1987 12 09
e
e
e
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 9, 1987
Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart, Steven Emmings, Ladd Conrad, Howard
Noziska, David Headla
MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Siegel and James Wildermuth
STAFF PRESENT: Barbara Dacy, City Planner
DISCUSS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE, MARK KOEGLER.
Mark Koegler: What we want to do this evening is take a few minutes to
kind of update and get some clarification, policy kind of comments from
the Planning Commission. As you recall, we talked to you, it's
probably been a month or two ago, about the possibility of doing some
corridor studies for some of the major transportation arteries throughout
the city. This group was kind of mixed on that. Somewhat split if I
recall. That did go onto the Council and the determination of the
Council was they would like that kind of separation shown on the Plan.
What we want to do tonight is to update that and kind of set the tone
for what the types of uses that you'll be looking at this time around.
The exhibit that's on the board right now is the plan that you've seen
many, many months ago. This is the 2000 land use plan. Essentially it
remains largely unchanged from what it was in 1980 with the exception
of some updates. These updates really coming about more as a result of
the zoning process. What we've done then is taken a look, previously
we talked about two different corridors. As a part of the garden
center discussion we went through, I think it was an issue not directly
as a part of the plan but it kind of became interwined to a certain
degree. We looked at land uses along TH 5. Previously also the plan
is showing simply low density residential predominantly down here.
That was refined somewhat as a result of discussions that this group
went through on a couple of occasions. Once pertaining to TH 212 and
then later on as an example of what these corridor studies might be.
That's the land use configuration we had talked about at that time and
we had talked about there being one spot of the neighborhood and
highway oriented commerial down there which you still show there. If
we have any comments on that, any changes in thought, those would be
appropriate this evening. The other thing it does show is essentially
the land uses we talked about for the TH 5 corridor. Again, that was
relating to the garden center in which we were looking at higher
density adjacent to Lake Ann and then scattered uses along the TH 5
frontage consisting of high, medium density, some commercial at two
locations, and then office/industrial which would tie in with some of
the development that is currently going on in the city of Chaska right
now. Bear in mind again that there's no sewer here and this is a
conceptual statement. It's a number of years down the road before that
ever will occur. So those are the two areas that we have looked at
kind of previously. The direction from the Council was to look at
essentially TH 5, TH 101, TH 212 and what we'll call old TH 169 as
It
e
e
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 2
corridors and they should be looked at as a part of the plan. Taking
that a step further, we looked at some scenarios of land use down in
the southern part of the city along TH 212 and along TH 169. What
happens I think becomes pretty obvious and we didn't really do that
until we put some of this information together and Barb, Jo Ann and I
sat down and looked at it. What we're almost beginning to do as a part
of these corridor analysis is to do a land use plan for the entire
city. We're beginning to have very few areas really that are not
carrying some kind of designation. And that, we think, is perhaps
getting a little bit beyond the scope of what we thought we were
getting into. Land use down in this part of the city, in terms of
being of any intensity that would have sewer, is quite a ways off.
Admittedly even more so than some of the more northern portions and
that gives us a little less degree of comfort in talking about what
these things should or should not be. As a result, the suggestion that
we got that we're bringing back to you this evening is to look at
specific corridor studies for the areas within the MUSA like the TH 101
corridor study we ran through before. If appropriate, portions of TH 5
and then as we get out into the more rural areas, to utilize this kind
of information as a base for discussion by this group is a base for
kind of setting some policy goal kind of statements for what these
corridors should be. I think maybe the best way to illustrate that is
by some examples. You'll notice the land uses that we've shown I think
along any of these corridors are consistent in philosophy with what was
shown along TH 5 in that we're looking at adversity uses. We're not
looking at creating a strip commercial corridor nor are we looking at
creating a solid industrial corridor. That kind of thing could be a
part of the corridor study for TH 212 for instance. If you would have
some statements in there, let me back up a step. What we're advocating
is not showing a detailed land use map within the corridor study for TH
212 and for TH 169. In lieu of that, we talk about the corridor, talk
about some of the potential qualities, talk about the improvements that
are supposed to go in, the timeframe for those improvements and then
mention some things like diversified land use, we'd like some input
from the commission on 17, if there ever is an interchange here, which
presumably there would be eventually if the road gets built eventually,
is that an area where we should consider possible addition of
commercial growth? Do you want to do that even though maybe some of
the other areas are not completely built up or should that be held in
reserve? We think there's got to be, in a corridor study for some of
these areas, there needs to be mentioned the relationship between land
use and the transportation improvement which is really spawning this
whole effort. This is probably an excellent case in point right here.
If TH 212 never happens, if we never have an interchange there,
presumably you have the potential to create a significantly different
land use pattern there. This one is really geared to where we're going
end up with some smaller parcels and some odd pieces that may work well
for commercial tract or high density residential tract. If that's
gone, maybe we get back to the scenario before where we've got a larger
area of low density that we feel is more reasonable. That's again why
we get a little nervous with going too far with some of these corridors
e
e
e
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 3
in terms of what they should be with the road. Now the TH 169 area;
just in kind of brief review, what we've shown right now is the
existing commercial area remaining there. That one is kind of anamoly.
to be quite honest with you, it gives us a little problem in terms of
how Metropolitan Council looks at it. As a commercial area, it's not
sewered and we've got to be a little bit cautious with the wording of
the plan as the intent is not necessarily to expand that but to
basically tolerate that as either a conforming or non-conforming use,
depending on what kind of facility is there. Then from there we looked
at possibly a pocket of high and mid-density residential. Maybe we've
got a land area here that seems, as far as the physical qualities go to
support that pretty well. A piece over here, there's a little valley
area with extreme topography and as you get over further east it's
quite hilly also. We've shown that perceptually right now as perhaps
high density residential because there was a need to do quite a bit of
intense clustering and balancing the property. Reflecting some of the
existing commercial and industrial down here, we're reflecting the plan
will eventually for all of this to be included in the Natural Wildlife
Refuge so what we're, I guess asking the commission to provide comments
on tonight. First of all perhaps is the approach that we think maybe
is the one to take. Which is again, look specifically at the TH 101
area within the MUSA, TH 5 within MUSA and any other corridor within
the sewered area. Once we get outside of that then, rather than treat
that by showing proposed land use maps, which may build false
expectations in some people and may be unrealistic expectations for all
we know, to treat that more in a goal policy philosophy kind of
statement. This is what we think the corridor should be. We want a
diversity of land use. We want commercial at major artery corners. We
want a buffer between certain kinds of uses. Those kinds of statements
and not get anymore specific than that. So with that, that's kind of
the direction we're proceeding and would appreciate any comments you
would want to provide on either how we approached that or any of the
specifics that are shown here.
