don't u,ant 're agreeing to disagree onto tell us we have to agree say you use what you're going and we'II let the futureresult is the same, we get the Creek cor r i dor ongoing issues t kno ve 12 So r.rh earin see ow we oi nge ando use d theland use plan that we laid out, I think that's a satisfactory result - Ifit makes them happy, fine. But I'Il keep you posted. Emmings: Are people sufficiently interested in this Bluff and preservation that ure should add it to our work list of Planning Commission HeetingApri] 17, t99f - Page 53 so it Creek doesn't get lost? Okay. Let's put that down as number 20. Bluffcorridor or somethins like that. this urork thing down, can r.,e call it. sorry. Tim Erhart's Bluff Creek Corridor. start calling it the tll.uff Creek greenway? Krauss: Oh! One other thing. In terms of where we're 9oin9 again. It has to do with lhat goal setting meeting and I think we probably don't wantto get into that tonighL but one of the things that came out of there is again going into this visioning thing but there's a desire for people toreally get an understanding of the TH 5 corridor and to work things through. And what we're going Lo be doing is organizing a bus tour, againprobably on a Saturday with some design professionals. [.,1e've been workingwith some folks who are helping us on TH 5 improvements and going up and down and arranging with property or.lners so we can get out and hike around into these individual properties and go back and basically do design shirrets. l^lhere you'll have a lot of blank paper and people are capable of drar^ring, which I'm not, and everybody can sit doun. Everybody being you and the city council and the HRA and kind of say really, here's what you sau. Here's uJhat you'd like to achieve and then try to figure out how toget there, That should be realIy an interesLing session and hopefully we'Il be doing that before the end of June. Emmings: What was the word you used? Design what? Krauss: Shirret . Krauss: Some french name. Emmings: Go slow. If it's french, I'm interested. Krauss: BasicaIIy everybody, you basically put your heads togeLher around a table uith blank pads of paper and you go through. Here's what happens if you put buildings so far back and you put your parking here and shopping center there. Everybody goes, no that's not good. Let's go through... aprocess where you're drawing your way through this until you come to some concurrence on r^rhat you'd like to see. Emmings: t^lelI I'd be willing to to be able to do that. try it. I don't know the hell I'm going Krauss: No, you're urban design foIks. Erhart: tJhen we put Emmings: okay. I 'm Erhart: No. [.Je can Emmings: Fine. Erhart: That's been not going to. I can't draw either. Ue'II have some written up quite a bit in planning stuff. Emmings: Shirret? tJhat does it mean? Planning Commission MeetingApri] 17, 1991 - Page 54 Emmings: And by that we mean Bluff Creek from wherever it starts to wherever it ends as long as it's in Chanhassen. Okay. Conrad moved, Ahrens seconded to adjourn the meeting- All voted in favor and the motion carried- The meeting was adjourned at 11:3O p-m-. Submitted by PauI Kr auss Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim I CITY OF EH[NH[SSEN COMMENT I find f must apologize for the Lack of progress on ordinanceamendnents and other issues presently before the planning Commj-ssion. As you can teII frorn this weekrs agenda, we have nothad an opportunity to work on these matters over the past 2 to 3weeks. I have been extraordinarily busy in working throughconcerns raised by the Metropolitan Council, Eden prairie and otharparties concerning our comprehensive plan approval . There havebeen a series of meetings, including a luncheon r+ith BonnieFeatherstone, who is our ner Metro Councit representative, and a second luncheon neeting with both Bonnie and l,{ary Anderson, the nevMetro Council Chair. There have also been large volumes ofcorrespondence generated to respond to concerns raised by the I'IetroCouncil and Eden Prairie. Copies of this nateriat is attached foryour review. Lastly, I am sure by now nost of you have heard that Jo Ann brokeher knee cap and was away fron the office for a week. We arepleased to report that Jo Ann is back at work, although she isnttnoving as fast as she used to be and I donrt think lhe will beplaying wallyball for a while. CITY COUN CIL ACTTON At the llonday, April 22, 1991,,actions were taken: City Council meeting, the following The zoning ordinance amendment to Section 20-263 regardingportable chenical toilets on recreational beachlots rraaapproved on a 4 to 1 vote. Councilman workman raised concernsregarding the visual and odor iupacts of these units. Theordinance was revised slightly fron the one approved by the L 690 COULTER DRIVE . P.O. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 UE!{ORANDI'I,T TO: Planning Connission FROU: Paul Krauss, Planning Director DA?E: April 25, 1991 SUB]: Report from Director Pl anningtApril 26, Page 2 Commi-ss ion 19 91 Planning Commission to elininate the requirement thatsignatures be obtained fron adjoining property olrners. TheCity Attorney felt that this was inconsistent with statestatute. Second readinq of the ordinance will occur shortly. The Council approved funding for a conprehensive sewer andhrater plan that will be used to assist in guiding the development of new I,IUSA areas brought in under the Cornprehensive Plan proposal . The Bonestroo Fino was sel"ectedto do this work. Bonestroo j-s currently working lrith us onapproval of the Conprehensive Plan. Staff believed it was necessary to take this step at this point in tine, since weare already receiving considerable interest in developing these areas and a further belief that the city needs to be infront of the issue to adequately guide developnent. June 8th has been established as the date to conduct theinitial meeting on the Highway 5 corridor. This wi1l be a Saturday morning session wherein a bus will be rented and wewill tour the corridor. Upon completing the tour,. we willreturn to the office to sketch the corridor area with theassistance fron sone design oriented professionals. This is being done in an attempt to gain understanding of the City'svision of developnent for the corrj.dor area. The Planning Commission, HRA and City Council are all cooperating on thisprogram and I would urge you to set this Saturday morningaside for what promises to be an interesting and useful experience. 3 . ty ol Eden Prairie . ty Oltices OO Executiw Drive r Eden Prahie, MN 55344-3577 . Tclephone 16121937.22A2 FAX TR,ANSMISSION TO e_- FAX NUMBER FROM li rdo/. ( Department FA)( NUMBER 6t? NUMBER OF PAGES TRANSMITI OATE OF TRANSMISSION th'is cover sheet)I 6EeS/ E6-6:01 9@:9I 16, SZ BdU t1 .. .i- IE 'd SZE-I 3ldtusd NgO3 l0 A-LI3:r€dl Clty ol Eden Pairie City Otticas 7600 Exocr.rtive Drive . Ed6n Preirie, MN 5534+3677 . Telephone (6i219g7.2262 April 23, 1991 Ms. Ano Hurlburt Comprehensive Planning Manager Meuopolitan Council Mears Park Ccnuc 230 E3sr 5th Street St. Paul, Mtr. 55101-1634 SU&JECT: Dear Ms. Hurlburt: CO]\TMENTS TROM CITY OF EDEN PXAIRIE ON CEANEASSE}I'S PROPOSED COMPREEEI{SIVE PLAN AMB{DMEI{T. The following commcnts are in responsc to thc city of chanhasscn,s proposed comprchensivs plan amendment which was submitted to thc Metropotitafl Council for review Felruary 25, 1991. These co-mments (major and minor) addrtss the various elemcnts of the plan that arc of interest to Eden Prairic and were for,rrarded ro thc city of chanhasrn on April ig, tggt. A subsequenr mccting was held oD April 23, 1991, with city rcprcsentatives Don Ashworth, city managcr, and Paul lGauss, city Planner, to discuss ttrc issues raised by Edcn prairie. Iiaul tGaus teqponded to each of our comments in a subsequant letter. The foltowing comments have been reviscd to rcflect changes resulting from our meeting with Chanhassen. Af changes and addirions to the original letter are highlightcd in bold typefacc. I havc also included thJtcncr submitted to us by Paul Krauss which rcsponds to each of our comments urd conccms. LAND USE & POPULATION, HOUSEEOI..DS AND E.}!PLOYMET{T: It is not clcar whether chanhassen is including land that is currently zoned and approvcd for development, but not built or vacant, in the d12 acres of dcvdfu commerria una. If so, the total amount of commercial lurd currcntly available for djvcbpmcnt (213) may actuary be greatcr, conscquently, reducing the amount of additional -commercial tani needed to accommodate futurc^ demand. Land ap,prwcd for development, but not yct built tlpicatly accounts for a.sizablc portion of a communities' vacant land inventory. Many projects tha rcceivc city approval never comc to fnrition, o! arc not built flr several years. Tbis land should bc considercd vacant dorelopable land. Furthermore, according to a document titlcd 'Tbc city of chanhassen Availablc land For Develorpment,' which is currcntly available to the public through thc chanhassen HRA, 0rerc arc 216 acrcs of industrial land available for development ( ttrcsc parcels are shown s edenpratn by lcgal description). This contadicu thc frgures in the Plan amendmenr which sates that only 90 acrcs of industrisl land arc cunently availablc for development. Tterc appear to be differcnces betreen the Chanhassen IIRA and Planntng Departrent ou what constitutes evellable lndustrial land. The Cfty of Chanhassen IIRA te curreutly markettng 216 ecrcs of tnrlustrial land that b yacant and planned for development. The plemhg depertueDt palntalm thil propeily that ls Dot currcntly befu markcted by tbe otpDers, or wbhh ts belng held for future development, should not be constdered la their land nrpply lnventory. Based on our experie[ce vith MUSA erporLslon requests, this b not the way land supply ts calculated by the Metropolttan Counctl. Chrre.nt land cupply lncludes ell ?seant developable land. If e prrcel b vacant, developable, and wlthln the IfiJSA line, then It should be lnduded in the cunent laud npply inveutory, whlch lncludes land thgt is held by e buslness for fuhrrc expanslons. It is aot clcar how iadusUial l8nd dcmafld was det€rmhed. According to the MetropotAn Development and lnvestment Prameworh Manual, io order to establish a regional ncod for inceasing thc urban lcrvicc arca ttte City must demonstrate that their land dcmand forccasts cxcccd thc total land rupply (with overage) within the City's CUIIENT MUSA, Although Chanhasen's rcsldential grcwth projection spper rcslistic, it ls still not clear how they are projecting hdustdal grovth. Page 10 states that Eden Prairie's sbility to satisff largc industrial uscs is rapidly diminishing, thercfore, increasing demand for industrial land io Chanhassen. As of April, 1990, Eden Prairic had 471 acrcs of industrial land, and 721 acres of officeJcommercial land availablc for all lcvds of devclopmcnt. This includes largc sites that can faDilitatc major campus stylc dcvelopments or corporatr headquarters, land that is currently supported by utilitias rnd tansportation irfr8strucnlrc. HOUS$iG: There is no indicatioo of thc curcnt Dumbcr of subsidizcd housing projectVunits in Chanhassen or the futurp numbcr of uniu. There is no indication of cxisting or futrrc City initiated programs to assist first time bome buyers, rehabifiatc or mainain tbc cxisting housing stocl, or assist in the frnancing of low income rental family or elderly housing projccs. Although Chanhassen has idsrtifiod an cxisting shortage of rental or first titne owpership housing, it does aot identi$ how it will accommodatc this shortage, C'hanhassen will have limitcd opportunity to provide affordablc rorul tousing siocc 6.3% of their mat residential land (including prorposcd MUSA expansion arca) is designated for multiplc family rcsidential development, and 8l perccnt of thc City's current inventrory (E/31/89) is singlc family dctachcd uoits. tra'd szE-l tstlIUdJ Nltof lo ,l,l I I rLri''l>,t{6F,,,.q,r.t6-6: n I Ia:qI IA. qZ X.{H chanhassen stetes ln thelr rcsponse letter that Edea hattlets rental housbg vacaucy rate is higb aud that iDcreastry the mpply of rental horsiog at this time may not be appropriate. Approxlmately 2dXX) nentsl gnlrs ysgp conslructed in Eden prairie wlthtu a threc period aad the ebsolptlon rate has been very htg[. hovldlug bousing opportunitles for alt rrsidents as stated tn the goals section of the chanhassen plan could include tncreastng the amount of land designated lor multiple family boustng (lncluding duplex, towrhouse, quadraolulum, and condo units). The phn cuntrtly desiguates 370 a crts or 2.7vo of the totat t8ud anea for multiple family development. TRANSFORTATION: There are somc inconsistencies in the functional classifications on border rout€s. In particular, the roadway shown as a minor afieriat - class rI on the north side of brc Riley is not compatible with our systcm. Frtar Prairie plans for a roadway that woulcl provide for thc contiruity of this alignment, howwer, our classification is a rcsidential collector (32' widc) with a treffic votume under 5000 ADT (2010). Anorher inconsistcncy of lcsscr imporancc is tlat Dcll Road (soutb of rH 5) is defrncd as a minor arterid in Eden hairie and rs a collector in Chanhealen. The uafficprojcctions sbown in the Eastem carrcr county Transportation planning study indicatcs that the CSAH l/Pioneer Tlail conidor is undcr utilized (especially in ttt $fu!1!f. restraint model - Figurc 4) in comparison o the roadway nefth 611 "kt ailsy. In addition, Figurc 9 (2010 Traffic Forecast By cig) shows a significant difference in the forecast volumc for Pionccr Trail than what is shown on Figure 3. We agrtc that TH 101 bcmccn CSAH 62 and TH 5 should bc classified as a minor arterial - class tr witb Dcll Road in Eden Prairie having a functional classification no highcr than a collector facility, h addition, ury improvemcots planned for TH l0l should provide some continuity through chanhassen and bc designed to accommodatc the projected volumes, chanhassea's traffic projcctions for TH 5 are higher than Eden prairie's projections which indicarc that thcy are anticipating growth 0rat significaatly exceeds -ttre traffic capacity of thc trunl highway facilitiec provided by MnDOT. We did not clearly understand the stnr€ty for implementing the plans, goals and policies for providing affordable housing. The need for affordable housing (rcntal/ownership) in Chanhassen wiII be increased by the conversion of 600 aercs of rural land to indusrial by generating additional manufacturing/asscmbly jobs (which are tlpically lower paying positions). It is not clear how the city is planning to sccommgdate future housing dcmand from low/moderate incomc persons who work in Ctanhasscn but cannot afford to livc ttrsc. PUBLIC SEWE8, AND WATER,: Chris M. Enger Director of Plaruing The hydraulic capacities of the Rcd Rock Interceptor and allocations io serve communities should be gonfirmed by MWCC. Thesc capacities are not present in thc plan, There is a significant gap in the ycar 2000 tr€atment plant capacity ctrrently allocated to chanhassen by MWCC, and chanhassen's projected year2000 flo'w. It wouid appear that llunnu-sen'1 planncd growth will demand more sewer capacity than what