Conrad: I think maybe Jay and Bill may have some comments or may offer
some help in terms of their perspective in terms what should be woven
into the Comprehensive Plan. I think I was the one that didn't want to
get into doing this and I think Mark summarized it fairly well by
making the statements that it forecasts some things that we can't
deliver. It's so far in advance that, planning is great but unless you
got enough information I guess I worry that we haven't hit the mark in
many of our plans and when you get way out in advance of something you
may send some wrong signals to people. The reality is you can't
deliver on those plans so I guess my only comment is, I'm really pretty
conservative. I do like to plan and that's probably why I'm here but
unless I know that we have some real good data to base that plan on, I
find it very difficult to provide valid information in the plan.
Therefore, I liked what Mark said when his direction was not to put it
into the Comprehensive Plan, such as land use, but put it into goals
and objectives and maybe philosophy statements. So I agree with what
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 4
.
Mark's saying but why don't we go around for comment. Not getting into
specifics here as much as we are in concept.
Erhart: My reaction to this discussion last time was that we do
present some kind of a long term map of sort of what we see. I guess
the basic assumption here or the basically thing that this depends on
is whether that freeway goes in or not in that whole half section. If
it doesn't go in, this whole thing is meaningless really so you could
put I guess a note on there that this is the long term 2020 or whatever
plan you want to talk about. I think it would be helpful because I
think you're dealing with, just like the guy who came in with the plan
to put the store on TH 5. It's hard to deal with that if you don't
have an agreement on what your long term plan is. I guess I'm in favor
of doing this as long as it's clear this is not a specific 2000 year
plan but there is a 2000 year plan that maybe is more dependable but
there's another one saying this is a concept only and it should be
viewed upon as. State it so anybody seeing the plan can understand
that this is concept and philosophy.
Conrad: You take the concept and philosophy but you provide some
graphics and a little bit more detail. That kind of detail with it.
e
Emmings: I guess I probably agree with Tim, and maybe it's just my own
bias. When I read goals and objective sections I almost never know
what people are talking about and I think it's really helpful to have,
and maybe if you just say one an example of our goals and objectives
might look like this. It could look like anything but it might look
like this. Just to make it a little more concrete. Otherwise, I just
get drifty when I read goals and objectives. I have no idea and I
think anybody who read that, to make it meaningful to them, is going to
wind up coming in and saying what are you actually talking about here
and it would be nice to show them something.
Conrad: And you think we can pin that down like Mark has tried to do?
Emmings: I think it's conjectural. I'm talking about wild
conjectures. I think it's pure speculation that's on this board here
but I don't know that it's necessarily irresponsible to do that as an
example of your goals and objective statement. Just say these are our
goals and objectives. We don't know how it's going to play out but
just to give you some idea of what we're talking about, this is one
possible scenario.
e
Erhart: I think the example Ladd, if I could interrupt, is if you look
at that land around TH 169 between the railroad track and TH 169,
there's some opportunities there that if you don't explore it today,
you'll never achieve. You're asking some good questions here. He's
long term. He's saying high densi ty. I'm saying hmm, that's across a
national park. It's very steep terrain. Is it buildable at all and
maybe the 50 year plan ought to be wildlife for the whole area and if
you don't look 20 years down the road, you'll never do things today to
e
e
e
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 5
ever get you there.
Emmings: I think it would be dangerous to call it a 2020 plan. I
wouldn't do that. I would say call it, don't put a year on it but just
say it's a long way out or else call it something that's so far out but
if you're going to put down goals and objectives, I think having an
example of it. Mark was able to come up with this and I'm sure Mark
could go back and do 10 more and come up with 10 different ones and I
would really have any way to evaluate them but I think giving an
example isn't bad. Maybe you even want to give more than one. As long
as those examples show an application of those goals and objectives, it
might not be bad to show more than one.
Noziska: I don't think it gives anybody false expectations of the
plan. I think that's it good to have a long range plan. Yes, you're
right, it's absolutely to try and predicate it upon the location and
whether or not we're going to have TH 212 going through there. Ten
years ago we were probably as close to that as we are right now. From
Mark's comments, he knows more about it than I do, is that still in
that great nebulous ball in the sky yet? Do you know anything more
about TH 212 Mark?
Mark Koegler: Hopefully it's a little closer since a consultant is
about to be selected but again, that's been done before.
Noziska: I know back in 1967, I think I did a study on three different
ways to cross the river on TH 41. It's still old and that's 20 years
ago and the studies have been long thrown away and they are no longer
valid so things like this do tend to drag on from time to time but I
think there's enough pressure right now that it will probably go
through and I think that it makes some sense for the Planning
Commission and the City of Chanhassen to outline what will be taking
place when that corridor goes in. I think it's good to address the
land down through the valley. That may not be the solution that the
Planning Commission thinks is right but I think it makes some sense.
If you're going to change it, then change it but project it out. If
there's a thought that Chanhassen never wants that area developed, then
they should let the people know or if water and sewer comes through
that would allow some high density stuff in there, then they should
also let people know that. It's good to have these long range plans
and objectives. People along TH 5, it may not be exactly the way I'd
lay it out but it's a solution. TH 5 probably looks better to me than
some of that stuff on the TH 212 corridor. I'm a little bit
apprehensious about too much residential along a freeway. I'm in favor
of seeing something. Whether or not this is what the final statement
is, I don't know, but I think something should be said.
Conrad: And you want to get specific though?
Noziska: As specific as a 20 or 30 year plan can ever be. Always
you're talking glitter and generalities and as we know around here, we
e
e
Ie
I
I
!
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 6
spot zone and every other thing depending upon somebody with a do-re-me
who comes through with a big idea someday. So that will always change.
Exact use of the land, most likely will change from the time that this
is put out but the general philosophy of developing higher density
along the freeways. The general philosophy of the open spaces and the
parks and this and that, that's really what.
Conrad: I totally agree with your statements. I don't disagree. I
guess the point is that the detail to which we provide the specifics
and I think Tim and Steve are pretty comfortable with putting down
something. Putting down some zones and circles that may indicate
something that's in concurrence with a philosophy.
Noziska: That's right Ladd and sure, the specifics are always going to
change. In the last few years we've had so many specifics change,
flipping flop back and forth depending on who walked in with a better
plan so as long as the specifics that are given on the map reflect the
general philosophy, how can you go wrong?
Headla: I had a question, maybe two for Mark. If we go back 15 to 20
years, with this type of planning that was done at that time, how close
are we to being to what was planned?
Mark Koegler: I can't give you a factual answer to that. I remember
the plan for the City was done I think in about 1968, if I remember
correctly, I saw probably a third or fourth generation xeroxed copies
of that when I was with the City in about 1977. If I remember right
they painted quite a large picture of simply low density residential at
the time and obviously the City has carried along on those tracks. It
did show a lot of planning concepts that were really in vogue at that
time which was defining neighborhoods by schools. If I remember right
it showed a number of schools around the city and each of those became
the neighborhood unit and there was commercial around those so in that
regard it's not consistent. It's tough to say. At that time a plan
was widely done, the late 60's and early 70's where you would take an
entire city, border to border and you take out your colors and just
cover it. Planning after 1976 did require a more focused effort by the
city to tie into the sanitary sewer. I'm not saying we're going back
to that by employing these type meetings. I don't think that would be
an accurate statement. ...so we are getting out there a ways. It's
much more questionable. If we do that, we definitely need a lot more
disclaimer language in the plan making it very clear that these kinds
of thoughts which are reflected in these graphics our predicators are
set on transportation, availability of sewer and those kinds of things.
Those become the overriding policies. You can do that and certainly
make that distinction.
Headla: Is planning much more of a science now than just guess work or
is it still in the early part of the cycle?
Dacy:
It's called the dartboard approach.
e
e
e
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 7
Headla: I just wondered if you're a little more comfortable now with
your planning process and forecasting procese.
Mark Koegler: Particularly within both the Metro Council's MUSA line
and the city's MUSA line, I would say confidently that we're
comfortable with that. It's working as a target population and some
target employment and so forth. Once you get outside of that, given
the fact that the City is not free to do whatever it wants to, it does
become a little more suspect and I think as Barb says, you are throwing
more darts. We're pretty comfortable with that level as long as it
stays within pretty well defined perameters. Once you take the entire
city and add to it the areas, 2020 is a nice date but I don't know if
some of those areas will sewer in 2020.
Noziska: I think you're totally dependent upon what the Metropolitan
Sewer Commission has to say.
Headla: Yes, I think you've got different triggers and that's what
we've got to look at but I like this concept. If you accept the
philosophy, no decision is forever and I certainly believe it. You
look at 10 years and the Planning Commission that's going to come in
here, it's going to be totally different but it's not going to be a
radical 180 degrees type of thing. It's going to be an evolution. I
would suspect it's going to be updated gradually. The same way
business plans do. They continually evolve. By the time you have it
in print, it's changed but it is a plan and it points somewhere in the
type of direction.
Conrad: What is the longest Control Data plans out Dave?
Headla: A five year plan is standard.
Noziska: They do plan ahead?
Headla: Definitely.
Noziska: But they don't think about their long range plan as next
week?
Headla: No, it's way out but by the time you get a document, it's
changing.
Noziska: But it's still a general philosophy in a general direction.
Headla: That's the point. It's a general philosophy and it's the best
information you have at the time. As you get smarter and planning
becomes more of a science, you're going to be more accurate.
Conrad: Jay, what do you think?
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 8
e
Jay Johnson: I like the approach of it being a general concept.
Graphics are much more understandable. I just spent the day in a class
that every time the guy turned around he talked about communicating
with graphics. People understand you a lot better when you communicate
wi th graphics. I agree wi th Steve and Tim. There's going to have to
be a lot of disclaimers on the graphics but I think it's a good
concept. I'm one of the people who will push for this far, long range
planning. That's towards TH 212 and TH 169. On TH 5, I'm concerned
also on interim use between now and when we get the MUSA. We're
getting more and more pressure to allow some types of interim uses.
I'd like to see some guidelines established saying there's not going to
be any interim use besides farming or putting a house in or here are
the lawn centers or putt putt golf, we've got putt putt golf in there
now. The real plan for that. Just a specific little corridor because
we're going to be, in the next few years getting some very strong
pressure to do some kind of development in there. I think if we start
thinking that out now, we can get some guidelines. I'm concerned more
for the TH 5 corridor because it's much closer in our future. We're
already getting pressure there now. It's going to worse. The more
strict guidance we have at this time, the better off we'll be.
.
Bill Boyt: Typical business plans, 5 years I think that's long range
planning. One year is getting to be fairly long range planning for
some businesses and we're looking at 35 years. I think it's a joke. I
will back up a little bit and say everything you've said about
concepts, I buy that. Sure, to tell people what we want. All these
different colors, business and high density here, I don't see that's
it's worth the time and money. What are the chances of that happening?