is-curently alleated by MWCC. We anticipate that the Mctropolitaa Couocit will approve Chanhasseo's Comprchensive pian amerldment request and we tru$t that our rcmaining questions and rccommeidations will be addressed during your rcvicw process. Our comments herein arE iotendcd to be factuat andinformational rather than obstnrctive or negative. Sincerely, CITY OF EH[I{H[EEEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (512) 937.5739 April 23, 1991 Mr. Chrls EngerDirector of PlannlngCity of Eden Prairie 7600 Execut ive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3577 Dear Chris: The following cohmehtl are in response to your letter of April 9,1991, and our dlscussions at todayrs nccting. I believe thit nostof the polnts you ralsed can be reasonably addreesed and, ln fact,are in the process of doing eo wlth the lletropolltan Council staff.where appropriate, additional lnfomation is appended to thisreport for your revlew. You ralsed approxinately 20 points in yourletter. As I an.6ure you .are aware, the Clty ls actively working vithMetropolitan Council staff to respond 1o guestlons that the-y traveraised. It nust be stresEed, houever, that uetropolltan c6uncilstaff has, uith one notable exception, found our plan to beunusualJ-y well developed and appear to be generally supportive ofit. . _That one exception ie, -ie I an Eure you are auare, thesignificart discrepancy between Mlke Munsonts r6gionat modeling andCity of Chanhassen forecasting efforts. llo elarify the issue, you lnd ygyl Clty Councll should be rnade a$are that the ltetropoiilanCouncil has forecasted that Chanhasgen rrould have l0rooo peo-p1e and4,500 jobs in the year 2OOO. the U.S. census conffums thit i,e traveapproxinately 12,000 people, while a census of area businessesperforned by the City indicates that rre have approxirnately 6,000jobs, with both eets of infornation dating to f-g-gO. We haie nadeit clear. to I'Ietropolitan Counclt staff th;t the only uay we couldcomply with their regional forecaet ls to put 2,000 peopl-e on a busto.south Dakota, which for obvious reasone we have io Intention ofoorng. Therefore, rnuch of our discuEglons with the lrletropol ttanCouncil have focused ar€und meanE of. resolving the discrepincy -in the- Metropolitan Council forecasts so that they rnore adiguatelyreflect reality. or, .-l ara-r =r\rtr.,rlJ-J l\t=Llt .rn lll'\!r.r-!r --r-r ?a a, !4 Dlr. Chris EngerApril 23, 1991 Page 2 rhe folrowing is a point-by-point response to the issues.raised in'your April 9, 1991 letter. f have Eopied your comments and ourresponse is provided in cequence for ttie sakle of cobpariso;. 1. On .page 5 under Ra3identlal Develophent tt states thatresidential developnent currantly acc6untt for 3r912 acres.This number ls inconaistent nith t-he acreaEe flgrurel lrsiea inthe land inventory by TAZ chart (4,2L7 acfes; in tn" lina use lppendix, and the cxiatlng land u-ee ftgurer oh page e ii,seol .It iE not clear whlch flglrree are coriect ResponsQ: You polnt out some apparent lnconsistencics in theamount of acrcaEe dedtcated to existinE land usos. I havebeen unablc to flnd your q,otatlon of reltdentiar deveropnenton page 5, eince there le no col'oparable acreage figure qirotedon either pase ? of_the_pop.latlon, HouseholCti anit-Eurpl6ynentsections or under the Land uae eection. r feii,ive -yJu ...uslng an earller draft copy ol the plan that wis lr'ovia.a,rather than the current draft that was fot:*,ardtea to tfreMetropolitan Council a3 rrell aa Edan pralrle. Hor*ever, letrstake this question in nore gancral tenns. There .are soueapparent discrepanclee in thls plan and we are currentlyworking to resolve then. Thesc diEcrepanclcs eteur, ior ttrenost part, fron the diff,iculty of plannlnE for a connunitythat j,s growing as rapidly ai nc ire. f an sure you arefaniliar with the difflculty of hitting a rooving taiget onnatters such as these. l[he rnbst current ilgure r dan giie youis that aII land currently Ln use for residentlal priiposes,both insi.de and outside the MusA Line, lncludes 2,i29'acresinside the I*IUSA Line and 11090 outsiai tfre uusa iine, tor atotal of 3,819 acres: T\ts ftErure lncludes aevef-fel rana.lhe current calcuration for vatant residentlal riria ie zoracres.of elngle -fanlry ancl 160 acres 0f raultl-fantry foia eeracre totar'. A1r of thls rand La located wlthln tie currentuUsA L,inc. we ar. currently in the process of -ulaatinE various eections of the ptan- to be eo'nslstlnt -wiiri-tne"u nuhbers. r an incrudrng a copy of tables wherein arr tanause6 have been broken dom by TAZ8 for your analysle. 2. on page 5 under cornDercia-l Deveropnert lt states that exl.tingcornnerclar uses occupy 163 acrea. This nunber ts tnconiistentwith. the acreage- fiEurer lleted ln the fana in-ventory-Uy raZchart in the land appendix, whlch rhowa rsi -ilrls ofconnereial land developcd. Response:. Agal.n, I aI! unable to find the exact cttation youare _quotlng. Hosrever, the rccurate nunbcrs f", -c"rr"i.iir ctevelopnent as contrJngil vithin the docunentatlon p."via-iwitlr thie lettar includes 119 acre6 ot ae-vliopea;d;;;;i;Iland within the I{USA Llne and 34 acr.s ot acvefoiea ;;il;;;i;i ,1 .) a2a.- t :rrutu\tJ rr!.l:t -rat t{r. Chris EngerApril 23, 1991 Page 3 acres outside the Ii{usA Line,Metropolitan Council staff haLcurrent inforoation. for a total of 1S3 acres.been provlded with the uost 3. It is not cl.ear nhether Chanhassen ls I ncJ.udinE land that iscurrently zoned and a pproved for devel opuent,but 4gt buiLt orvacantin the 612 ac res of dcvcloped connercial 1and. If sothe total anount of councrcial land currentl y available fodevelopnent ( 213 ) nay lctually b€greater, cong6 guently,reducing the aEount of additional coneercial land n eeded toacconnodate future denand. Lnd approv.d for dcvel opnent, butnot yet built t ypically account i for a sizable portion of acommunlt i eir vacant land lnventory.Uany projects thatreceive city a pproval never cone to fruition, or are not builtfor severaL year6. Thie land ehould be consldered vacantdeveJ.opable land. Furthe rDore, accord lng to a docurent tltledxlhe City of Chanhassen Available Land for Developnentr', whLchis currently available to the publlc through thc ChanhassenHRA deve l ophent (these parcelr are sh own by legal descE ptlon)Ihi6 contra dict6 the fiEures ln thc PIan anendmen t whichstates that only 90 acres of indu strlll land are cuEentlyavailablE fo r developnent. ES+anSg:- _Yo! Suote g ftgure ot 612 rcres of developedconhercial Iand. This ls no-t a figure we have us.a ,na-i-alnnot certain what.you are lnctudiis i" thir-.;l;;.;: - ;:separated co,nerclal -r,-and frou inau-stiiar/offico rint -ana"i believe you are probably ager.g"iing tti t o. you correct-ly point_ out that thero ie often 1andt which iscorunitted for developroent, but nfrictr ie not ufti:r,aiei"deveroped ror that usl. inr" r"v -t-J"tr"-""iii"r1-" il-il:future. As r an sure-you travl fn i:aen-irafrfe, *e rru".-roi"of those situations ..hlre ac-rirr-.----w'. have' "tlirptii-'ii!ili_il:',L.'f .'x'"'r:r"":iiiifrt"r."r,""iil*9"-+:il ji,"iii*ii of how vre &ade our delermlnation. --ioi .*"rpf", tt.-fi-.cfvii?:k:Il:: own a eigniflcant parcef in itrinnassln,'eone "i ili;i.ts reaerved for their future Erouth and sone 6f which ls onthe open narlcet. rhe 35 aciiE wtrictr--ii" or trre "pen -uair.t are lncluded in our vacant land categjry rrhll.e the ticclynnsite itsclf le not. The reasa; iorltri'r, i's ;h;;-u;[;;;I;:already cone in for one expansion, fJiirlaai w;ril;;;1;;i;second and have approved plans to deveiop tie ontirL-efi!l-- Ior also .point out- appar.nt discrepanclec betueen theconprehensive pLan and a llochure thai ,i. pr.p.red by our HRAi11":!.:!il,s -sites. trrat _nere--ivaiilirl* r", developnent. rregret that there ie confusion over sonl of thed;;;p;r-tfa.] eA'.{ qzl-t llxTHx.{ Ninl tn 1rt1:Lr]r.]<e, cr aa-a !n r a1r.6r ra F, !! 6@'d szE-l 3IUIUUd r.Et03 JO A.LIf, rl€El 6EaS.ES-6:0J. SA:9I 16, SZ dd Mr. chris EngerApriL 23, 1991 Page 4 but possibry eorne of thir courd be exprained. r have obtalneda copy of the brochure and undcrstand bow you arrived at theavallablrity of 215 acrea, wherein our ionprehensive prancurrently ahous aD availablrity ot 96 aircr of vacantlndustrial land. .IEain, I have ihc dltflculty o! frlttlng anovlng targct on thls one, but I rrould Clispute one or tro o!the assunptions that were ueed in the tIiA brochure. Forexanple, RedNond products has a 511 acre sitc for whictr ptinswere belng devrloped -last ycar to relocate the conpany. 'They bave since retrenched on this plan, but the propcr-ty is Uiiniheld by.the Rcdnond._fqqily and ls not on tfrE airfc€. w; iliwieh this to be available, and would rilce to Lnterest aoneon6ln it-, but the fact iE that thle property is nocon the uarket' and is !e1ng !el.d_by the coupany.- Seicondly, there are 28acres 0f industrial parh Propirty shown in €rie ward Estate.with the -adoption oi- -ouf cuireni eonprehensrvc pran, thisindustrlal acleage wilr be converted t6 residentlar ana son"nlnor conrrerciar uses due to the relocatl.on of fiEn,liy roithrough chanhassen and thiE sitc. rhus again, i bericve tneHRA erred in this rince as soon as our plin ri adopted, this. rand wilr no ronge-r be avairabre rn thie.categorf. 'srriiaiiil thero ie one snar.r 4 acre elte in our rndustrrir paii-wrri'crihas an approved offlce building whlch has not yet beenconstructed. slnce r cannot aaaure you that the project wilibe developed,. t.Iip probably fallg irito the category you havedescrlbed, but thrs-le a ninor Bnount of rancr. rL" iiitai iiieil polnt concerns {o .acrea wirfcl iie owncd ty -iun Link/Datasenr. At the time our pl.an was aevefopea, tfrfi fandwas bcing held by Datascw for iuture corporaiJexian-r-n-inJwas not be_ing marketed. ca11s to Dataserv- indicatet that thisland n":Iq,l?! -!e devcloped-by anyone tut trreuicr"ie a"a iiilvwourd be sitting on it untlr auch tine ss th"y courd uEe it'.rn the rast few uontis, thero hae recentry _ bee-n eone activtiyon this. property uhere 40 acres of lt-i; currcntry lerninarketed. Even in thia ca3.r. bowever, lt is not furlf crearlAs you nay be auare, southrrest Metro iransit fs aiil'i,tfng-t"secur. some of this area for a park and Rlde raclrtty.' rire aoacres could legltinrately be added to the 96 acres w6 r"arcaieas being vacant, for a total vacant avatlabiltty of 136 acras. ., ii$ I-l:":__b..1 worklng wlth Hetropolltan Council etaff to help -uil.,-\ .\ II?n get a handle on our enploynent grorrth and Bpace dernands'.'N- )(? $r rha current Etatus ol thls Lxerciic iE that Metropol itan.I.*€rns counclr.etaff bclieves we courd justrtfovei-roo0 acres of)H\\t(, -113:"!:iat-_1and av_aitabirlty lor chanhasien to satirfrrh" i6.{\_$., x:ll_?I"rth prus 5 year ovorage stancrard o! rhe uetr6politin o\-q-fl !!!ii:|i"ur""l1'l'"'"lilrJrBr.&..:".:1*?'.',rilf :::lg:l*l"il [\s" office,/industrlal growth. Thereforo, i"r -i;rin prop-o-"", =to Ur, Chris EngerApril 23, 1991 Page 5 brlng in a total of 539 acres nhich Lncludtee the 96 acrespr"y+gysly considered to be vacant. Obvlously rr!- "oufO-r,"""lusEr.treq.a huch. greater ahount of industrial lanil, but didnot feel. it was 1n the best lnteresti of the Clty. The resldential Land.denand forecast nethodlology developed bychanhassen ir confusing. rt ia not croii-n"w-iid;;i;I;i;;Adenand r.as deterxrnea. lccoritinj 1o tlre n"in"p"ritiirDevelopnent and fnvestnent Franewoik Manual, fn or?er- -io establi.sh a regional. need for increasing tne' UrUan- -s-Lrvlce area, !h" city Eust denonEtrate that -their iana -aeni"a forecast. exceed the total lanct supply (witfr over-a-ge) ;ith'i;the cltvts cu*ent lrusA. rhe heed lbt'aiartio""i-iEJio""iiiiand lndustrial tand ia.app.arently bascd on thi ia;udff;;i;;;growth will continue. ln Chanhasien through tt€ lgtdG;-[;"1987-1988 ]evel, which _were the rpeak g-rowthil ye.r" in tt.198ors in chanhasscn. fhis docs nit sedra ffilty,-esp"-J"iivr+'hen consldering the cu*ent econonic recession'i"d-il-;;;;-_built industrlar and office real estate narket ln-'ttr"southwest^ aetroporltan area. rt appeirs that cnanhii""nf=approach for nore indu.trial land ls biecd on targe E.;i;;;";Lnterest. The plan doea not aJffn" li-rle scatc user. .BgSBgnse: You erroneously state that Chanhassenr, grouth is !,ase-d^ on. assurrptlons that- pe.x growth -ievele ."p.riinJ"J r"the 19s0rs w1r.1 be perpetuatcd ln tlre contng ct"Ji{". -otir priigoe? to great lehgths to atress that rje are fn no -wiy projccting that the 10t grovth of recent ycars witfr'-a "S,t annuaLlzed- groyth of the list decade fs qJing't.;.-;;;;J:In fact,^the City uas 60 conEcrirrative ttrit w6 assuned i-1;;;iof 4.75t to 5.5t Erorrth rate was corr"i.t""i--ritfr--iiiexpectations. our land consunption forecasts were basca-onthie presurnptlon. rn current drscussions with the Metropolitan councrl .taff. l1]..11:y -".e wirlinE tg so. wlrh at thi;-ai;; rl-iii.-.riili!&popuratron growth prol-ectlonr that rrere contal,ncd r" -i;; Highway.212 EIs whi_ch was contributea to bt b";;';;connunities. our l"pq consuurptlon foretasTs -"-; -;; consenrative that evcn nith the redirced popJrut-rorip="jiiiioilcontained- in the HiEhlray ?1-2 E_IS, wtros6 accuracy we dispute,we stitl have not excccded Land availaUrtty u" e"i;u];6e-;iUetropolitan Councll etaff. Page 1.0 Etates that Eden pralriets abUtty to satisfy iargeindustrial, uses is rapidly afninistrfnfil,r,erefore, increasinsdenand for industrtar rand in chanhaslL"l -il-;;ip;ii:-i;il: Eden prairie had a71_rcres of tnaustrii-i rana.-anE-iti ;;;;lof officelconrrerciar _ra-nd avauauie--tor iri--ri"!r"--Jideveloprnent. This lncl,udes targc -e-itea that can facilitite ,-L ',lr*x \"}1 aT'd saE-1 =Idluud N3q! Jo A.LI):r^louJ 6EaSaE6-6:01 9A:9r 15, SZ UdU 5. Mr. chris EngerAprll 23, 1991 Page 6 bajor e-aEpus atylc developnents or corporate headquarters,land that ie currently support.d - by utilities andtransportation lnfrastructur€. llhis lE not a walid nethod ofdefining need for industrial lanct. Response: Wc in no way Deant to sllght Edan praLrl,e l-n ternsof your land availablllty, nor did we include any figuresrcgarding sane Ln our plan. t{e do know, howcvei, ttiat a nuruber of devel.opers and property brokers have becn tiUing usthat our new UUSA oxpanslon does present possiblltties fordevelopnent that do not currently rxist 1n Eden prairic, Inany case, ue are not trylng to Justify our devolopnent ba6edupon your land availabillty or lack of aval1abiIity. yte aresihply trying to juctify uhat is reagonable and laLional andin the best lnterests of our connunl,ty and hopefully ourreEion. 