Erhart: I'd comment on that since I do 5 year business plans. The
premise for a business plan is totally different than the premise for
this. A business, I can't predict by business, what it's going to be
like 3 years from now. I agree but you're dealing with a different
thing. Technology changes. Customers change. Personnel change.
They're all different. You can't plan out. I'll guarantee you that 30
years from now TH 5 will be there, TH 212 will be there, the houses
that are there today are still going to be there and you're still going
to have the same problems and it's still going to be growth. I think
you're dealing with an entirely different premise. In a zoning plan,
or I shouldn't say zoning, in a long term plan for a community, it's
just not related to a business whatsoever.
Conrad: I do want to start moving on to some other things.
Interviewing chandidates. Jay, go ahead if you have something relevant
to what we're...
Jay Johnson: Graphics, we don't necessarily need to show TH 212. We
can show any highway, not necessarily this particular land, a stretch
of h i g h way wi t h an interchange on i t and say t his i s an i 11 u st rat i on of
our concept. Not have it specific to southern Chanhassen. So you show
it but it's not geographically specific so it does illustrate and
e
e
e
e
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 9
people can still see it. So the farmer who owns that land right now or
a developer who owns that land right now is not going to say, gee, I
don't want to put high density, residential there. There is no
relationship but the concept can still be graphically illustrated
because you've got a stretch of 4-lane highway with an interchange
showing how on a typical interchange to do that.
Conrad: The Comprehensive Plan that we're updating is really valid
until the year 2000 right? And we know what we're talking about. We
know these corridors will not be open for development, for commercial,
for residential by the year 2000 or like we're 99% sure that a MUSA
line is not going to be extended to incorporate some of these areas
that we're looking at. Is that a pretty good guesstimate?
Mark Koegler: I would bet with you on that one, yes.
Conrad: And the Comprehensive Plan called what we're going to be
looking like in the year 2000, we're going to put what we're going to
look like in the year 2020. The major corporations of this country
can't put together a 10 year plan that's close. We're talking about
putting together something that's 25 years, 30 years in the future. I
do disagree with you Tim. Even though there are highways, we don't
know where TH 169 is totally going to be yet. I think there are some
things that are really tough to settle on. You don't know if a Valley
Fair wants to move in. I think there are some things that we just
don't have the foggiest idea now and I'm real nervous about putting
something that we think is in the year 2020 in a year 2000 plan.
That's my nervousness. Philosophically however, I like doing some of
the concept. I think that's really kind of neat and I guess we've got
some various opinions. Bill's on one side and that's why Jay's over
on the other side. I think what I'd like to do and take us away from
this, the detail to which we get to I'm not sure, but I think Mark I'd
1 i ke to i nv i te Ma rk back and where we do some concept i ng on these two
particular, I think we sould relook Howie at TH 5. I'm real
comfortable with TH 5 and how you've got it laid out there. I think
there are some really nice things. I think we should look at interim
uses there and I think that makes a lot of sense. I don't have the
foggiest idea how we want TH 212, TH 169 to look. I just don't know
and I think if we're talking concept, which everybody is saying right
now, I don't know what the concept is. I haven't discussed the concept
with anybody and I don't know what anybody's thoughts are for that so I
guess it sounds to me like we need a working session with Mark to start
talking about what our philosophies and concepts are.
Noziska: I think that's a wonderful idea but I don't agree with Bill
and I do agree with him. On one aspect I think that sort of graphic
illustration of a general direction is important if for no other reason
than to give the aura of progression in the city of Chanhassen if
nothing else. But beyond that, I don't think it's worthwhile spending
an awful lot of time, this is where I agree with him, I don't think
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 10
e
it's very worthwhile at all to spend a lot of time on it. To just give
a general, philosophical direction and say hey, if a lot of things
happen this is what we feel should take place but to spend a heck of a
lot of time dinking around wi th it, I don't think so. I think there's
just some little philosophical statement that the Planning Commission
can arrive with Mark in a very short period of time. Whether or not
that flatland between the railroad track and TH 212, TH 169 needs to
have anything done with it other than low density residential and also
if in fact TH 212 is going to go where we promise it's going to go,
are you going to want to keep that residential or are you going for
some high density stuff here and there. That's just about as far as
you can go. I think that's the only question in philosophy that I
would see at all in this.
e
Conrad: So, I guess most votes are for more detail than maybe what I'd
like to see but I think that we can deal with that if we invite Mark
back and let's start with the philosophy stage. Mark, I don't think
that's going to be a big deal. I think, like Howie said, I think we
need you for half an hour so we can start talking conceptually. I'd
like to feed that back up to the City Council before, real quickly, so
we get their thoughts on whether that's the right philosophy in terms
of their eyes and thoughts and proceed from there. If the consensus is
that we need the examples and the detail, we'll do that. Then we'll
work up the administrative way, Mark, of working this out to make it
very clear what we're talking about trying to do. Is everyone in
agreement with that?
Emmings: I don't know if Mark can do it, he certainly can't do it in
half hour, but when he comes back and talks to us about these concepts,
it would be an awfully good opportunity to educate us on how to think
about these things. I don't know how he came up with this particular,
how he colored this in but he went through some kind of a process there
and I'd like to know what it is. What do you think about laying things
side by side because I certainly don't know.
Erhart: Why do we need a 2000 year plan?
Conrad: To help us plan.
Erhart: Well, I know that. If we're going to eliminate one, it would
seem to me that's the one to eliminate.
Conrad: But we've got more definition on 2000 because we know where
the MUSA line is. That's the key. We don't know where the MUSA's line
going to be ever. We don't know if it's ever going to change.
Erhart: That you do know.
e
Noziska: I think at some point in time you can build a house in Eagan,
you can build a house in Chanhassen and just in a few lots left in Eden
prair ie. It's ei ther tha t or you can dr i ve to St. Cloud. It's obv ious
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 11
.
that development is coming this way.
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICANT INTERVIEWS.
CAROL WATSON
Carol Watson: I've lived within a mile of where I live all my life.
My family came to Chanhassen in 1909. I'm a registered nurse. I do
utilization review for Health Risk Management on a part time basis. I
was on the Planning Commission from 1980 to 1982. I was on the Council
from 1982 to 1986 and I am presently on the Board of Adjustment and
Appeals, Carver County Solid Waste Advisory Committee and the Park and
Rec Commission.
Conrad: Why are you interested in getting on the Planning Commission
versus the committees, and I guess that brings up what you would do
with the committees you are currently on?
e
Carol Watson: I would resign my position on the Park and Recreation
Commission. I don't know that there would be a conflict as far the
Board of Adjustment and Appeals. There always used to be a Planning
Commission member on that board so there's no real conflict to being on
that. During the peak building season they do meet pretty much every
time there's a Council meeting but now since like th end of September,
early October, we haven't met. It's very sporatic. It's when someone
wants to build a garage and their lot's too small or they want to build
in Carver Beach or Red Cedar Point. They are very restrictive lot
sizes and they almost always need a variance.
Conrad: How come you want to get back on the Commission?
Carol Watson: Because I like zoning and land use issues. If there's
anything I learned during the years, that's what really interested me.
The land use issues.
Conrad: What's your philosophy on the direction for growth for
Chanhassen?
e
Carol Watson: In having helped developed the new zoning ordinance, it
was one of my last official acts as a council person was to finish the
ordinance, I perfer the larger lot sizes obviously. I see that used on
the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, you see a new house and the plat
for the development hasn't been there in years, someone's coming in
because they can't add on a porch. They can't build a deck and it's
because the lots were too small to accomodate anything beyond what was
built in the first place so I like larger lot sizes. I think that
Chanhassen is going to grow. In the sewered areas you can no longer
afford to farm. It was inevitable. It's coming and as long as we have
a chance to plan, I hope the new ordinance is helping to make it easier
for the developer to come in and see what we want as well as to guide
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 12
.
us as we try not to be too arbitrary in our decisions.
Conrad: What's the good and the bad about growth so far?
Carol Watson: The bad is the dwindling open spaces that those of us
who have lived here a long time are used to seeing. Trying to plan for
open spaces. For parks and for enough open spaces in our developments
that we still can see some of that. The up side of course is a larger
tax base, larger community. More people to make use of the facilities
that we are designing and setting up for a more populated community.
It's almost more inevitable than anything that we put a handle On it
and say whether we like it or not.
Conrad: Last question is the time that you've got and I know Carol
you've always got a lot of energy to whatever you've been on. How is
your time? What is your availability right now? We always have
problems maintaining 75% attendance here.
Carol Watson: I missed one council meeting in 4 years. When I'm
committed, I make the time to do it.
Conrad: How are you in Park and Rec?
Carol Watson:
I believe it's 79% or something.
e
GARY BASS
Conrad: Gary, can you give us a real nutshell of your background at
work and home, whatever. Almost what you have on your sheet but
summarize it for us a little bit.
Gary Bass: I'm originally born and raised and my formal education was
in Michigan. I transferred here with Sherwin-Williams Company in 1983
and lived in Chanhassen, my wife and I for one year on Carver Beach
Road. Sherwin-Williams, I've been with the Sherwin-Williams Company as
an open sales representative for 7 years now. Prior to that it was my
formal education. I graduated with a BS in urban planning. I pursued
that field as a county recreation planner for a little over a year and
as an assistant city' planner. Frankly I found that the money was not
there so I pursued other avenues. I worked in the building trade as a
subcontractor in floor covering and wall covering and kind of eased my
way into the building trade and wound up with Sherwin-Williams. I'm
very happy with Sherwin-Williams and to be in their employ. However, I
do feel I kind of neglected my degree and I would like to get back into
the planning in a kind of volunteer aspect. I have a concern in land
use. I've seen some horrendous land use planning. I've seen some very
good land use planning and I see Chanhassen as a community on the move
and growing very rapidly. I feel as though I could contribute
somewhat in planning for the best use for the majority of the people
~_ the majority of the time.
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 13
e
Conrad: That sort of takes care of the second question. What
direction do you think Chanhassen should grow in? Do you have a
philosophy on their growth?
Gary Bass: I have a difficult time in answering that question. I'm not
as familiar as I should be to answer that. However I feel that maybe
that my being new in the community might have advantages in that I
don't have any biases or anything in that manner. I see the direction
Chanhassen should take, as I mentioned before, is the definition of
land use planning. We should consider the best use of the land for the
majority of the people a majority of the time. It's as simple as that.
Conrad: Anything good or bad about how you see the community growing
right now?
Gary Bass: Contrary to opinion, number one the downtown development
that I see, I like. I think it has some potential when the project is
completed. When all the aesthetics are there, I t~ink th~_m9re~people
will enjoy it and praise it than they do right now. I see, as everyone
else does I'm sure, lack of transportation planning. I have some
concern, I don't know how founded it is, in the recreational plans for
this area. Normally when you see residential development grow as
rapidly as Chanhassen is, sometime~ enough consideration isn't given to
the recreation aspect. Like I say, I can't comment on it becapse I'm
not real familiar with the City as of yet. I would hope to be.
e
Conrad: What we require on the Planning Commission, we meet every
other week, basically two times a month which necessitates an
additional two days a month for preparation so you've really got four
days a month. We require 75% attendance at the Planning Commission and
that's hard. It seems 75% is not that big a deal but I think if you're
working and you're on the road, it's a lot of stuff. Talk to us about
your tIme. It's one of those things we really need because it's quorum
type of issues here. Tell us about your availability.
Gary Bass: My job I am involved in sales however, I'm not overnight.
I rarely have commitments to travel overnight so I don't anticipate
that I would miss meetings often. I'm familiar with the commitment of
a Planning Commission member in that my employ with the county and the
city of Marquette in Michigan, I was preparing presentations for the
Planning Commission and attended those meetings so I'm familiar with
the time. I put in some long hours sometimes meeting right into the
wee hours of the morning as I recall. I thought long and hard before I
actually filed an application to consider myself an applicant for the
position.