6 Slnce the litetropolltan eouncilrs growth lorecaets fall, shortof those described ln chanhassenra plan, rre exp.ct that thisarca srould receiv. lowcr pr!.ority for invest-uent ln rcEionalfacilities than lreas nithin the MUSA a6 etated l-n tnel,letropolitan Developnent and Invcrtment Fraaework (HDIF). TheMDIF stat.s that rrthe Council ultt place lts higheBt priorltyon senring exlsting devrlopnent uithin thr urban "enricc areiby _naintainlng and replaclng Lnvegtrocnte already Ln placer.Adding nore 1ndu6t!1al land to the Mt SA ln Chan-haeeei wouldnot be consistent with Councll policles on.utlJ.izlng exlstlngdevelopnent Lnfrastructure, cap.clal1y when ther6 ts ovei1,,1,00 acres of lndustrial and connercial land uith utilitieeand currently avallable for devrlopnent in Eden pralrie. Responpg: lIy _understantling of our rueetlng thls norninq isthat this section will be dcleted recognlzlng that Chanhaisenis-not looking for any new investncnt -in reglonal facilltiesand that chanhassen has already pald for ite ltrare o! the costof ln place sewcr capacity. ChanhassenrB 1990 estlnated full tlue enployment, (5,079) lsbased on a Clty But:rrGy thdt l,E not prisent in tlie plan. Although re agrec that eurplolment ls dlfitcutt to forecast, indolng- -so, the laso eroploynent estl.rnate should be f lrnlyestablished. Since the Councll ucrs the Minnesota .lobs anhTraininE estlnated cov.red enploynent data for theirenplolarent estLroatos by cltyr- we assuDe ChanhassenrsernpLo)4nent eEtlnate nlll be .Ualghed aEalnst the counCifestinate. .-fl'S q 7 RespolFe: l{e have been norklnE closely wlth ltetropolltanCouncil etaff for gver on. yeir on orir enploynen€ dota.MetropoLltan counsll staff acknovledges that-th6 data thit 6EaSeE6-6:0.1 L@197 16, Se W N\ I1 'd SeE-I 3IUIUdd N3G= J0 AtIf,:r,rOUJ I{r. Chris EngerApril 23, 1991 Page 7 I xsgrd* 9 7a') c?l-t iT).llHx..t N?dl {n ltll:Lrn>].r aeJ e, e<-<:n r aa:eT TE - c7 >ur.r they received fron thc state is highly rrroneous as it cornes.to chanhassen. For exanpl., they do not lnclude the over1,285 jobs that are locatea utthin the portion of Chanhassencontained within Hennepln County. In additlon, their rlata isonly current to the flrst guarter of 1989. f an appendlng acopy of, our emplolreent runrey for your review,. Chlnhassen,senplo)mont su!1ey lr not an estlaate, it is a count, whcreasihg Metropolltan. Council .stlhate is rlnply wrong.Hetropolitan council itaff haa been able to actcn6wiedgc thispgint and I aD sur. that after revl.ewlng the attachcE aita y-,,rrill too. Chanhassenrs futurc eDployDent calculatlons vcre done bvmultlplying-the current jobs pcr acre ratio of 8.3, tV f,:Zilthe total land vacant and designated for counerclat an&industrlal develophent (lncludinE- 5S4 acres outsl,Cle currentMUSA). It does not appe-ar_ that publlc 1and (not includingpark/floodplain) was lncluded in-calculatlnq the iobsZairiratio. If soue of tho 5,079 eoployeee estiuat6a tn e[arri,l=="nare public, 1.c. Eovernuent, tChool , poet office, etc., a noreaccurate ratio could be attained by tncluding this IanA in thecalculation. Response: We have been very careful in explaining to CounciLstaff that rre have olininated onl,y laiEe laliee and DNRidentified vetlands frob our 1and catcirlattonJ. - sU.LChanhassen alraadly easentlally ha6 a no net-Ioss rretlandprotection progran, thcre_ ie -i large ahount ot lnettici-n-ythat is nor:oal in our devclopnent process. As to vouiposltloa that public land,. lncluding sEhools and post otti""ishould be included on our lnduetrlai land catcEorlLs, I cannotfollow the roasonlng. posslbty you have slt-uatloni 1'-ie;;Prairie vrhere a Largi percentag;r ;f your enployroent f" ;dii;sector, but wc do not in Chanhlseen. Paga 11 Btatcs that the location of llght ral,l translt (InT,)through chanhassen bay- proDot. devel6prnent tn unaeveioleiareas of thc Clty. Although lhis nay be true, fnf t,lll, ra'osilikely not be built through chanhassin tor zolfo years: - -' Begponse-:- W6 operate fron the eane lnforDation ae you do andfully well understand that l&T is rtot expccted to cone to ourarea for at r.ast 20 year6. rn no'way do *" nivJ iiiexpectatlons rldlng on this and the aentence you referred t'oreally implies that the IJRT co-rrldor that wai eelected ru;;through the eouthernnost part oI chanhassen. rrhrs ar", i. nol_i::lrq:d in any.current Uuse rlne reg,r"st. tn ts or zo yeiis$rnen devetopnent iE proposed,.liEht raiI, if it runs thiougfrthis area, could be ot Lenetit. 10. There Ls no indication of th€ current nunber of eubsldizedhousing proj ectslunit3 ln Chanhasscn or the future nrrnber orunits . Response: Your irsues 10-14 relate to Housl.ng concarns thatappear to be idrntical to those which wars raised by Housingstaff at the Metropolltan Council. A3 to why tnele ls n6curront count of subsidlzed houslng unlts in Chanhassen, thesilnple ansr{rer ic that there are non-e. We do have initividualswith rent eubeidies but no dcrlgnated unlt6. At thls point,there are few, if any, resources to utltlz. to oUtaln thiihousing but tho lr{etropolttan Council ls arare that the ciivuould be willing to look lnto any suggestions or prograns. no Indlcation ol exlEtlng or futurc City Lnlttatedto aseirt flrst tlEe hone buyrrt, rehaitlltate orthe exletlng houclnE .tock; or assigt ln theof low incone rental fanily or .laterly housing !:r. Chris EngerApril 23, 1991 Page I 11 . There is proErans araintain !lnancing proJ ects . 72. 13, there 3e€tua to bs af f ordable/subs Ldized deflciency Lnin chanhassen. RelpgPFEi The City did roalntaln a proErarn to asslst honerehabilitation- using Block Grant tundj ani the progrin was ,ounder utillzed that it nae dropped. Aa for- oui elderly,chanhassen ls becornlng very lnniiatlve for a c"u.unttv-oirisizc and has ! new Senior Conulssion that la actlvely fur'suingthese Issues. Houslng is currcntly the Eubject tl a CityEponaored feasibillty Etudy. Although Chanhass.n hae lctentlfied an cxlsting ahortage ofrental or first tine ownerehlp houslng, it does not iae'ntifyhow lt wlll acconnodate thls ihortage. chanhasaen will havllinited gppgrtuntty to provide affordable rcntal noustng sinceonly 5.38 of their totaL reBidential land (ihcluding pioposed MUSA expansl,on area) 1r deslEnated for nultipie liutIvresidential d.v.loprent. rt appeare as Lf crranriassen tiiihave few alternatlves to rlngle fanily detached houslnq,although thc Plan clains to provide a variety ot houslfii lypgi, 81t of the Cityts currena lnventory (s-31-89) ls sing16lanily detached units. Response: . We belleve that tre have ln lact provlded anpleopportunitles for thls typc of housLng. the Hetropolitancounc_ll Houslng plaDner, ln connentlng oi our ffan, notis itritEden Prairie has a large vacancy in rental unlts and suEgeststhat-this ralght not be an appropriate tlare for Chanhasi6n iodevelop these cLnce thli- could adversely ariei[--youiconrounity. a real houslng th. supply AIthouEh .ofthe aI 'J Gzt- I ?T)ITHX.{ N:tdi {n J.tTl:LnXt 6tr,'.q,r.t6-6:n I FA:qI 16. q2 XJIJ Mr. Chrla EngerApril 23, 1991. Page 9 Pfan contalns goals and policies statlng the need foraffordable housing, it lacks a clear stEategy on how thesegoals !ri1l be lbplerented. Xhere are not tinillng sourcesldentifled for the developuent of subsidlzcd housing projects. Response! We ghare your concerns ln thir. area and arefruEtrated ulth a Iack of viable optLons. llolrever., te arefinding. that, Just as $as the ca-e ln Edcn praiile, theincreaslngly rectrict.d rupply of ].and ls raislng housingcosts and thr }{USA Llne &endaent rrilt bc a dir.ct Seneflt. - 14. 15. lhe need for alfordable housing (renta1,/owncrshlp) inchanhassen witl be conpoundcd by thL convelsl,on of 600 Lcresof rural land to lngustrial by potentialty generatingthousands of nanufacturing,/assenbly J obs (which arc-typlcaf lylower paying posltlons). -ft does nof apprar that the city i;acconnodatinE future houslng denand lr6rn 1owTrooderate iniornep.rsona who work in Chanhassen but cannot afford to livethere. Reaponse: I concur with your sentl.uentc that a comnunityshould strive to develop a nl.x of houslng, partlcularly s6that people Lrho work_ In a -connunlty can 1ive ln a connunlty.Both Eden Prairie and Chanhasgen sufler fron problerns 1n thisarea vherein nany of those vho work ln nanufacturing jobscannot afford to l,ive in our connunities. I vrould s-ugiestthat Chanhassen doeg havc several 1arge relatively nodest-ios!housing subdivisions currertly belng bulft, utilch help toalleviate this problen. Howcver, a-galn, li you have 'sone luggestions on rrhat Eden Prairle ls dolng that Dight wor)< lnChanhaaEen, I would bc happy to hear then. There are Bone Lnconelctcncies ln the functionalclassifications on borde^r routes. In particular, the roadwaysholrn as a rainor arterial - Class II on the north eide of Lakililey is not cornpatible wlth our systen. Eden pralrlc plansfor a roadway that would provlde for the continulty of- thisalignnent, however, our claselficatlon ie a reilaantiiicollector (32' wide) with a traffic vol,une under 5OOO ADT(2010). Another inconsistency of, leascr inportance iB thatDelI Road (south of TH 5) ls defined as a nlnor arterial l.nEden Prairl-e and as a collector in Chanhassen. The traffic. projections shown ln thc EaEtern Ca:irrer CountyIransportatLon planning Study Lndicatec that the CSAI{ 17Pioneer Trall corridor -ls undor utillzed (especiaffy jn- tfr!capacity restraint nodel - Flgure {) in 'coripariso; to iil;roadway north of Lake Rlley. In addltlon, i.iqure 9 (zo1oTraffic Forecast by city) ghowe a elgnlflcant alte"rende in 15. I'tr. Chris EngerApril 23, 1991 Page 10 L7. 18. 19. the forecast volune for Ploneer Trall thBn what is shown onFigure 3. We agre. that fH 101 betrreen CSAII 62 and l[g S Ehould beclaseified ae a ninor arterLal - Class II rrlth Dell Road inEden_Pralrle havl,ng a functlonal classification. no higher thana collector facility. _In addition, any luprovenentj plannedfor TH 101 Bhould providc sone continuity through Chanhassenand be desiEned to accoDmodate the proJ e-ted voluues. Chanhasaenre trafflc pro]ectlons for BH 5 are higher than EdenPrairiere. projectlons whlch incticate thai they areanticipatinE grolth that significantly exceeds the €rafflccapacity of the trunk hlghway faciliti-r provlctcd by HnDoT. ResJonFe .to pgintg 15-18: you raise a nunber of pointB thatrefer back to the Eastarn Canrcr County Eraneportation Study.I have spoken to you about thls study on Eevcial occaelone inthe. past -an-d as you are aware, this- wae a Jolnt effort by anunbcr of Ca::\rer County cornnunitLes along with the Cou-ntvTransportation Departbent. At several tlnis in the past voirhave inplied that the traffic we flnd coulng out of chinhasienthrorrgh Eden Prairie is a1l Chanhassenrs doing. Nothing couldbe further frou the truth. The Eastern Carier eountv- studvwas deslgned to reflect th. devel.ophent int€ntions of i nuLfeiof connunitl,es, nuch of rrhlch palees through Chanhassen isygll. I_t_yas designed to be a docuDent that would produce t}lekinds of discussions that would hopefully aiBrrer or reepond tothe issues that you have raised, which I aErce ar6 valid. youare correct, the Eastern- Cari\rer County Traneportation Stuilydoes proJect slgnificantly highcr vol-urnes on the number Jiroads that had been proJ ected in prevJ,ous rnodele developed bvthe l{etropolitan councll . llhere-are obvious anewerE ti ifri'sand that is that the Metropolltan Council was wrong --on populatlon, th.y uerc- wrong on enploynent and they "." -.f "Lrrrong on traffic. . As you are Lwale, I uade €tris stuayavailable to. you durlng your recent lnlSa ilne--;d;;;:Follow-up meetings ln thlB irea are certalnly rari"nre,i wrir,both yourself, the Mctropolltan Councll , f.ln6Ol ina Uennepincountv arong with tho'e ag.ncloc particifatrng tn ttre uiitiiirCarver County Study. The hydraullc capacltlee of the Red Rock Interceptor andalrocatlons to serve connunltles shour.d be conf i:oea'uy r'rwcd.These capacities are not pro3ent in th6 plan. :fhere.is a significant-gap. in the year 2oo0 treatnent pJ,antcapacity currently alloclted to -Chanhassen by Utlccr'-;;dchanhassenrs projected year 2OOo fLorr. ft woufa' opprai tfrii 20. srd 9eE-1 3tultEd t€tq3 .J0 AtIf,:HO!l 6EZgl€6-6:Ot gI:9I 16. Se ddu Hr. Chris EngerApri} 23, 1991 , Page 11 t 2 P'le n t' chanharrenrs planned growth wilf denand mot. iCrbt capaclty than rrhat will be allocated by UWCC. Response to points 19 and 20: Iou ral,sed concern3 sith theavailability o! public 3.rr.r. This issue uaa explored in our PIan and haE been the subj.ct of an intensive .effort betneen Chanhassen cnd the IitwCC over the apan of the lart 1fear. Inaddition, ar you ara awar., Chanhassen haE been uorking on sohe of the l-eeuee that nere raised by thc racent MUSA L,lne anendnent In Eden Prairle relatlve to chanhaEEenl6 Eanitary seser availability. Chanha3s.n wlll clearly be exceeding theflows that were provlded by the ltetropol ltan Council Syst.nsStatehent. The reason tor this again ls obvious ln that the Systems Statehent toLd u6 that we would have 21000 people less10 years froa now than ws do today. llorever, you can be assured that we have confl.rmed with the UWCC that there is adeguate capacity to handle our projected developtnent without any inrpact at all on Eden Pralrle or other connunities using-the sane facllitles. I an enclosinE a recent nenorandum fromour consultant to address info:nation reguirpuents by ltetropol itan Councll staff. Thank you agaln for the opportunity to comment on those lterns. You should note that we deleted our comhents on Questlon S6 based uponour agreernent this rnornlng that Eden Prairle would not seek toIinit chanhassenrs grolrth based upon land availabllity withln your corn:nunity. Shou1d you revise other sections of your letter, we would appreclate belng copied so that we r[ay aecordingly alter ourother respoDs.a. We look fonrard to working with you on these andother natters in the future. S incerely, Paul Krauss, AICPDirector of Planning PK:k qT 't c2c- r tTxlHlt.,l N:fl: {n I r r'1:r,ra\rJ <c, c) c<-a !n r ,'r :aT T< c2 lr-.r!,r 1.1r. Chrla EngerApriI 23, 1991 Page 11 chanhassenrs planned gro$th irlll denand nore sewer' capacity than u,hat will be allocatad by uwcc. Rqsponse to polnts 19 and 20: You ralBed concerns with the av"irauitity-of publlc seuer. Ihic issue uas explored in our Plan and hae bejn the subJ ect of an lnteneive effort betueen chanha3sen and the Ui{cC over the span of the laet year. In addition, aE you arr aware, chanhasaen has been norking on come of the iisuee that ucrc raised by the recent uUsA tlne aroendment in Eden Prairle relative to Chanhassen t s eanitary ser"rer availability. Chanhas6en vill cloarly bc exceedlng the flows that uere piovided by the ltetroPol. itan Councll syitcnsstatencnt. fhe reason for this again lo obvLoue ln that the systens statenent told us that we vrould have 2,000 people lcss 10 yearr frou now than ne do today. However, you can be assured that ve have confl.rmed with the UWCC that therc ls adeguatr capacity to handle our proJ ectcd developnent \rithout any lurpact at al1 on Eden Prairie or other coronunities using the Bane facilitles. I aD enclosing a recent ueraoranduu frornour consultant to addross infotruatlon rrquireroents by Metropolitan councll 6taff . Thank you agaln for the opportunity to coEnent on these itens. Ydu should note that we deleted our cobllents on Questlon 16 based upon our agreement thie rnorning that Eden Pralrie would not reek toIinit chanhasgenis grorfrh ba6ed upon land availablllty within your connunity. Should you revise other sectiong of your letter, we would appreclate being copled 60 that we nay accordlngly alter our other responses. We look forward to worklng lrlth you on these and other natters in the future. s incerely , Paul Krauss, AICPDirector of Planning PK: k Ll'd 9?t-r Slrludd N:tg= l0 A.l.ItrrLndl 6EZqZ96-6:n r ZIi9I 16. q2 H.+t TU CITY OF EH[NH[SEEN 690 COULTER DRIVE . P.O. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739 II{EMORANDT,III To: Richard Thonpson, Uetropolitan council planner FRoM: Paul Krauss, Planning o*ectot 4(- DATE: April 18, 1991 SUBJ: City Response to Issues Raised by Uetropolitan CouncilStaff Relative to Review of Chanhassen Corprehensive plan BACKGROUND As you are a$rare, I have Eet twice with you and other MetropolitanCouncil staff nembers to discuss a variety of issues pertaining toissues in reviewing Chanhassenrs proposed ConprehenJive plan and MUSA Line Amendment. At these neetings, questions were raisedeither verbally or in writing and this nenorandum is intended toserve as the Cityts response. I have taken the liberty of faxingemplolment data requested by Regan Carlson ahead of this rneno, inthe interest of facilitating her analysis. Copies of thatinformation are included with this neno. EMPLOY},1ENT,/ POPULATI ON/ I,AND USE CONSI,MPTION It is our understanding that lrlike Munson is unwilling to undertakea new forecast of projected population and household growthrelative to Chanhassen at this tine. It is his preference to waituntil complete census data is available to rerun his nodel. He isalso unwilling to accept projections contained within theChanhassen Cornprehensive PIan since he is unable to verify theiraccuracy. Horrever, since it Ls clear that 19Bg Systems StltenentInformation is clearly erroneous, llr. llunson is wilting to acceptforecasts developed 3 to 4 years ago for the Highway 2L2EnvironmentaL lnpact Statement. These forecasts are anong the three sets of forecasts which wereused by the. city of Chanhassen in our planning efforts. We believethat the Highway 212 EIS projections significantly underestimatethe amount of growth that is expected to occur in- our conmunity. We also note that there is a fundanental problen in that employnei:tforecasts were not done for the TH 212 Ers and that ur. t-tunson hassuggested alternatives to dealing with this situation. we continue to believe that the forecasts contained in the Chanhassen Plan are reasonable. Thus ue are essentially in aposition of agreeing to disaqree on population and householdforecasts. we are fully rriUing to ]et the accuracy of eachforecast be determined at the end of the decade so long as this does not adversely liroit Chanhassenrs ability to both plan for and accommodate rrhat ue believe to be a reasonable anount of grouth.rt is our understanding that ue are in agreement of conputing landconsumptions as outLined below, rhich essentially justifies the I.lUsA Line relocation proposed by Chanhassen. This is acconplishedby nature of the fact that Chanhassen was extremefy conservative inour land consunption projections and as a result, our relocated MUSA Line basically conforDs with land consumption projections being used by Itretropolitan Council staff. Richard Thompson, Metropolitan CouncilCity Response to fssues RaisedApril 18, 1991 Page 2 Residential Land Denand Regarding residential land denand, Metropolitan Council staffindicated a willingness to accept the TH 212 household projections. According to page 20 of the Innd Use Section of the P1an, thehousehold growth consistent with the IH 2]-2 projections willrequire a total of 1,365 acres of residential land between 1990 and2000. This total includes a 50* excess to account for a five year excess in supply consistent with Uetropolitan CounciL policies. At the present tine, Chanhassen has 361 acres of vacant residentialland within the MUSA Line. The Comprehensive plan draft calls foran additional 1,028 acres of land to be added to the ltlUSA Line forresidential development. This results in a 10 year supply of 1,399acres. This total exceeds the TH 212 projections by 23 acres. Projection of land denand nust consider other factors. The 1,389acres of land identified in Chanhassenrs Plan does not includenajor wetland areas. It does, however, incLude smaller wetlandareas and slopes that nay be unsuitabl.e for deveLopnent. As you are aware, the City essentially has a no-net loss policy inplace, but does not yet have an adopted wetlands map. Thus theeffective developnent densities that result are reLatively 1orr,averaging only 1.7 units per acre in the singl.e faroily districts. The 1,389 acres also does not include the Eckankar, prince, Carlsonand Ward properties. These parcels are categorized asVacant/Agricu1ture. The net developable area of these pargels(excluding najor rretlands) is as folloss: Eckankar Prince carlson 113 93 54 acres acres acres Richard Thornpson, Metropolitan CouncilCity Response to Issues RaisedApril 18, 1991 Page 3 Emplorrnent we understand that the parcels we have identified for specialtreatnent listed above present an unusual problen for lletropolitanCounciL staff. We clearly differentiate betreen these parcels andsituations involving nornal property osnership where a property olrner nay or nay not desire to see their land developed in a givenperiod of tine. That leaves us with two large estates, one orrnedby Prince and the other by Jerone Carlson. The prince Estate is nanaged as a secure compound and it is unreasonable to think thatthey would be deveLoping the property at any tirae in the nearfuture. In the case of Jerome Carlson, l,!r. Carlson has gone onpublic record (copy attached) during one of the Planning Conmissionreviews of the Couprehensive PLan indicating his long teno intentfor the property. We note that he has recently acquired additionalparcels and is living in a newly conpleted home and ue veryreasonably believe he intends to naintain the status quo for theduration of a valid life of our current Conprehensive pLan. During review of our Plan prior to subnittal to the MetropolitanCouncil., a nunber of individuals asked us to explore .deletingindividual parcels fron the IiIUSA Llne amendnent. Carlion's andPrinceis property couLd reasonably have been deleted froro thisscenario and hre rrould not now be having this discussion. Ilot ever, we felt that it hras unreasonable to have a checker board pattern inthe MUSA Line, fron both the City standpolnt of being unable toservice property in a reasonable manner and fron a titetropolitanCouncil standpoint in terns of regional developnent and policiesissues. Ann HurLburt confirmed this position and wls verysupportive of city staff in ensuring that we vere able to pfoduce a reasonable UUSA Line expansion. We therefore continue to telievethat these properties should reasonably not be counted tor{rardsdevelopable acreage. At the neeting with MetropoLitan Council staff,projecting land denand based on enployuentBaseline assunptions for both uere as fo11ow6: two uere Dethods of discussed. 1. Chanhassenrs 1990 emplolment uas G,000. 2. Metropolitan Councilrs enploynent projections for 1990, 20OO and 2010 sere 3r500, 4r500 and 5,1o0, respectively. 3 Chanhassen exceeded the Metropolitanenplolment proj ections by 2,500. Councilrs 1990 4 Chanhassen has a current ratio of 8.3 jobs per industrialacre of property. Richard Thompson, Metropolitan CouncilCity Response to Issues RaisedApril 18, 1991 Page 4 Employment Option *1 Add Chanhassenrs empJ.oynent difference (2r500) to the MetropolitanCouncilrs 2000 emplo)ment projection of 4,500 = a 2OOO enploymentprojection of 7,000. 7,000 eDploynent € 8.3 j obs/acre = 843 acres 843 acres e 1.5 (+5 year supply) = 1,265 total acres ofindustrial land Enplounent Option #2 Add chanhassenrs eDploynent difference (2,500) to the l{etropolitanCouncilrs 2010 enployrnent projection of 5,100 = a tottl 2O1Oernploynent of 8,600. Derive 2000 project via straight linecorrelation = a total 2000 enpLoyDent of ?,3OO. 7,300 enplolment € 8.3 Job,s/acre = 880 acres 880 acres e 1.5 (+5 year suppLy) = 1,320 total acres ofindustrial land The Chanhassen Plan t i1I result Ln a total of 539 . acres ofindustrial land available for developnent. This is obviouslysignificantly less than the 1,265 acres outlined under option 1 oi1,320 acres under Option 2. These calculations are based upon acurrent availability of 96 acres of vacant land within the exiitingMUSA. This supply excludes several tracts held by corporations foifuture growth. Even if these parcels are uftinateLy put back onthe rnarket, the relatively few acres that could be added to supplysrould have a negligible inpact. Regan Carlson has asked for information to calculate enploynentprojections. she has recelved infornation from the Stafe ofUinnesotai however, this infornation was current only to the firstquarter of 1989, and excluded Hennepin County enploynent. Ininformation attached to this neno, you will see - thit ue havecounted 1,286 jobs within Chanhassen located in Hennepin County and2,407 jobs that have been added to our courmunity since the iirstquarter of 1989. fhese nuobers are contained within an annualcensus of enploynent conducted by the City of Chanhassen. The datais approximateLy 8 to 12 Donths o1d at this tine, but we believe itis reasonably accurate. I{e presented this data to li[etropolitanCouncil staff previously on severdl occasions and havL alsosupplied copies of it to the State of Hinnesota. Richard Thonpson, UetropoL.itan CouncilCity Response to Issues RaisedApril 18, 1991 Page 5 Summarv In summary, although we are agreeing to disagree on the exact nurnber of nehr households, persons and enplolaent in the city, the methods of analysis are close enough that we are abLe to justifythe land use conponent contained within the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan. We are confortable agreeing to this nethod ofanalysis at this tine, so long as the lower population and enployrnent projections are not used to throttle back Chanhassenrs access to regional rraste control facilities. We have providedadditional detailed infornation on this matter later in thisletter. we do not believe there is any problem in this area. Inattached infornation, rre have presented data which has beensubstantiated by prior visits with UWCC staff indicating that thereis nore than adequate capacity for grollth being projected within Chanhassen without nodification or expansj.on of the regionalfacifities. SANITARY SEWERS,/JACK FROST we took the coEments Jack Frost gave and conveyed then to BobSchunicht with Bonestroo-Rosene-Ander1ik uho is the Cityrsconsultant on this rnatter. First we should state that there were apparent inconsistencies upon closer revier., between data containedin the Plan draft delivered to you. The inconsistencies wererelative to sewer use forecasts rrhich rrere based on higherpopulation projection figures than have been used elsenhere in thePfan. In fairness to ![r. Schunicht, this is through no fau].t ofhis own since this data rras prepared by other parties. Horrever, hredid ask that he undertake a reanalysis of the matter and preparefindings. In addition, t[r. Schunicht has been able to document the success ttrat Chanhassen has had in reducing inflos and infiltrationproblens through reconstruction of deteriorated systens. In an attached nemorandum, lilr. Schunicht has basically prepared revisedpages for our Conprehensive PIan. These have been tailored to respond directly to Jackrs nemo. The total estiroated peak flowinto the Red Rock/Lake Ann Interceptor has been. reduced fronpreviously projected 10.58 ngd to 6.934 Dgd. This cones about dueto the use of forecasts based upon current population and growthprojections contained withln the Plan, which are lolrer than thosethat had been used when the Sewer Plan uas originally prepared byanother partyi a somewhat lower connercial/industrial landabsorption rate than had originally been anticipatedi and l orrrer peak flows based upon a flow analysis. Hopefully this will addressthe inconsistencies that Jack found in our PIan. Again, I must stress that while Chanhassen is undoubtedly producing sewer flows in excess of what uas contained in the SystensStatenent, that we have worked closely irith UWCC to assure then and Richard Thompson, Ir{etropolitan Councilcity Response to Issues RaisedApril 18, 1991 Page 6 WATER OUALITY ourselves that in no rray are we approaching the capacity ofregional facilities serving our cornnunity and in no way are lredetracting fron capacity being reserved for neighboring conrnunitiessharing the same facilities. I will point out that the SystensStatenent data is of course based upon extraordinarily fowpopulation projections which have been proven to be wrong by the 1990 Census and City employnent survey. Jack has raised a question regarding the potential for Locatingprivate rrasterrater treatnent plants in the connunity. He notedthat there was no policy prohibiting such treatnent plants or,conversely, if they rrere allowed, rrhat conditions would be applied. we are certainly willing to amend our Plans accordingly. we do notenvision the use of private iraster{rater treatnent plans in our ruralarea in any rray in the future. I{e note that as of 1986 and theLake Ann Interceptor Agreement, se have adopted current standardsfor regulating on-site rrasterrater disposal and have also takensteps to significantly linit the developrnent potential of areasoutside the MUSA systen. Any developnent that occurs within the MUSA is obligated to hook in to City facilities. There is,however, one exception that is going to be considered by the City. Under the neu Dletropol.itan Council Rural Area cuidelines, the Cityis re-exaraining our policies in the interests of favoring cLustered deveJ.opnent without changing the 1 unit per 10 acre density. It isconceivabLe that uhen developnent is clustered that ue nay elect toutilize some sort of conmon drain field system designed so thatthis could be elininated at sone point in the future ind hooked into city lines as they becone availabte. Horrever, even in thisinstance f do not beLieve that these would be classified as privatewastewater treatnent plants. The City is pleased vith t{r. Frostls generally conplirnentary reviewof our water guality, water Danageruent and yetland protectionefforts. we are proud that our conmunLty ls in the foiefront ofthose who are attenpting to develop responsibly. The nemo points out problens that the Council and Minnesota Boardof water and Soil Resources are currently having vith the Riley-Purgatory-B1uf f Creek Watershed District r s Watershed l.