Headla: Do you have any questions of the Commission?
Gary Bass: In section 1 of the duties and responsibilities, Section
1-2 it stated that the Planning Commission shall prepare a
-
h
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 14
e
Comprehensive Plan.
Plan?
I interpret that as there is no Comprehensive
Barbara Dacy: No, there is one. We adopted it in 1982.
Gary Bass: The other thing I had underlined here was the subdivision
ordinance and that's one area that I'm not real familiar with and would
enjoy working with. In working in the Iron Range of upper Michigan
there was not a lot of new subdivisions going in, which might be
expected so we didn't have to deal with that a lot.
Emmings: Is there any particular issue that's provoked your interest
in the Planning Commission?
Gary Bass: Not any issues in particular with Chanhassen but issues
that have come up in my life after my education. The different
communities that I've been in.
Emmings: It's the broader issue so no particular issue in Chanhassen
caught your attention?
e
Gary Bass: No. Issues in general related to quality of the
environment let's say and casual comments by friends or neighbors in
relation to conditions in general. Whether it be transportation or
schools or recreational facilities or problems with the roads. I find
it interesting how many times a day if you stop and think and count,
the comments that are made and conversation brought up that deal
directly with quality of our environment. That deal directly with our
land use.
Erhart: You own your own house here in Chanhassen?
Gary Bass: Yes.
Erhart: Do you have a family?
Gary Bass: No. I have a wife.
Erhart: Why did you pick Chanhassen as a place to buy your home?
Gary Bass: Aesthetics. I suppose if I had driven TH 5 a few times
before I had signed the commitment I may have looked elsewhere but we
found a beautiful home on Carver Beach Road above Lotus Lake and it was
the best house for the money that we found.
Erhart: You didn't pick out, I want to live in Chanhassen? It was
basically the home?
Gary Bass: I looked over a year. I looked from Lake Elmo all the way
to Chaska and Chanhassen area.
e
, ~
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 15
.
JOHN OLSON
Conrad: Give us a real brief scenario of your background.
-
John Olson: For the record my name is John Olson. I live at 690
Conestoga Trail which is in Chanhassen vista 2nd Addition which is the
new development about 3/4 of a mile to the north of here. We closed on
our house on November 1st of this year so I've only lived in Chanhassen
for a very short time. Prior to that I lived in Richfield. Currently
I'm the director of research for the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce
which is in association with 92 local Chambers of Commerce and some
5,000 businesses from allover the state. As director of research I'm
responsible for preparing and analyzing various data on comparing for
instance Minnesota's relative position to other states in terms of
things like tax policy, worker's compensation costs, employment
compensation costs and so on down the line. My education is I have a
Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Minnesota in
agricultural and applied economics which is a little bit misleading
because the emphasize that I had during my course of study was in
community development. So in addition to having the educational
background on community resource development and the things associated
with that, I've also been able to get 4 years worth of experience in
working at the state level and from time to time dealing with some of
the issues on a state level that I'm sure many of you are dealing with
from the perspective of Chanhassen. My interest in being on the
Planning Commission is that even if I'm not appointed to the
Commission, being a resident of Chanhassen and having the background
and the access to the various types of data and information, I think I
can make a contribution in terms of trying to help you or the staff or
both of you out in trying to get at certain types of information.
Particularly things like what's happening in other communities around
the state. Last summer I drove 5,000 miles and all of it was in
Minnesota so I've had a chance to go around the state and see how
things are done in different communities which I think is an asset
because once you go through a community, in fact once you've gone
through many communities you can look at them and you can see where you
or I might think that some mistakes were made and hopefully we can
learn from those mistakes. Particularly when you're dealing with
issues like commercial development. Basically, my view on what
direction Chanhassen should take, I'm somewhat open on that right now
because I've only lived here for a month, I'm still getting accustomed
to where things are and how to get from point A to point B. Very
quickly though I guess I would see two immediate things. Number one,
with the amount of development and construction that's going on out
here, particularly in your single family dwellings, you have a sizeable
amount of new income coming into the community. With that new income
coming into the Chanhassen area, obviously at some point you're going
to start to have developers that are going to be looking at the city
like Chanhassen and seeing dollar signs in their eyes because maybe,
just maybe we can sco re a good dea I on a pi ece of land and put up a
shopping center or strip mall or whatever that's going to provide us
-
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 16
e
with a wonderful return on the investment. In fact, I would probably
guess, and I'm just guessing, that Chanhassen today is probably at the
same stage that a city, for example like Eagan, where Eagan was at
maybe 10 or 15 years ago or Burnsville 15 to 20 years ago. I guess my
quick analysis would be, I think you have the opportunity to look at
places like Eagan and Burnsville that have grown very rapidly over the
past decade and see what they've done. Maybe it is the best way to do
things. Maybe it's not. Maybe you need to do a mix of things in there
but I think the key element in planning is looking at what has already
been done by other people and taking the time to analyze it and see is
this really what we want? Is this applicable to the City? Those
types of more essetaric questions that are often difficult to answer.
In terms of my time commitment, I really don't have too many concerns
about that. My work day typically starts at 6:30-7:00 in the morning
because I find it's the only time I can get work done because at 9:00
the phone starts ringing.
Conrad: Basically we meet twice a month and that means you really need
a night in advance to do some preparation and reading because sometimes
we get stacks. We review our Comprehensive Plan and it's a lot of work
and we have special sessions but we require 75% attendance at the
Planning Commission and it seems easy until you really have to hit that
75% mark. I guess what we're kind of interested in, if you feel that
is a realistic goal for you, that you can attain that kind of
commitment to the Commission.
e
John Olson: My attitude has always been, as far as work is concerned,
because I work in downtown St. Paul, that's a 30 mile commute one way
and I would much rather get up early in the morning and drive in
instead of working late at night, I would just rather do it on the
front end and take off at 4:00 in the afternoon, which I usually do and
get here by 4:45 or 5:00 before the real crunch hits in Eden Prairie.