{anaqenentPlan. It has been noted in several ueetings that Chanhaisen,sefforts appear to be nore sensitive than the Watershed DistrictrsPIan. we really do not have a desLre to get enbroiled in what hasbecorne a controversy except to note that- we do have good workingrelationships with the Watershed District and f wouid also hop6that we r{ould have_ sinilarly good working relatlonships wilhappropriate Metropolitan Council staff. t{e have denronstrated thatthe city is willing to undertake aLf reasonable efforts in safeguarding water quality and rre are uilling to work uith rrhoneveris sirnilarly interested. As far as adopting the }{PCA guidelines onBest llanagenent Practices for Protecting Water euality in UrbanAreas goes, the City is rilling to undertake any reasonableneasures that can address this issue. We have subnittedsubstantial anounts of infornation to the Council staff indicatingour current developnent and environmental protection practices, which I would beLieve address nost of what is contained in ttre UpCamanual. If there are any identified omissions in our prograns, wewould certainly consider anending then accordingly so long as costswere reasonable and that the City hail an ability to adninister theprogram. Richard Thompson, I.letropolitan Councilcity Response to Issues RaisedApril 18, 1991 .Page 7 TRANS PORTATION REGIONAL TRANSIT BOARD COMI,{ENTS fn discussions with Anne Braden, we have been nade aware that thereare one or trro inconsistencies in the functional classificationsysten identified by the City relative to IiInDOT r s classificationand the uetropolitan Council classifications. The classificationsystem outlined in the Chanhassen plan cones fron thd EasternCarver county Transportation Study. This is a recently courpleteddocunent that was prepared by a number of Carirer Countyrnunicipalities in coordinatlon uith Carver County. Thaclassification systen that was developed represented our bestattenpts to get a handle on the transportation systen out here. weclearly need to undertake a next step in this process, which is tosit down with Hennepin County, UnDOT staff, Metropolitan Councilstaff and neighboring communities in Hennepin County and rrork outdifferences or issues that nay arise. Anne Braden has raised aconcern regarding the functional classification of County Road 17in Chanhassen as it uould intersect with an interchange with Highway 212. I believe that she has ldentified an inconsis€ency inthe Eastern Carver County Transportation Study that needs to becorrected. As I explained to Anne, I think we are talking aboutthe sane thing as we have identified County Road 17 as a roid thatwill need to be expanded to four Lane status so that it can arnplyserve as a north/south route betueen Highway 5 and the lrlinnesotaRiver and utilizi the interchange effectivel-y with Highway 212. In a neno from Garneth Peterson, there are fi,ve sonewhat ninorcomments that ue believe can be responded to quickly. TheSouthvrest Metro Park and Ride Study does include TDM neasures thatqrere incLuded for discusslon purposes only. we have begrun aprocess with the Eastern Carver County Transportatlon Study whLreinissues such as this can be discussed on an inter-corununi€y basis.Chanhassen is willing to make reasonable efforts wittr TDMstrategies, but rre believe that they must be incorporated in a Richard Thonpson, Metropolitan CouncilCity Response to Issues RaisedApril 18, !991 Page 8 There was a coDnent that we should include a discussion on LRT inour Plan. We believe ne have done so to the extent that it isvrarranted, but since no one is contenplating bringing LRT to chanhassen within the next 20 years, i€ is rittrer ditficu:.t toprovide additional inforoation. If there are specific Lssues thatwe should resolve, rre would like to be made aware of them so wecould do so. The city is actively norking to supply transportation services tothe elderly and persons with disabilities. As you are aware, weare an Opt-Out conmunity and uork closely with Southwest l,[etroTransit. carver County RuraL Transportation services does servethe cornrnuni.ty as does Uetro Uobility. In addition, the South ShoreSenior center in Excelsior, which Chanhassen helps to subsidizethrough CDBG funds, also has a van service that is available forour cornmunity. Chanhassen has recently created a Senior Needs TaskForce and is studying Long tern prograns of inprovingtransportation for our seniors with 1ocalIy based efforts. HOUS ING coordinated Danner with surrounding nunicipalities and can only beeffective if done in conjunction witb area businesses. We bel.ievethat this wiLl be a groring field of interest for aL1 concernedover the comS.ng decade. Maps contained in the current document are not final . We tri1I beprinting final naps that will illustrate Park and Ride locationsand LRT corridors after the Plan is finalJ.y approved by theMetropolitan Council and no nore changes are conteDplated. Audrey Doherty in her Housing neno raised several. points that Ibelieve were to supplenent a Deno she prepared on an earlierversion of a draft of the Housing Section last year. There arefour specific questions raised in the lilarch 11, 1991 neno. The first concerns identification of various rental costranges to obtain a clear picture of the Cityts housing. I{ehave not yet gathered this infornation, but it should berelatively sinple to do so slnce there are few rental unitsavailable in our connunity at this tine. I rrould also thinkthat this data is available in coumercially avaitable products such as those produced by conpani.es seeking to market rentalunits. 1 2 The numbers and t14>es of publicly assisted housing unj.ts wasreguested. The sinple ansrrer is that to the best of myknowledge, we have none ulthin Chanhassen corporate linits.we do, however, have a 60 unit building that Has recently 3 Richard Thonpson, tletropol itan CouncilCity Response to Issues RaisedApril 18, 1991 Page 9 conpleted in our dortrntovn area wherei.n 20* of the units arereserved for Lor.r and noderate incoroe households, but this was a City sponsored project with financing assistance provided byour Housing and Redevelopnent Authority. Current and proj ected enploynent opportunities are containedelsewhere in our Pl.an subnittal. 4, Households incone data is requested. This uilI not beavailable until census data is supplied at rrhich tine we wil.1be happy to send this along. The Housing Section was basically found to be acceptable exceptthat it was noted that there vere no policies or tools identifieitfor achieving goaLs such as the provision of a Dix of housingstyles and cost ranges. If there are any tools or progransavailable for use in a cornmunity such as ours, we are not Lware ofthem.' If there are opportunities rre are nissing, we would bepleased to be educated in this area. It Eeens as thougb we havebeen asked to develop an inplenentation plan for housing when thereis realJ.y very little in the uay of functional tools foi us to use. We should note, however, that the City is in the early stages ofassessing the viability of City sponsored Dodest cost housing forthe elderIy. As far as the rental Earket goes, .we have again takenresponsibility for creating sone new housing opportunities in ourdowntown and note that our ability to attract rental housingopportunities is lirniteil by the sane narket force that inpacthousing anywhere else Ln the Eetro area. If additional infornalionthat is useful to us can be provided, ue would be pleased toincorporate it into our plans since rre belleve that we have conmongoals with the Councilts Housing staff. Mayor and city Council Planning Commission Conprehensive Plan File EH[NH.[ESEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O, BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 CITY OF CHANHASSEN FAX COVER LETTER Fax Number: 937-5739 DATE: i-iltc hr COMPANY:Ole-hr.o u"vra \ ATTENTION:€_ FAX NUMBER:'f,"1^. * 2<l-b4 cT Jql-bssD FROM :a"\\G s5LL Seniling a total of 7 pages you do not receive all pages, oin transmission, please call 93assistance. Thank you. ,ira7-t ncluding tbi sre experiencin 900 and ask fo er page. Ifther problems pera tor cov 9oro \le-.g \s vk inPonnahot W^ ryM' 6N5).ra.ls h $tlo.^,' tak, +Lts ,-.,ee[ M i g.-f.* io 3c\.--Tl^o7ra.t. 1)<nne.g.-r Cac a\/Ct^"ll.;,rs,t,o un4b9*ut = l?ge szls ?o9+ tlt \ ta$4 e.-gl",'\n€.*n = 2L1o'? wls .t * &"- no+ r-te- o ,-doq i,g"F l^-14 E4v;.e. 9e-^g{az. An reJ't; 1 CITY OF Telcphonc Ful1 ttne part ttoe !::i:;.Proposed Expant i on OFPI CE,/ I NDUSTRI AL J..Apple Va1ley Red-E- t',i xr 2.Autohated BulldIng conponents 3.lutonot ive Unl inited-Unlon ?6.Color Respons .Brenden Excavat ing . Component Engln!er lng .D6L Hachine .Data Se!v .Dayco Concr e tr 0. Dexter Htsgnatic l.E,nerson EHC {?{-?085 829-6000 41 4-5246 3 6 0 r1 5 5 1r8 9r1 1 432-1t!2 93?-9060 r7{-9611 937-5005 474-0909 47 4-0992 448-26t2 934-0414 93{-3301 4?{-5669 4?a-8100 93{-4955 4?t-0951 {?{-5258 93{-2455 a?a-81ta 93a-O5?6 a7a-51a5 4 3so 13 23 15 215 10 t2 58 2 53 35 1 12 1 50 3 I 270 5 2 15 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 E 2l0I 12 , Enpa k l3.Energy Cont! o ls,Inc.1{.Fitness Ha stct 15. Gedney, H. A. Coripa nylS.Heating EC 17. Hend! i cLson Bros. Dryua 1l lS.Holasek G!eenhouses I nc.l9.Industrial Inf o. Cont r o 1s 20.InnovatlvePlBstlcs, Inc. 21.I nstent lleb. 22. JtR 's Rad i at o! Repalz 23.L!kcsho!e Equlpnent Co. 2l.Lr lsu!e des lont 25.Lyn'an Lutnbrr 25.!{ack tnnon HoDG I npr ovcnent 2?.LSR Nlnl Stor.EC 28. llar lne F I be!gl.sE 29.HcGlynn Bakcr lc!30.He!tt HVAC 31.llurphy Ha ch lnc32.N.tur.l GrrlD,Inc. 33.PHT Co!po!.t l on3{.P!lslcy Pa!k35.Plpcr Plurnblngr 36.?hc Prcss, Ine. 3T.Progrcss v!llcy Storrgrr 38 . Rcdlnondt Prodtuctr {7{-1116 41 4-3282 4?{-0295 35 150 1 23,0{8 1a5,000 15,380 o 55,000 150,000 50,000 125, ooo 15,808 200,000 1,332 3 0 30r 2a0 5a, 391 175r 000 2Sr 000 93t-2227111-1ttt t7 a-L723 a?a-0931 I ? a-11a 5 a?0-0856 t1 t-620t 931-2207 937-9?6a ar8-5626 2 350 26 7 60 92 16 3 285I 89 r 000 2r737 2l,392 a5r 150 9 3 a -5308 6 39,980 300,000 ' flenn3'-r Ciu,\ F'n"r' BUSINESSES tN CHANHASSEN +o\Cr\ = I2O 6 TESs 1 0 0 l?,50020 ??,690 3 13 51I Pagc 1 250 39.Roberts lutotflatlc 40.Rorne Roos {l.RoseEount I nc. 39.Tonka Insulatlon,/ Xulhchak Bu l lders {0. Top Tur f {1. Un i tedUaillngrInc.l2.ver-Sa-Tl1 Ass.{3.Victoly Enve I ope{i!.Volk Truck lng & Excva t i ngl5.tlaytek Inc. t5.RPH Stud i o TOTALl.Allstate fnsu!ance 2. Atner l can Leglon PoBt 580 3.lnirna1 Fair {.Anh-Le Restaurant 5.1!bo!etum 5.Attorneys oi Chanhassen 7.Benson, Ste phen./Tester, David, DDS8.Big A Auto parts 9.Brook,s Supe! ettel0.Brovn's Standard Sta t i on 11. Canp Ta nad oona12.Chrlet Pizza 13. Chanhassen Bait and Ta ck 1e 1{. Chanhassen Bank 15. Chanhassen Bovl/Fillyts 15. Chanhassen Chl ld Deve l opnent 1?. Chanhassen Chi r op!rct lc Cc nt. r lS.Chanhassen'Dlnncr ?hrr tc!,/Conplcx 19.Chenhasscn Fant lyHedical cl lnlc 20. Chenhassrn l{rd I c! I C.nt€! 21 . Ch!nh!ss!n G!ooDr!s 22. Chanhassen Inn l.lote L 23. Chenhassen Xltchen and B!th 2l.Chanhass.n Laenrnd Spolts 25. Chanhessen Ph.!nacy BUSINESSES IN CHANHASSEN 50 120 1000 2 93r-?298 47 4-4L82 2 3{5 200 1a0 1 941-5550 41 4-7 857 949-2{00 r7 4-3264 4?{-5105 9a9-0?65 47 4-470r 330,000 500, o0o 55 150,0?2 98,000 117r593 21,960 10000 934-005{ 93{-66?? 1{5I 1? 1 5 {0 2 1 3 60 a5{? 1 6 934-0{{4 949-1125 443-2{60 93{-?98? 93{-5133 9{9-2837 934-2155 {7{-8085 937-5007 93{-0?89 931-2265 93{-6503 {7{-5338 93r-r500 93{-1500 93r-05?0 93a-5688 9 3 t-?373 93a-5?05 93{-5303 93r-5258 2 3 3 5 0 1 1 19 6 0 0 1 2 2 3 10 t0 12 I 110 5 1a0 I 1 L2 0 2 3 I 5 3 9 1 17 a0 C Prgc 2 25.Chanhassen Secretarial Se!vi ces 2T.Chahhass!n Taco Shop 28 . Cha nhas se n Vete! inaly Clinic 29.Chanhassen Vtde o 30. CoBnun i cat I ons lt or 1d3l.Country Clr.n Laundry e Cleaners 32. Country Suttes 33.Crossroads Nat l ona1 Eank3{.Custom 0utckPrlnting/Clcaner 35. Derhaag t'rot o!Sports, Inc. 36.Dolphin'Constructi on 3?. Doni noes plzza 38. Fite Systern39.Frontie! Jeue l er s 4 0, Ga! denee!, f nc. 11. Glenr ose F1o! a 1{2.cleEte Pr I nts{3.Hair !o! cuys tDolls {{.Ho11ov Haven Fa!a {5. Hol iday Statlon Stores 4 5. Hooked on Classlcs lT.Ivan I s Sinclatt &luto Repa !taS.Jeuelry Out lct 19.K 6 A Ass oc I rt.s 50.The Nalpet R i ngd otn 51 .XrDpfelt Salcs.nd l.!a!kettng 52.Xennyrs Supcrllr!kct 53 .l( 1 i nge thutz Rea ltors5{.Xloya Colp 55.Lakevay Clcancrs56.Lltt1c Cc.scls Plza 5?.Lotus Rcaliy 58.t{c}t Llguor 59.xal lbu Tannlng S0.IlcDonaldrs Re s t! ur !nt 61 .Her1ln I c Ha!dea!! H.nh62.!t!111..! Dclt BUS I NESSES 93t-3903 934-227\ 93{-8852 93{-8{02 93{-0872 93{-3333 931-2t2 4 9{9-9000 9{9-233{ 93{-0{?2 IN CHANHASSEN 1 2 2 6 a 0 3 I 5 2 { 0 8 1 2 1 4 1 4 5 3 2 3 1 151 12 0 1 0 16 93a-a53I 9 3? -9 300 93a-0112 93r-8530 934-E515 93{-5525 93?-1891 93a-?12{ 93t-3530 93r-0000 9 r9-9??? 5 2 1 60 1 1 I I I 3 9 t2 5 1 0 7 93r-8??8 93t-2301 ao 2 7 {48-1899 3 1 1 5 2 a 2 93{-68?8 93?-0102 93{-7115 934-2244 93{-3{3{ 93{-{1?0 5t 5-?? { 1 934-1t50 937-2221 93a-0t03 I 2 Prgc 3 BUSINESSES IN CHANHASSEN 11 9 1 5 6 5 3 8 0 5 25 3 5 I 3 1o 1 5 20 2 3 0 33 1 5 2 1 3I 2 I 3 ? a 6 t2 0 0 0 3 2 1 7 3 7 1 2t 3 ,1 7 s32 50?9 Pagc I a1 3 3 6?5 821TOTAL I,/O,/C 63.!'tinnetonka Destgn 93a-?4{0 54.Hinnetonka Husic 41 4-327765. Hoore Slgn co 4?4-911{ 55. Nev Boundary 41 4-0924 Des i gns 5?.Nev Ho!lzon 9{9-9058 Daycare 68. NeY Revolution 93{-5gOO69.No!thvestHoEe t?O-1?99 Ca! e70.Pau1rys 93a-3030Restau!ant 71.Peterson, SteveD- 934-9323lttorney et Lrv 72. Pos lt lve Ilrages {?l-S31{ ?3. Pra ir ie Housc 934-O{{1Restaurant ?{.Pr ofess i onal a?{-1168 Insu!ance l,la!keting 75. Total Nart 93{-8?23 ?6 . R&Il Sanitation t?4-1813?T.Riviera 93a-93{0RestBurant & Lounge 78. Rodenz, Da!re11, 931-131? LP} ?9. Rorne Devcloptnent, 47 4-Zl2SInc. 80. Sa fet!onl cs, fnc. 93{-59?9 81. Safar i Tannlng 93{-5?85 Hut 82. Sal enos {?0-9lOO 83. Schne ldcr 934-8000Insurance lgcncy8{.Scott's 93{-299{lutomottve Repa 1! 85. Sophist I -cuts 47 t-153385.Spa!kllngLtne 55t-555187.State Bank of 937-2265 Chanhassen 88. Strrete! lndlus 9 3l -59 ??ReaIty ttor ld 89. Subuay a?0-53?390.s,/A tt5-155191.S./r (Huy ?/11) a?a-9t0592.Ttubcrg ?revcl93.Vcrnco 931-?8?1llalnten!ncr, lnc.9l.Vldleo Expl os t on 95.Vldeo Updatc96.Vl11egcr 93|-5OOO Nevspapc! 9?.Testcrnann rs llt 9 3l-51?9 98.Your HaJcstyrE 93t-9602Valet Cl.anrtr TO?IL 10 Fir-,; tlnal Bli l) ern BUsrNEssEs rN cHANHAssEN *:)uf;Ib,r*t, i**, +ot"Q = Lg.ol ]ro9s *relcphone Full ttne Part tine ;::i:;. Eili:ii:" OFFI CEl I NDUSTRI AL 1. Apple Va11ey Red-E- l'iix 2.lutotnated Building corDpone nts 3.lutotnotive Unl inited-Union ?Gl.Color Respons 5.Brcnden Excavat ing 6. CoDpon.nt Enginee!lng 7. DEL Hach I ne 8. D.t. Se!v 9. Dayco Conc! e t e 10. Dexte! HEgnatic 1l.Ene!son EHC l2.Enpak 13. Ener gy Cont r o 1s, Inc.la.Fitness Ha stet 15. Gedney, H. A. Conpa ny 16. Heat in9 Ec 17.Hendr icLson B!os. D!yua11 lS.Holasek G!eenhouses Inc. 19.I ndustr ial I nfo. Cont!o1s 20.Innovetlve Plest i cs, Inc. 21.I nst.nt lleb 22. J&R ' s Rrdiato! Repa I r 23.Lakcshore Equipnent Co.2{.Lelsure dcs lgn 25.Lyrnan Lurnber 26.Hacklnnon HoDe I tnp! ovrDent 2?.LSR Ntnl Stollgr 28.Her lne Fl bcrglass 29.!{cGlynn Bakrr l.s30.Herlt HVAC 31.Murphy ttachtnc 32. N.tur.l G!. e tr,Inc. 33 . PllT Corporatlon3{.Palslcy pslk 35.Plpc!. P).umblng 36. Thc P!Gss, I nc. 3?.Progrcss Va l leyStor.g. 3S.Redlnond Pr oducts 432-1t32 937-9050 4 7{ -9 511 937-5005 {?{-0909 {?{-?085 829-5000 414-3246 4?{-0992 448-26t2 93rl-0{1{ 934-3301 r74-5559 {?a-8100 93{-a955 {7r-0951 {?{-5258 93{-2t55 t2 2 53 1 t2 tl 350 73 23 75 275 10 I 0 1 3 6 0 , 23r 0{8 1t5,000 16,380 0 55,000 2 15 1 15r 808 0 200r 000 1,332 3 0 30,2t0 5t,391 1?5r 000 251 000 21.392 4 5r 130 2r737 150,000 50,000 125, ooo r ? I -1115 41 4-5282 41 4-029 6 35 150 50 1 I 210 5 2 0 1 a?a-81at 93{-0575 a?a -51t 5 13 5tI 931-2221 17 t-7 tti r7a-1?25 a 7 a-09 31 a?a-11t5 2 350 26 7 50 { ?0-08 6 6 a7 t-6204 937-2201 93?-9?6a {a8-5526 0 0 0 0 2 8 2l0 1 3 2e5I 92 16 250 6 39,980 3OO,OOO * no aR€-y+ n'aJe-{o c€v..r* r-c{r. i[ O F scrrr.c r. ?.a^gl916e 6a- 93r-530E Prgc 1 58 35 0 {?,50020 77.690 3 3 89 r 000 BUSINESSES IN CHANHASSEN 50' 39.Robe!ts lutonatic 40.Rone Roosr 41. Roseurount Inc. 39.Tonka I nsulat i onl Xu! rncha k Bu i 1de!sl0.Top Tu! ! {1.UnitedHailing,Inc.r 12. Ver -Sa -Ti 1 Ass. 43. Victo!y Enve l opea{.volk Trucking & Excvat ingr a 5. ll.yte k t Dc. a5,RPH Studio TOTETl.Allstate fnsurence 2.Aner lcan LegtonPost 580 3.Anirna1 Fair a,Anh-Le Restau!ant 5.Arbo!etun 6.Attorneys of Chanhassen 7. Bens on, S te phe n/Tcste!, Davi d, DDS 8. Big A auto Palts 9. Br ook 's Supe!ettrl0.Brounrs Standard Stat i on 11 . Canp Tanadoona 12.Cha1et Pizza .13.Chanhassen Baitrnd Ta ck 1e 1{.Chanhassen Bank l5.Chanhassen Boy1,/ F!11yrs l6.Chanhassen Ch t 1dt Deve l opncnt 1?. Chanhasscn Chlropracttc Crntcr l8.Chanhassen'Dinncr Th!a ter,/Conplcx l9.Chanhasscn Fanl lyHcdtcal Cl lnlc 20. Chanhisscn Xcdtcal Ccnt.r 21. Ch.nh!ss!n Groona rs 22. Chenhassen tnn Note I 23. Chanhassen l(l tchen anil Bath 21. Chanhrsscn Laen.nd Spolts 25. Chenbasscn Pha r na cy 941-5550 47 4-7 851 93{-?298 17 4- 4L82 9{9-0?65 11 4- 47 01 93{-798? 93{-5133 9 49 -2837 93{-2155 120 1000 2 330,000 500, ooo 55 150,0?2 98,000 1{?r 593 {0 5 2 3a5 949-2{00 47 4-3264 {?{-5105 17 110 5 10 {0 t2 1 934-005{ 934-557? 145 1 1? 93{-0{{{ 9 {9-1125 443-2r60 1 3 60 a5{7 1 6 {?4-8085 93?-6007 93{-0?89 I 2 2 3 2 3 3 5 0 1 1 19 6 0 0 I 5 3 9 I 931-2263 934-6503 {?r-5338 93r-a500 93r-1500 93a-05?0 93r-55EI 93t-73?3 9 3 a-5? 05 93a-5303 93a-5258 1t0 I P.Ee 2 I 12 0 2 3 24,960 10000 200 1t0 1 1 5 {0 2 2S.Chanhassen Sec!eta!ia1 Se!vi ces 2?.Chanhassen Taco Shop 2 8. Chanha s s enVete!inary Clinic 29.Chanhassen video 30.Conmunications llorld 31. Country Clean Laundry e Cleaners 32. Country Su t tes 33. Cr osst oadsNational Bank3{.Custon Qui ck Pr I nt I ng /Cl eane! 35.Derhaag Hot orSports, Inc. 36.Dolphin.Construction 3?.Doninoes Pi zza38.Fire System39.F!ontie! Jeue 1e r s40.Gardeneer, lnc. 11. Glenr ose Fl o!a 1{2.G!eEte pr i ntsl3.Hair fo! cuys tDolls{{.Hol1ov Haven FalD l5.Hol iday Station Sto!es l6.Hooked onCl.sslcsl?.Ivan's Sl ncla l! Gluto Repa i!lS.Jevelry Outlett9.X & A As s oc l. tls 50.Thc Kalpet X I ngil on 51 . Xcrnpf cr t Salcs !ndl XaEkctlnE 52.Xrnny's Supcr Xr!ket 53. Xl tngclhutz Rcaltors 5,1 .Xloua Corp 55.Lakcuay Cleancrs56.Ltttl,e Cc.srls Ptza 5?. Lotus Realty 58.HcH L I quot 59.Hal lbu Tannlng 60.!{cDonaldrc Bc s t! ur ant 61.Herl,1nrs Hardyarc H!nh52.Xl11lctr D!ll BUS I NES SES 934-3903 93{-2211 93{-8862 93t-8{02 934-0872 93{-3333 9 37 -2124 9{9-9000 9{9-233{ {{8-1899 934-0t72 IN CHANHASSEN 1 2 2 6 4 0 3 1 5 2 a 0 8I 2 1 4 3 1 1 5 2 1 2 1 4 5 3 2 3 1 I 2 151 12 0 1 0 93{-8615 93{-5525 937-189{ 93r-{170 934-7t24 5{5-77{1 93r-1r60 937-222t 93t-r538 9 37-9300 9 3 r -0112 93a-8530 93a-0r03 93r-3530 93r-0000 9 a9-9??? 5 2 1 60 1 1 1 { I 3 9l2 16 93t-E77I 5 193r-2301 Pagc 3 93{-58?8 937-0102 9 3 { -7115 934-224e 93{-3{34 0 7 a0 2 7 BUSINESSES IN CHANHASSEN 63.l,tinnetonka Des t 9n5{.Hinnetonka Husic65. Hoore Sign Co 66.Neu Boundary Des i gns 57.Neu Horizon Dayca ! e 68.Ney Revol ut i on 69 .Northvest Hone Car e ?0.Plul I ys Rcstau!ant ?1.Peterson, Stevcn-Ittorney at Lay?2.Positlve fnages ?3.Pra ir te House Rcstaurant7{.P!ofessional tnsurance !.ra!keting75.Total Har t ?6.R&H Sanitetion , r.t{tvlera ReE tau!ant & Lounge ? 8. Rodenz, Dat re 11, LP} 79.Rone Deve l opne nt, Inc. 80. Sa fet!oni cs, I nc. 81. Sa far i TEnning Hut S2.Salenos S3.Schnelder lnsurance Agcncy8l.Scott's' lutolnotive Repa ltS5.Sophisti-cuts 86. Spa!k l lng LtDr 8?. St.tc Bank of Chanhassen 38. Strr.te! lnatru!Rc.lty ttot ld 89.Subvay 90.s,/r 91.S,/A (Hvy ?./11) 92.?lnberg travcl93.vrtnco llatntcnance, IDc.9{.Vldco Expl os t on95.Vldco Updlatc 95.Vl1lager Ncvspapc! 9 ?.Iestcrrrann I s lrt 98.Your lt.JcstyrsV.lrt Cleanc!! TOTTL 934-?{{0 41 4-3277 a ? 4 -9114 t7 4-0924 9 1 5 5 q 3 8 9{9-9055 93{-5500 {?0-1?98 93{-3030 93{-9323 11 0 0 0 3 2 I 1 3 7 5 ? 6 I 3 10 1 {?{-5314 93{-0{{1 2{?{-1158 93{-8?73 4 7 4 -1813 93{-9340 934-134? 47 4-2125 93{-59?9 93{-5785 {70-9100 93{-8000 r?a-7553 55r -5551 937 -2253 93r-597? a?0-53?3 a t 5-155{ a?a-9t05 93{-?8?1 93t-5000 9 3 t -51?9 93t-9502 3 0 33 1 5 2 1 3 1 2 1 2l t1 3 3 6?6 t21IOT^L r/o/c 0 5 2 10 1 3 ?I 6 5 20 93{-299{ o, .1 7 532 50?9 P.Er a 12 Cit, Council lleeting January .7, L99L tlayor Chhiel: Yes, maybe ue can have that. Steve? l1a yo r Chmiel: Thank you. Larrv vanOeveire: Excuse ne, if r oright add. Even if it uasn't changed back toa neighborhood conmercial, r guess the nain thing r have is r just doi'i feelthat it's suited for residential. Like r say, r c,ouldn't rive-there. r didn'task anvone else to Iive there and r'o stirl not asking that. r drive nu"..or"miles around the netro area and r can't recall any ini:rsection, rori iin"lighted intersection uith housing on the corner. Neu housing. -rt tnri. i"housing there, it's old housing. rf it's verv old housing, i lot ot that oldhousing has been turned into a coonercial cstabrishoent. -An rnsuranceestablishment. Stuff like that. If there are any old houses, rhat the raingoal uas to have chanhassen rook nice, uhat I've noticed is that you "". privacyfences up on those, you knou stockade type fences up if there are'older-housesthere that haven't been converted to conrrerciar use. r guess that,s alr r have. tla)/or Chmiel: okay, thank you. fs there anyone else? Jerome Carlson: tlr. llayor. lly naoe is Jerome Carlson. 6950 Chanhasscn but ifvou're going to nail us sonething you'd better rake it Excelsior. rt lilr neverget there. But that's a different issue. I uould like to start on i positivenote and congratulate the.Zoning and planning rnd the council and anibody elsethat has uorked hard on this plan. I na), or ray not rgree uith it entirely butf do respect the trenrendous tioe and effort that has bien put inio iti" "o.t otthing. ,Our particular property is right up here. rt runs through the-north endof Harrison Lake and I think sorre of ,,ou lre perhaps familiai;iih ii. "i rust that u,as part of the discussion baqk then. The revisional changes back and kept it as residential uas some of the thoughts that r,rere come back into thai particular ioning. llaybe you cah elaborate onbit more PauI. PauI Krauss: l1r. llayor, it's J<ind o{ tough to go back in your mind and figure,you knor,r try to remenrber exactly uhy al1 the changes uere nade that uere oade.rnitiallv at a staff level r,rhen ue prepared a draft of the plan, ue felt thatthat uas an acceptable neighborhood commercial site. It,s Iimited scope.Ihere's not a ]ot of acreage there and as you can see, there's a proposar for afrontage road to cone across the front of it so that rourd take sooe of theground that already is there. That there probably is going to be sone desire atsome point to have neighborhbod commercial type services prior to turning intoyour neighborhood area. I don't recall it being a najor issue during theconsideration but it did receive some attention and some concerns uei raised byresidents in the Deetings over the sumDer and it uas one of those changes thatuas made. r don't knour uhat else r can offer unless the planning commissionErsthat are here ton.ight can add to the rationale to it. t hat trent t here and t hat a little steve Emmings: ..,recollect the change but r do knoul that uhen complaints L,erevoiced..' 0n a more positive note, ue also thought that the intersection ofTH 5 and TH 41 uras a.lmost certain to develop uith sone commercial uses thatr,rould be the same type that uould deveLoper at that corner and ue thought thatbeltieen the dountoun and !,hat urould exist at TH.ll and TH 5 rrould piobibly beadequate to serve the needs of the people in that area. * 9 : 3ity council lleet in9 January 7, Li9L admit this u,as the first tine I noticed the green space, park and open space. Ihat uould cut us right in half aloost. I uant to point that out and I must object to that if it uere to be something that uould be seriously enacted during any time that ue Iive there. If r,re sold and subdivided or some such thing, I can appreciate at that time the desire to move in the direction of a trail system but the ulay our property currently lays out, that really does include perhaps at ]east a quarter of a nrile right through the heart of our property and so I nust simply go on record and object to that happening uhile ue oun the property or if r,re uere to sell it in bulk. The other thing that I really uantedto comment on uas the potential for tax increases. Our concern, uhen roe bought the property originally, very briefly, it uas checked uith the city and our indication uras that it uould be 2005 or sometine like that before there r,rould be any rezoning r,rhich ure thought uas a good idea and sounded ]ike sonething ue Uanted. This of course is happening subsequent to that and I'm not opposed tothe fact that changes occur. They happen in business all the tinre. !,hat I'it concerned about is again uhile ue live there, does the rezoning affect the rateat uhich our taxes uill increase or are they going to decrease llr. llayor? you don't have to ansuer that. llayo r Chnriel: I can't. Jerohe Carlson: The have no int ent ion of concern is developing our taxes uill increase or are Jerohe Carlson: And no natter presunrably af fect that? a result of rezoning of property that !,e time, does that affect the rate at uhich be based upon current use? t hat as at t his taxes to Oon Ashr,rorth: They're based upon current use. Jerone Carlson: So if ue live there and la have a feu horses there and maybe even sonle beef, if that's permissible, ue'II check uith you. ft's based upon t hat use ? uhat color the), paint it, it isn't 9oin9 to hypothetically ),ou could see some increase. It,s reaIIy Commissioner Klingelhutz li]I agree u,ith that point.f you have anything to add. AI Klingelhutz: Actuallv r,re had orin Shafer at one of the hearings and that uasa big discussion from a rot of the large lot areas. He said anything that !,asin those areas, because of the rezoning of the entire area uould not change thetaxes except as values 90 up in the entire rural area that you can expect to seean increase there but overall the idea of the zoning arone uould not changethat. PauI Krauss: If I could expand on that a little bit. The l.and use plan is aguide for future development. Your property Jerone, unless you uant to nake.a change or sell. it to somebody that does, uill remain uith it's agriculturaldesignation. AIso green acres and uhatever other tax provisions you operateunder are uholly separate of uhatevar ue do here and there r,rould be no Oon Asht,orth: You could be infl.uenced by other Large lot rural values. Ifrural values i ncreas on the use. I think And PauI, I don't kn ed, Al,oui 10 Oon Ashuorfh: That's correct. Ci: y Council Heet in9 January 7, L99L n. Jeron e Carlson; that? Lle have nentioned the front 13 on TH 41? Ue've talked about .PauL Krauss: yes. ,lerome CarLson: Thank you very rruch. Thoie lere ny pritary coDcerns. llayor .Chmiel: Verlr good. Ihank you. Just as a quick plug for the Council. Uahave,'as vou r,rell knou in the past ? vears, Iouered taxls ior-ttro". iili ,.r"reassessed. I alr,rays like to bring that rp b"."rs. it's very Oiiii;iiil-to t.yto keep things doun and ue have. Arso again this year therais going-io ue.slisht reduction but tre can,t euarante. rhat eiinei ttre coriti iisi;i iJ o. u,"School District but at ]east te knor,r r,rhere lelie at. AI Klingelhutz: ...ue get too nany nandated rules like building a neu jail... llaycr Chniel: you're r,ight and I understand that unfortunately. Gary [.larren: Relative to l1r. Carlson,s cotihent on.the park area on hispropertv. you night uant to addrass thrt but that is t'ta ieie-nnn'rnilrceptoreasement area ,hich the Lake Ann rnterceptor ras construction in rgiz-ig so thatis a pernanent easement area-on the proplrty. -i ttint ir,i-iiti, liil"-l"rtuants to address it, is looking to takc. heyor Chrliel: Is that a kind of !tsatent? could use it as. trril corridor andGary tlarren: Dual in the such? dual fac t t hat ue PauI Krauss: No. Gary tlarreh: There's I specific usa thlt uas for the Intlrcrptor alone. Jerome Carlson: I guess itr. llayor, that uas ry point. l,lhan re rere approachadabout srantins that easerent, re rrr! crrcful it"t it r." i""ingil'i"!l' u. r,.ano idea uhat oight come. Ue didn,t givc this rny thought at -;ii-aut -t;ere rasrt that tine a snoumobile trail that las utilizing tf,"i.oiiiaii iighi"it.oueh t1 underarinding ol that. It should be st ressed that this plan is not int ended t omake anybody develop their property or to force that decision to co me earlier ofraising propert y values.Lle've taken great efforts to try to trake sure t hatit's structured in such a !,ay that those decisions are made by people uhen t heyuant to nrake them and that there's no hint of coersion or a schedule or anyt hi n9else. In fact case ln int Carlson r a Pr nce' ar amou o re are seve r acres are vidua S t n0 o years a nd v!Jere s n9 e 0u AS tr,O eX c se o u e nc o n SUJ 09ue o ro as o exac t t 'rey n0 v s ever as ore. ue ouJ ne rs t ions o tst SO UE to t hat eity Council tleeting January 7, L99L our property so that llas our ihpetus at that tihe to rake sure that it u,asdefined. That rdas r,rhy ue raised the issue nou. Hayor Chmiel: okay, thank you. Is there anyohe else? 0ale Carlson: 0ale Carlson, 6900 Utica Lane in Chanhassen. I,n representing the Lake Luc), Homeouners Association and I just uanted to point out sooething that as I uras readi.ng the comprehensive plan, as it relates to Lake Lucy. I,o asking some consideration be given to a particular section relating to LakeLucy. A comment uas nade earlier that this cotiprehensive plan is to be used as a guide for the next decade and sonreone el,se rade a coDnent that it !,as nore than likaly to occur and I'd like to point out that in the recreational sectionof the comprehensive plan it states that the recomnendation is that Lake Lucy continue to be oaintained as a natural environment lake. I believe that everypl,ace I read, not onLy in the conrprehensive plan but also in the Lake Riley restoration project uork plan that so e of us knon so ueII, that there is verydefinite difference betueen an environrrental Iake and a recreational lake andI request that some consideration be given to including or reurording the plan so Lake Lucy be considered a recreational lake, not an environoental. Iake. Thank you. llayor Chmj.el: Okay, thank you Dale. Do you have any comnents on t hat Paul? of intent.Paul Krauss: I'lI1 not sure there's a conflict really in terms Possibly tlark could get into that a ]ittle bit. Oale Carlson: 0kay but I think that tero is...because if ule,re going to benaking decisions later on for exanple, I noticed in the coaprehensive plan underthe list natural environnent lakes, I see Rice llarsh Lake. Harrison, Lake St. Joe and Silver Lake and over under recreational developnent lakas I see... Inthat one section you refer to Lake Lucy as an environnental lake. Hark Koegler: l think the plan speaks lora to the shorcland developarentthan it does the actual lake or the use of the surface uatlr itself. ltetake a look at that. Pattern can Councilman t,in9: f uas just interested in hr. Carlson's nor! You obviously uant it to.be recreational. Can you define uhat concerns !,ere? Environnantal versus recreational. 