So in terms of missing meetings or anything like that, I don't perceive
any problem in that.
Conrad: What questions do you have of us?
John Olson: I'm going to throw out kind of a loaded question, just out
of curiosity more than anything, where do you see Chanhassen in let's
say 10 years? I guess where I'm coming from Mr. Chairman is that when
my wife and I were shopping for houses, we looked in many, many suburbs
and the most vivid one that still stays in my memory was when we were
in Eden prairie and we were looking at a particular developer, I won't
mention any names, where clearly they had taken something that was
meant to be two lots, like say this table was two lots and divide it
down the middle. What they had done instead was they had put in a
private cul-de-sac and had split it into three lots so you had house 1,
house 2 and house 3 and it was very evident that the developer was
trying to cram as many homes in as they could in a given amount of
space. I guess as a new resident out here, we have a very good sized
lot and all the lots in the development are of good size and I
--
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 17
~ understand that is by ordinance and I'm sure with a considerable amount
of work that you folks did. I would be concerned as a resident down
the long run to see the city acquest to the pressures of developers and
developers have ways of exerting pressure. In trying to corne in and
cram 50% more homes into an area where aesthetically it really, frankly
can't handle it. Then of course once you get more homes in there, then
you also need more commercial development and the whole thing
snowballs. The only thing that I really see as a flying blanket is the
TH 5 situation. If that doesn't get resolved soon, development I would
guess will probably corne to a screeching halt.
Conrad: I think you've identified some concerns that some of us have
and I think what we've done John over the time that I've been around,
is we've tried to identify assets. Uniqueness and then make sure that
the growth fit in with those assets. They may be lakes. They may be
open spaces. They may be a farm. Again, through our Comprehensive
Planning process we kind of identified those and we tried to guide the
growth. I think a lot of us have spent some time on that kind of a
planning and I think that's why we're here. Hopefully we're guiding
that kind of an orchestrated growth which probably says not much but in
case you end up, a lot of us did get on the Planning Commission simply
trying to preserve some of things you were talking about.
e
John Olson: You're just a part of the overall process with the Council
and I'm sure the Chamber and the Mayor and the other various entities
that also have vested interest.
Erhart: Why did you pick Chanhassen over other areas? You drive a
long ways to St. Paul.
John Olson: A couple reasons. My wife works at Cargill up in Wayzata
and part of her responsibilities include getting calls from people at
1:30 in the morning saying the computer has died, corne in to work.
Secondly, and to be very candid with you, the land value out here, the
price that we paid for the lot that we got was the best in the Twin
Cities that we found. In the areas in the south and western parts that
we were looking for. That was not the only factor. We were also
looking at developers and the quality of the construction of the homes.
Those sorts of things. We both corne from smaller towns which
Chanhassen still has a very good mix of the fact that you're right next
to the metropolitan area but it has a very distinct small town
attitude. Demenure or however you want to describe it. It seems like
a small town out here in that respect and on the basis of that, we
chose to build here.
DANIEL CHRISTIE
Conrad: If you could just give us a brief summary of your background.
Almost the stuff that you put on the application form but in your own
words.
--
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 18
e Daniel Christie: I'm originally from Milwaukee and a graduate of the
University of Wisconsin Milwaukee. I'm an engineer. I work for public
utility and then several consulting firms. I moved from Milwaukee out
to Denver and then to Monrose, Louisiana and moved up to Chanhassen in
January of 1979. I worked for two local consultants here in town and
then I started with my own business in 1984. The type of consulting
work that I've done is primarily energy related and it's for municipal
utility and industrial clients. I get into such things as designer
boiler and incinerators, etc.. Do you want me to continue?
Conrad: Yes, just tell us why you're interested in the Planning
Commission.
Daniel Christie: I think my wife and I have, just due to the nature of
the type of business that I'm in, working for other consultants, we
never really had any roots. Due to lay-offs, low workloads, changes in
interest in the company where they've decided to divert, it was
necessary to keep moving so we never really did put down any roots.
Outside of Milwaukee where I was brought up, I've lived in Chanhassen
longer than anywhere else and I think we're here. I'd like to
contribute to this area's growth and at least make some type of a
contribution towards which things, in some cases irritate me, such as
TH 5 and I think also my background as an engineer and now as a
businessman might give a slightly different perspective to some of the
views on the Planning Commission.
e
Conrad: Have you served on anything else in the community?
been with any other community or civic group?
Have you
Daniel Christie: I work with several groups that were related to my
technical background. I worked with AS ME, American Society of
Mechanical Engineers here in town, the local chapter and also the
computer, the Texas Instrument professional computing group but I
haven't done anything on a civic background.
Conrad: What direction do you think Chanhassen should grow? Do you
have a philosophy of growth in this community?
Daniel Christie: My own opinion towards looking at no growth
situation, is I think when you quit growing you start dying and I think
though that you can go through a controlled growth and exercise some
direction towards which way the city can grow. I have no problem with
Chanhassen getting larger. I think the area obviously, including the
Twin Cities, has an awful lot of people and we're not going to be a
small town or an oasis because the area is growing so I think as long
as we can provide the kind of services that people in this town need
and require, that that growth isn't a problem. I think unbridled
growth right now with TH 5, for an example if it were to be left
unchecked, would create problems but if highways can take the people, I
wouldn't see any problem with growth in the area. The same for any of
the other utilities and amenities that go with living in a municipality
e
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 19
I ~ like Chanhassen.
Conrad: Why don't you summarize for us the good and bad things that
you see about the growth. I'm sure TH 5 is the bad. What do you see
as the good?
Daniel Christie: I think the nicest thing about Chanhassen is I see
for any number of reasons, the community coming together closer with
our downtown development. I hate to bring it up again, but TH 5, it
seems to be something that's almost bringing the people together rather
than dividing them and I like the development that we've had as far as
bicycle paths throughout the community. Our park system. I think for
the most part our development has been handled fairly well.