0ale Carlson: Yeah ue, you guys right even be able There's some of you people on the Council that uere speci fic sone of concerns.your , to talk about that more. involved in the RiIey- L? llark Koegler: Yeah, I don't think the classification as the City has used,natural environnent lake in the CoDp Plen necessaril.y is parallel to tike the ONR classification of lakes. r think there's text, if r rernember correctly thatjust eludes to the more natural habitat and the fact that that ]ake contains large r.retland areas around it. It,s in that context that the term naturalenvironment. The term is not Deant to be ?xclusive of recreational usage of thelake itself. Lle can take a look at that tlxt but I think there's not really aconflict. I think itls a difference of terns. llayor Chmiel: Okay. Oick? EXr I Englnccr3 t Archltcctl April lt, l99l City of Chanhasscn 690 Coulrcr Drive Clanhassen, MN 55317 T.I Bonestroo Rosene Anderllk & Assoclates Oac 0 tr'l* rr ar, 6 A'rti. ?t 0t ,i C'rl,l ?rr4.; I tiarll ,! to.i 6 kia.a ,, t/r.,' V tnivr trA rr.d ( rert 2t lrtt{i I rr{'ria'lt 2, rr!., O {,iG, 2tl'E tr * tt rEr ,, ki t PritE fa I T I T Attn: Mr. Paul Krauss Re: Chanhasen Comprchensivc plan Our File No.39302 DeEr Paulr Enckred are rcvised Sewcred poputation,_Estirnarcd Scwage Ftorrs and MWCE Inrcrccpronrecrirns of the pubuc sewcr and warer Etemenr of rheiilitrir.i-clip-*iensire pran.Thcse sedkrns have been rcvJsed ro rcflecr thi iniinr"ing n"or, l) Metropolitan Councll commentr tn Jack Fro*r! 3/1&91 memo.?) thanhassen's growth projccrion of ,1,75 - 5.5/0..i) Pcak flow dau Aom our'mcmo of 3}ll9l.4) commerciar,{ndustiat tand absorption assuming 3aturation of thc expande4 MT,JSAby 2010. wc would be-happy to review rhc cncrrscrl rtara wirh rhc oty of chanhasscn and theMerroprliran C,ouncil at any mutually convenient time. Yours vcry truly, BONFSTRoO, ROSET\E, AI.TDERLK & NSOCIAT|S, INC.7,**y'*t"^;* Robcn G. Schunicht RGS:li Encl. 39302.RPT T I 2!t5 wcst Hlghwqy t6 r 3t. prul, Mlnncsot. 53ltt r 6t2{!646OO :rYt.i , &atr. ttl'r t brt ,tLnC *rrEr ^tahrna a ^r!$/t t! lltsirr,! A l..!t! rtArtl J aai.rrr rtn r^Lt ,t, ) f Crffar 2f}nli ^.Oatr. ,lg.,r t u/att ,3 tlliar , a!l!t ar^ 6..y , 4ianrr, ,I r sEnrRED POPUITTTON &wered population projcctions arc bascd on futurc populatiou proJcctioru lcs those residendal units wirh cxisting on-dtc sl,stcms that wil not bc connccted to tbc 3aldtary rcw€r'lystent. Otanhassen's April l, 1990 housing unit cstlmate b 4,113 as prcsenlcd h the Populatiorq Household and Eoplopocnt r?ction. Using an occupancy nte o1,95% would cquate to 3,907 uaiu being occupied. Thc City of Qranhassen estioatcs that in 1990 rpprodmatcly 413 units haw tbeir own ss$agc rcatment q6teEs. Tbcse units fall outsidc the MUSA linc urd ere not projcmed to coDncct to thc ChanhasseD eewage collection systcro h tbc aear futurc. Atlditioaat devclopment witb on.sitc reatoent is anticipatcd and thc total nuober of hdividual tcaEcnt rystems is projectcd to reach 6fl) by 2010. The following tablc presents projcctions of rcwerod households rnd scvcrcd populatiotu th,rough rbe year 2010. Tbe borschold projectioas lre bascd on a grcnflh rrltc ol 4.75 '55% u pr-sentcd on pagc 6 of the Populatiotl Houscholds and Eoployment scction. Se*crgd PoDulation ProjEctions Year Toul Occupied Scwercd HshldL r990 1995 2000 2005 20r0 3,,W 5,082 6Zs6 8,178 10,688 L14 L70 L70 2.65 2.6s 9,570 12,490 15,480 20,190 2q730 Total HIIUE Occupicd FIshlds. Oa-Sitc Treatmcnt llshlds. 413 457 523 560 500 Pcrsons Per E$ld$. Scwcre.d P9pulelion Nct Dcnslty 2.9 du/ac 7.0 dCec 10 du/rc 3,494 1,625 5,733 7,61E rq087 Occunangy 3.2 ildu ?-S gldo 1.7 gldu Scwage Gpncra- don Ratc r00 ccd r00 y'uo 100 gcld t,Od) gaUacre/day 1,000 gdacra/day 15-25 gallpcron/ttag- 12 gaVscat/rcrvicc 1,000 ga[aco/day ESTMATED SETI'AGE FI.OWS Flor projcctiors by tand usc rre as followc: l:nd Use Residential-LD Rcsidcntial-MD Rcsidcntial-HD Commercia! tndutrid Schools Churches Iadrstrial-Canpus 39302.RPT I i 4,113 5,350 6,586 q609 11,250 8o HESTROO & ASSOCIATES Aclording to the-MWCC rcsideurjat flows have becn nrnning sligbtly wcr 100 g/c/d at anesd,ated 0ow.of lfi g_cld.it.19$:^ f!:-C,ty'e efrors to ria,r# ph,ot" pi-.,i"h ff ,*expccted to reducc the 0ow below 100 g/c/d, In 1990, Chanhassen had a totd of 5d9 arcs of indusrigt and con,ncrcial property within thco<isting IvIUSA llnc scrved by puaicipal watcr. The csdEoatea! glrn nr i"tii;agc is 600ga1/acre/d-ay,- h-is anticipated that roiagc 0om will incrcasc to au cstimatcd aop'ot t,OoogaVacre/day by 2O10. Flor projections werc dcvcloped for erch of the thrcc II,{WCC laterccpton tbgr rcoclrc oowhom chaahassen. -Thcse projcctioas, ln five (5) year iocrements tborigh the ru zoro, "ripresented in tbc followiug tablc. T T I I T I I I I I 2. 393oZRPT I -RedsDdaL0lD-@I' SevercdYcar PoFlation Floul (MGD) A) SEORET}I,OD TI\1MCEIPIIoR 1990 3,m 300 1995 3Jm -gn zm 3,600 360 M 3,7m 3m 2oto 3'8m .380 AV]ERAGE DAILY FIOW P'IIOJECTIONS (MGD) CommerciaUlndustrial Area (ac-) f'Iow/(g/ac) Fltn (MGD) Total Flw (MGD) $ 300 330 360 .lm .380 .050 .080 .tm .105 .fl0 I \I t" BI PT'RGAIIORY CREEK INTERCEPN)R TI}UCK TAIG nI'.} 1990 6m .060 t995 8m .080 M Lm .100 N5 l,os .1o5 ztlo Llm .Irc I I I 3m02.RPT ,- EFEEE. FI H{HEHc.-6166 RRBtr8qqcqq EF o\oool,.rti')6rlerl^Faac.L qll O\<,(:)ol,)tlh(.l0r FeI\F1 (.I rFt .. FO\6ar\6YltcF(lriq6tqqqr<<GlGl HAE*E!r-Gl H$EE$r<F'tGl6 O\lrlC)FllaNN\gi6cv).:qF] - F EFEEE !l ao lr 3leEtb Et t EIE B Ei ot dIG ls d ()1 a >l?t tr l!I €i I I I II I .1 I I I I I T T I I I I I T T T T 3 AI(,l gB EI EI =l Elr EEgq#g LdeioI -,R88gBtihrtllrlraH'SSSS H 3 HEEFHF F3E3EYloddtlljFFGI BHSEB?r -61 6a N c OIx I Tbe majority of Chaatascn's wrstewarer llony is octcrerurcoorinsrla-miffiitlLr.A;r*,;;;i"il;;:'&HrT^1#:l-#frt:mJ;,:T ;rffiH,|to,}i **'rt urd peat o,,t i"i'ti'i LIil yr*t .i-friiiir"**nocd in rhe M413 nowpATA Year Averagc Flow (MGp) Pcal Flar (Mcp) Pcak o{Gp) Peak/ Average Ratio Pcak Day/ Avcrage Ratio Day t978 tn9 1980 t98l 1982 r983 1984 t985 r986 1987 1988 1989 1990r 0,397 0.46s 0,406 0.407 0.484 0.s79 0.664 0J91 0.586 0.556 0.605 3.595 2506 2.456 3.151 L537 3,U20 1900 zs90 3.r32 3.021 L7t5 9.060 5380 6.070 8.500 5,240 5,210 4,r70 4380 4J60 5.330 4.480 3.E10 1.165 7235 r.r86 1.87t 1,450 L072 1.980 lfrtT 2253 1.718 r.680 2000 1930 z@ L9Z0 4J30 3.000 3.630 zgx) 3.r40 3.300 3.300 z7w 0.867 3.300 2.3t0 &?#":iTl'.:H,1fi J"*tff .$.ymgff ffi :ffi"f, i*ffi#tff y:::l,f; ;l*'#tls#,',;t':*uf *;,f #*:,T*idf-fl.,H'ffifli[I;11,*,ffi utiig;f .H,il:#ff triit#ffi,:irmm.i;.-$,rm#trF,,jdt#i ralo 9f 4.6 New dcveropmcnr,wrrh unitary rr*"r, ir,*iuua tiri.a iiiiiffiL **rt ;iiilil",'fr ii::'"1"d'#,H"f,r#'-'H#f,- jtrfi Hl,ffi ,:#Hff Htrr#ln the following tabtc. r 5 montlu records 5. 39302RPT i I l. r I i I : ,t:--- DF{K nl,ow pno..rnc[roNs A) SIIOREWOOD INTERCEPNOR I I I 1 .I I I I I I I I I I Ycar 1990 1995 20w 2fi5 2010 Arcragc Flow orcp) Peal/Avg. RFtio 300 .030r .030 .010 .010 4.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 Pcak Flov (MGDL 4.276 0.356 o436 0.456 0.476 12fr 5.573 6,934 8.675 r0.92t B) puRcATORy CREEK TNIERCEPnOR 1990 r99s 2000 2005 2010 c) LAKE Ar\'t{/RED ROCX INTERCEPTOR .926 .,f38* .484 ,713 g27 .060 .0n .020 .005 .00s '1.6 4.0 '1.04.0 4.0 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 4.6 3.0 29 2,7 z6 ' Incremental floq6 added by nar devetopmcnt ovcr the past 5 ycrrs. Ir4VyCc INTERCEPToRS The MWCCo t988 Lakc Virgtds IJft Statton ard Foru ft onthesb;il&h;;],r"rJcavtngamprc.rp"riryiffi :l*;.ff [[ffi:Ir:#MGD frora northcrn Gaudasscu Thc Purgatory Gcck Intcrccptor, wblch rpcctvcs flw &9rr the Duct Lalc Road !rcE, hlssufficient capacity for rbe projeacd peak flows of JiO fr,fAO. 6. I t 39302.RPT t380 1.488 1J96 1.632 r.668 i?rz qrrl;i .f 39302.RPT ,ffi ri roo n -r--o WS+t'i11rnq-,X$,;;,-**m['migp,',Wm : i . : I I 7. J CITY OF EH[NH[EETN 690 COULTEB DRIVE. PO. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-s739 April 3, 19 91 !1r. Gordon Voss Chief Adninistrator Metropolitan Waste Control Connission l,lears Park Centre 230 East 5th StreetSt. Paul , I!{N 55101 Dear l1r. voss: I had an opportunity to attend one of the breakfast meetings on the 1992 to 2010 Inplementation Plan for the ltetropolitan Waste ControlConnission. I an pleased to see that the Comnission is continuingto undertake an outreach progran for local governnent and on behaliof the City of Chanhassen, we would like to rernain involved in theprocess. In reviewing the docurnent, the concern that f find f nust raise isrelative to Appendix B, Metropolitan Council policy plan Requirenents. Policy 1-1OA states that Metropolitan WastL WaterFacilities should serve only Lands located iniide the MUSA area. We do not dispute the policy as such, but note that the IiletroCouncil is currently in the process of anending their plans torecognize that there are rttransition areas!. which lre areal locatedoutside of the present UUSA line but are highly likely to bedeveloped in the not too distant future. As a rapidly developingcornnunity, Chanhassen has sone of these areas. we are noirequesting I.IWCC capacity for then at this tine, we believe it isprudent for your planning process to reeognize the likelihood thatservi.ce into these areas r,rill ultfunately be reguired. I an certainthat there are nany other conmunities in the Twin Cities that havesimil.ar situations as witnesseil by the good deaL of support andinterest shorrn by cornrnunities in the l,{etro Council rs new nu}a } ereaPolicies - At the present ti:oe, Chanhassen has a significant MUSA fineanendment being reviewed by the litetropolitan Council and we haveworked extensively r"rith Denbers of your staff to ensure that thereis adequate capacity and that youi standards are being cornpliedlrith. We are aLso currently working with MWCC staff on the onloing l!r. Gordon vossApril 3, 1991 Page 2 study of the disposition 6f the Chaska Serrrage Treatnent plant. chanhassen is in sonewhat of a unique situation in that thesouthern portion of our city is surrounded by urbanized developr0enton all four sides yet there appear to have been littleconsideration as to how this area uould be served as developnentoccurs. We have actually had land annexed by the adjacent City of Chaska in these areas since they had the ability to serve it and wedid not, which puts us in a rather difficuLt position. please beassured that rre are not trying to promote any sort of leap frog orprenature developnent in undertaking these considerations, it issinply that L,e believe effective planning dictates that this issuebe studied and acconnodated so that when it does arise it can beadequately resolved. Sincerely, au1 auss, AfCPDirector of Planning PK:v Planning CournissionCity council Dave Drealan, SW Communities CoaLition CITY OF EH[NH.[EEEN 690 COULTER DRIVE . P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 ApriL 5, 1991 Ms. Ann HurlburtDirector of conprehensive planning Metropolitan Council Ilears Park Centre 230 East sth StreetSt. Paul , }{N 55101 Dear Ann 3 Thank you for hearing me out this norning regarding our initialreview session with }retro Council staff on our ConprLhensive plan Amendrnent. I continue to be anxious about the inpression wereceived frorn llike I.Iunson that, while he acknowledgls regionalforecasts concerning Chanhassen to be in error, he is unr,rilling toreview or consider any realistic alternative for sone period oftime into the future. We continue to believe that our pldn is bothreasonable and responsible and is fully consistent with the intentof the Land Planning Act and professional planning practices. This morning you raised some questions regardlng selrer flows forthe city of chanhassen relative to sewer forecasts. I had anopportunity to research the matter and it is as I thought, theselrer forecasts in the SysteDs Statenent are based on the SystensStatenent Forecast of Population and Enplolment. I an not certainas to the direct correLation betueen the SysteD Statenent and theWaste water Managenent data that was provided. The SystenStatenent indicates ln the year 2OOO, a populatlon of 10,OOO-hrith4,500 jobs, while the waste uater section indicates a seweredpopulation of 14,700 uith 3,200 jobs. f nust renind you that wehave a current population of .L?.ZOO, vhich is based upon U. S.census data plus building pernits for single fanily homes that havebeen cornpleted since the census sas taken. we have almost 6,000jobs based. upon-a phone survey of all enployers in the City. Thus,hre have significantly exceeded the year iOOO projection! of thgSystens Statenent and have nearly. achieved the year 2OOOprojections for the waste water t{anagenent Section, white rrevirtually have a 1009 increase over lhe seuer and enploynentforecasts in the l{aste Water litanagement Section of the SystensInfonnation Statenent. To make natters even nore confusingl Uike Munson has indicated that he is willing to accept the.Highway 212EIS population forecasts, which indicate a sLightly higher year 2000 population of 15,300 persons but do not give any enplolmentforecasts at all. If you can make sense of this, you are a betterstatistician then I. our current plan subnittal indicates a year 2ooo total sanitaryflow projection of 3.218 nillion 9a11on per day or 1132 nilliongallons per year. The Systens Statenent indicates a range of 7Ol,to 730 nillion gallons per year for the year 2OOO, grot ing to 901to 959 nillion gallons per year for the year 2010. Since our planis a ten year pLan with a five year overage, consistent uith UetroCouncil policies, I suppose you could conclude the SystensStatement anticipates a nunber soneplaee in the niddle of those tworanges. These ranges need to be adjusted, at the very least, to accommodate the H!ry. 212 population forecast and }tike unson hasalso indicated that he is willing to undertake a revised forecastof_ enploynent in light of the significant error that presentlyexists. If the rraste water florrs are recalculated based upon theseassumptions, I am sure the number will increase again and conecloser to what ue are anticipating. Houever, the botton line onall of this is that based upon our analysis, there is an availableflon, of 13 nillion 9a11ons a day in the existing Lake Ann pipe foithe City of Chanhassen. We obviously believe there iL -ampIe capacity in this pipe to nore than acconmodate flows which would beintroduced into it and this infornation has been reconfirnedseveral tines by UWCC staff. Thus, rre are not asking forconstruction or nodification of any reglonal sanitary facilitiesand f night add that the City of Chanhassen paid ovar a half ofnillion dollars for the capacity in the Iake lnn Interceptor that f,re are now asking to have the right to use. I hope this inforrnation proves useful. As both a professional andas a planner representing ny conmunity, f stand behind therationality of our conprehensive planning eftort. I do not lrish tosee this process devolve into a statistical dispute. We believethat we have done our job in a responsible nanner and that this hasbeen co-n-firnqd by Uetro Council staff, who are baslcallycornfortable with virtually every other aspect of the pl.an. fappreciate aII the help you have given uj in the pasf and theattention you are paying to this matter at present. Ms. Ann HurlburtApril 5, 1991 Page 2 S incerel PauI Krauss, AICPDirector of Planning PK:v CITY OF EH[NH.[SSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147' CHANHASSEN,MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 April 5, 1991 Ms. Bonnie Featherstone 908 woodlawnBurnsvilfe, MN 55337 Dear I'ts . Featherstone : I am enclosing a copy of the Chanlrassen Comprehensive plan, as r{el1as a rnap indicating directions to City flaL1. The Mayqr, cityManager and nyself, look forward to our luncheon engageBent nextThursday. We believe it vill give us a good opportunity to showyou our comnunity and discuss sone of the issues that we areencountering. As f nentioned to you during our phone conversation, I had ny firstofficial revj.ew on the Conprehensive plan Amendnent yesterday. Theplan docunent itself was very wel.I received and theie were few, ifdDy, changes being. reguested In the text of any of the ltanelenents. In addition to receiving high uarks on the plan,chanhassenrs efforts in environnental preservatl.on, nost nolablywetland protection and water guality inprovenents, uere alsopraised. Holrever, a potentiaLly significant probJ.em did crop uprelative to our population forecasts and grovth projections. ttriiwas a situation that I believe I briefly dlscussLd with you duringour phone conversation, since I had anticipated that this nay bethe case. As I am sure you are auare., the l,letropolitan Council uses regionalgrowth nodeLs to establish - policies regarding the tining andlocation. of developnent. This is a reasonable policy tool liventhe varLety of lssues that confront a regional goverrunent.However, there are often numerous probleDs that occur at localunits of governnent as a resuLt. In our particular case, theregional nodel rras extraordinarl,ly inaccuiate with regard toforecasts of our growth. The 1988 l.tetropolitan Council Systeursstatenent projected a. year 2ooo population of 10,oOO, t ith 4,500jobs for the sane tine period. In reality, Chanhassen has apopulation of approxinately 12,200 and alnost S,OOO jobs in 1990and our data has been confirned by the U. S. Census and a phone I.Is . FeatherstoneApril 5, 1991 Page 2 survey of our enployers and busj.nesses. Hetropolitan Council staff recognizes the inaccuracies of their data, however, at this point they appear unwilling to recognize the reaLity of our situation and nake appropriate changes. What this results in is we are beingtold that new forecasts viLl not be projected for tbe next year ortwo, during r.rhich tine their staff is going to apply erroneous datato their revj.ew of our Cornprehensive Plan. In rnaking tny conments, f do not wish to understate the 'difficulty that the Metropolitan CounciL statistician has in naking accurateforecasts and we do understand that they yould wish to wait untilthey have coDpl,ete census data to rerun their model. However, a fundamental guestion nust be posed and that is uhether realitydrives Metropolitan Council policies and nodelingr efforts or,should the satistical nodel drive reality. I strong).y believe that we have been responsible in preparing our pIan. We have taken intoaccount demographic trends and the connunity desires as rre1I asinnurnerable other issues such as environmental protection, development of schools, ne j.ghborhood protection, enpLo]rnent growth,etc. to develop a plan that is a reasonable vision of our future.It is designed to acconrnodate growth over the next decade' rrith thepotential of a five year overage in grovth proj ections that isfulIy consistent with I.tetropolitan Council. policies. The planningeffort itself is also fu11y consistent with the Land ptanning Actwhich encourages comrnunities to think conprehensively andprogressively, as we have done. our plan is the cuLnination of over two years of intensive effort,a commitrnent of great aDounts of tine by our pLanning Conmission,City council, residents, developers and staff, and nany tens ofthousands of dolLars. Throughout this tiEe period, I have rrorkedwith lttetropolitan Council staff, subrnitting copies of plan sectionsas they became available, in the hope that any potential probLensthat would crop up could be adequately dealt with ahead of tiroe.As a matter of fact, our population and grorth proj ectlons rreregiven to the !{etropolitan Council staff in Oecenbei of 1989, orJanuary of 1990, and have not changed significantly since thattine. Of equal inportance is the fact that our cornrnunity of 12,OOOpeople have bought into the p1an. We held an extrenely largenunber of public infornation sessions and hearings supplenented bynumerous nelrrspaper artiCles to develop a docunent that Ue believerepresents the best interests of our residents. A large number ofpeople have a vital stake Ln this doculoent and there is already ahigh anount of interest in bringing forth quality developnents- j.n the new IIUSA area. I aD sorry that we are put in the position of having to thrust youinto the niddle of this, within days of your coning onto aheCouncil . We appreciate having the opportunity to o-utline ourconcerns lrith you and discuss thern, along with olher J.ssues, when Ms. FeatherstoneApril 5, 19 91 Page 3 you visit with us. I an aiso attaching a copy of a letter I just sent to Ann Hurlburt on the counciL staff. I look forward toseeing you next veek. si Y, Paul Krauss, AICPDirector of Planning PK:v CITY OF EH[NH[ESEN April 15, 1991 l.Is . Bonnie Featherstone 908 WoodLarmBurnsville, l.lN 55337 Dear Bonnie: on.behalf of the lr{ayor and City Uanager, I vould again tlke to takethis opportunity to thank you for the tine you took to spend withus Last Thursday. I hope you found the rneeting as lnformative asue found our discussion with you. As I indicated at our ueeting, I spent Frlday Dornl.ng at our secondneeting with Metropolitan council staff on our Conprehensive plan. This was a sraaller work group than the flrst ueeting anil f nust saythe tenor of the neeting ras slgnificantly inproved. The najoistunrbling block continues to be tlike tlunson I E forecastlne for Ehecity and his reluctance to consider significant changes untll .he isable to rerun his uodel sonetine next year. !tr. ti[unson is wil]ingto go with internediate forecasts uade approxinately 3 to 4 years ago for the Highway 212 Studty for populati6n ana houslholds, but hehas no forecasting uhatsoever for enployaent grorrth. The long andthe short of it is that Chanhassen, Ln developing our plan, uas soconservative that ne believe that se riII be able to-jus€lfy our MUSA Line expansion for residential land based upon ttre lowef nwy.212 estinates of growth even though ve continue to disagree viLhthen. On enploynent grorrth, l!r. l{unson rras somewhat nore lenientand has stated that our expectations for groutb ln tbis areprobabl.y - reasonable. Ittus, ve are DakLng progress and roay haveeven achieved an agreement but I ulll. feel a lot nore coufoltablewhen I see the staff recoEDendatlon on paper. At our rneeting you asked for a sunnary of polnts relative to ourCo:oprehensive PLan aEendDent. I have tried to set thia out asbriefly as possible, but f believe the naJor points have all beenhit. These follou for your revieu. 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 9s7-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 1. fn 1986, Chanhassen signed a cooperative Irake Ann fnterceptorAgreement. We contributed S500rOOO to construct a netrbinterceptor for future use/planned grou'th. fo date, ue havenot been abLe to use the plpe and currently need to assess aportion of the cost to property ouners. Unl.ess they can usethe pipe, we uill have difficulty recovering our costs. 2. The Lake Ann contract connitted Chanhassen to changeordinances to coincide rrith Uetropolitan Council policies andthat we uould undertake the developDent of a new cornprehensiveplan to support any uajor uUSA line anendments. We havefulfi1led our part of thls bargaln. Chanhassenrs grollth has far exceeded Xetropolitan Councilforecasts. We uere projected to have 10,OOO people and 4r5OOjobs by the year 2OOO. We had 12,OOO peopJ.e ana -O,OOO jobs ln1990. Us. featherstoneApril 15, 1991 Page 2 4.chanhassenrs growth forecastE and land consunption proJectlonsare reasonable. fn llght of econonic slor dorrn anddenographic trends we used a rate approxJ.nately one-ha1f ofrrhat tlas been experienced over the past 5-6 years. Ifanything, we are probably being too consenrative lut we feltthis was the Dost responsible courEe of actlon. There is arnajor policy- gr.restlon tbat Eust be raised at ttris point. Isthe lletropolitan Council regional nodell.ng effort Leing usedto deternine or alter reality or should the reverae be true?We do not believe that the uodel ras even intended to Eetceilings upon a conmunity I s developnent but thls has in factbecone the case. Based upon the adoptlon of a carefullydrafted and responsible plan, ue are confortable rrith ouiforecasts and are villing to let the future, cornprised ofecononic and denographic trends as rell as the decisions ofthousands of lndividuals, fanllies and businesses, determinewho is right. Chanhassen ls virtually out of vacant developable land. t{ehave a 1-3. year supply left uhen t{etropolltan Council policystates that there Ehould be eufflclent land wlthln ttre Ui.lSa t-oaccornm-odate- lo-years of grorth p1u6 a S year overage. Iack ofavailable land is severely liniting potential grorth andprobabl.y contrLbuting to an inftatlon in linal cost.chanhassenrE Innd Use plan ls predicated upon aound plannincpractices to provlde an optinal nix of qulftty deveiopnentlff necessary, ue l,ould be able.to have ieveril Twln Eitteiqual ity_ residentlal and office ihdustrial developers testifyas to their plans for the proposed TIUSA expansioir. 5. 6 Chanhassen has taken the responsible course of action. We have conpLetely redone our Conprehensive PLan so that it nayserve as an effective gruide for the 199ots. ltany other MUSArequests considered by the Uetropolitan Council are not nearLyas lrelL developed. Chanhassen is on the cutting edge ofenvironmental protection programs. as has been acknowleilged byMetropolitan Council staff. We have taken a leadershipposition in the areas of water quality, wetland protection andtree preservation. We have an extensive open space programthat is coordinated wlth IocaI, county, state and, in the caseof the Minnesota River National Wildlife Refuge, federalauthorities. l,lany of these prograns were fornulated duringthe coDprehensive Plan process. 7 o we are not requesting the alteration or expansion of anyregional facilities. Highway inprovenents are already undeiconstruction or conmltted in construction prograros. There isadequate selrer capacity. Tlris plan has been in developnent for a nunber of years.Since the faII of 1989, we have rrorked closbly withMetropolitan Council Etaff to obtain their comnents is eachsection of the plan nas conpleted. In fact, our growthprojections were sent in for review ln Decenber of 1989. 9. The chanhassen PLan has undergone years of developnent andreview. Hundreds of peopte have directly participated in theprocess. Through an extensive public inforrnation program, theprocess has touched alnost everyone Ln our coEmunity. I{e areexcited about the future and vant to get on uith the real workof shaping our conmunity. Thank you again for your help. I{e wlIl certainly keep you inforrnedas to continued progress or problems. fi"'"rY,(ha--?aul Krauss, AICPDirector of Planning PK:v City Council PLanning Conmission cc: lls. FeatherstoneApril 15, 1991 Page 3 CITY OF CII.[NH[SSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN; M|NNESOTA55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 The Pranning comnission has asked De to convey their thanks foryour presentation on the puDrs Last nonth. They found it to beinformative and timely. The lnforDation is beini useil to developa new ordinance as rapidly as possible. Thanks for your help. I look foruard to working with you in thefuture . April 10, 1991 Mr. Terry Forbord Lundgren Brothers Construction 935 East Wayzata Boulevardwayzata, MN 55391 Dear !lr. Forbord: sin Paul Krauss, AICPDirector of Planning PK3 v Planning CommissionCity Council ,cH[I{H[EEEN 690 COULTER DBIVE . P.O. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (512) 937-5739 April 10, 1991 Mr. John shardlow Dahlgren, Shardl.ow and Uban 300 First Avenue No.Minneapolis, MN 554 01 Dear Mr. Shardlow: The Planning Comnission has asked De to convey their thanks foryour presentation on the puDts last month. They found it to beinformative and tinely. The lnfomation is beinj used to developa new ordinance as rapidly as possL.ble. Thanks for your heLp. I Look forarard to uorking uith you in thefuture . S incerely, PauI Krauss, AICPDirector of PLanning PK:v Planning ComrnissionCity Council CITY OF cc: REVISED APRIL 25, 1991 2 ONGOTNG ISSUES ConDre ensive Plan Issues l-. * Comprehensive Plan * 1995 Study Area (North) and Hwy. 5 Corridor Study 3. 1995 Study Area (South) OTHER ITEI.IS 1. Blending Ordinance 2. Rezoning BF Dist. to A2 BLuff Protection Ordinance 4. Sign ordinance Tree Protection OrdinanceMapping of significantvegetative areas STATUS Delivered to tletro Council on2/25/91,. fn review with MetCouncil staff. Meetings heldwith Bonnie Featherstone, ner^rMetro Council Rep. and }taryAnderson, new l,letro Council Chair. 1995 Study Areas - Work effortto begin after adoption of newConp Plan. Council isrequesting that this be courbined lrith a Hwy. 5 corridorstudy developed by a joint PC/ CC/resldentldeveloper taskforce. Joint pClCClHRA Corridor Bus Tour tentatively scheduled for June 8, 1991. Inactive 3 Staff directed to developscenarios - Iow priority Staff directed to draft apotential new zoning districtordinance. Fish & Wildlifeand DNR have agreed to expandrefuge boundary to incLude allland lying south of Hrry. L69/2L2. SuDmer, 1991/position paperreviewed by planning Cornnission. Inactive/CC acceleration ordinance. has reguestedof rrork on new MnDNR undertaking accelerateduapping program and will workIrith city to develop. Ne$/ordinance/spring/suromer, 1991 5. 7. Wetland Ordinance 8. Shoreland ordinance 9. croup hone ordinance l-0.* Zoning Ordinance Amendnentfor satellites onRecreational Beachlots LL.Structures belo!, OHWII nust have a city pernit. L3.Rural Area Policies -ordinance changes stenrning L4. Landscaping standards 15.PUD ordinancecontaining irnproved standards 16.PC input in Downtown Planning and Traffic Study t7.Review of Architectural standards to Pronote IlighQuality Design 18.Bluff Creek Corridor Greenway Schedule futuresprlng, 1991 agenda Budgeted money for update 2year tineframe or storn waterutility fund - Reguests forProposals were sent to consuLtants on Harch 18, 1991.Expect to have a contract by June to initiate progran. fn January we receivednotification from the llnDNRthat ue are a priority coDmunitywitha2year deadl ine 19 91l inactive Approved 1st reading by cc on4/22/et. Inactive City request to elininate ninirnurn lot size requirementshas been subuitted to l,[etroCouncil. Approval is expectedby late Apri1. Ordinancerevisions required. fssues lteno presented PC - I{arch, 1991 Consideration by PC March, 1991 1991/ongoing 19 91 t99t/L992 to * Change in status since last report 6. Rezoning 2L Acre Lots to RR 12. ordinances pertaining to antenna tohrers.