Conrad: In talking about time commitment, the Planning Commission
meets twice a month which also means that you're going to be spending a
night beforehand preparing for it. The packets are 10 pages long and
sometimes they are 100 pages long. It requires that type of a
commitment and we require 75% attendance which means 3 out of 4
meetings you've got to be here. We do that because of a quorum. We've
got developers coming in and having public hearings and we can't
disappoint them in terms of whether we can hear an issue or not. Why
don't you tell us about your ability to fill that kind of time
commitment.
e
Daniel Christie: Now that I'm on my own, my office is in my house so I
don't have the commute time. I work in the area and I'm anticipating
moving on out into regular offices but they would probably be in the
area that I'm looking at in Chanhassen, a commercial building, the old
drug rehab center. I think one of the reasons that I probably wasn't
interested in this type of a situation before was the amount of
traveling I was doing when I was working for other companies. There
was one year I put 37 flights between Milwaukee and Minneapolis. Now
my work is pretty well a day out of town, I probably haven't spent 10
days a year in a motel so I think the time commitment and the
interference with the work isn't a problem like it was in the past.
Conrad: What questions do you have of us?
Daniel Christie: What type of issues does the Planning Commission get
into? Do they review everything that you review and prepare a report
to you or is it less or more specific than that?
Conrad: Primarily they are land use issues. We're not in planning
other items for the City other than that. We get into zoning. We get
into subdivisions. We prepare Comprehensive Plan, which is for the
Metropolitan Council, which tells us how we're going to grow and how
we're going to have utilities and services to support that growth. We
hold public hearings. We're the group that basically lets issues open
to the public for their input and have to make our decisions and pass
that along to City Council. We even have to make tougher decisions
e
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 20
~ based on the community's interest in those areas.
Headla: I was thinking, sometimes we go after midnight and the next
day, I'm just dragging. Can you get along with working until 11:00 to
12:00?
Daniel Chr i stie: I haven't in the past, in fact qui te often I work
late at night. I find that in my business I can get more done in an
hour at night than I can during the day because of the constant phone
calling so it's not tough for me to work until midnight-l:00. Although
if I'm really wiped out because I've done this for a while, it's no
problem for me to hold back my hours in the morning by an hour or so.
Emmings: Is there any particular issue in Chanhassen or in your
neighborhood or anything like that that's prompted your interest in the
Planning Commission?
e
Daniel Christie: I think the three things that I've seen recently that
most prompted my interest are the fight with TH 5, development of the
downtown/TH 101 route and I as some of my acquaintances have called it
the hairpin turn coming out of that, and the city square, town square
concept which I thought was nice. I think those were the three major
issues. I can't really point to anything that's been directly under
the control of the city that I think has been totally bad. I'm not an
irrate citizen, mad as hell and going to go out and change the world.
I just think that some of my philosophies may be slightly different
than current and was interested in applying for the positions that you
had open.
Conrad: What do your neighbors say about the city?
Daniel Christie: It's sort of funny, in the area around our house we
haven't been terribly close to some of the funny neighbors. The
immediate neighbors, one of them is a young couple that's burning the
candle at both ends. He's going to school and working and what not.
He just doesn't have time to do much. And the others, an old time
Chaska-Chanhassen resident and been here since day 1 and plans on
staying here and I never hear anything bad from them either. Most of
the criticisms you hear about government they start at the state level
and go down.
DAVID C. PRILLAMAN
Conrad: If you could give us a little bit of your background, some of
the things that you put on the application. The length of time you've
lived here and your work and that would be helpful.
David Prillaman: I live on Red Cedar Point in Chanhassen since 1961.
I've lived in Minnesota since 1949 and I retired about 3 years ago. My
work was not very important but I managed a plastics division for
e
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 21
~ Carter Day company in Hopkins. Since I retired, we sold our property
on Red Cedar Point and moved into Red Cedar Cove. The only thing I'm
doing right at the moment, I'm doing some volunteer work helping older
people with their income taxes and the golf course, since I don't have
anything to do. My interest in the thing lies in the fact I didn't
know that Dave was on the Planning Commission. I think we need some
representation on the north part of Chanhassen and the Lake Minnewashta
area. Some things that are going on over there, there's a lot of
development left to be done and if there was anything I could do to see
it done in an appropriate matter, that is what I would like to do. I
don't have any particular qualifications. I'm not sure that anybody
does. I'm an engineer and architect and maybe what you have to look at
is sometimes resort to the environments. I think that's item one.
Land in the lakes. You can build roads and houses most anyplace but
you can also destroy the things if you're not careful in pursuing some
of these projects.
Conrad: Do you have some philosophies on growth for Chanhassen.
You've lived here for many, many years and as you can tell Chanhassen
is growing. What's your philosophy on that? That's really what we do
in terms of the Planning Commission. We plan growth.
e
David Prillaman: I think the Planning Commission has done a good job
in TH 5 corridor. I think the highway department needs to get into the
picture now on some kind of basis. I think that sometimes government
is too concerned with tax base and not enough concern with what
comprises that tax base. I think there are times when you might have
too much building for the land that is involved. I can think of a few
instances of that and I'm not going to get into any details because
what has been done has been done but I think there are times when
perhaps other towns have gone too far. I think that as this building
continues, I think there should be some means for some agency to
provide a little bit on the builders to see that the site isn't fouled
up for a long period of time. Some of it might be necessary. Some of
it is completely unnecessary and I don't know what vehicle is used to
police these things and take care of them but I'm sure you've driven by
some buildings sites that have been underway for a long, long time and
that's just a matter, it seems to me, of having a little bit more pride
in our communi ty and our area but as far as the development of the
city, I know nothing about that. I'm in it occasionally. On TH 5 only
when I have to be but I don't have to be anymore. I feel that's a
problem and has to be addressed at some point. The construction that
is taking place out here south and west, I think that's remarkable...
Maybe there's nothing we can do to speed up construction or to police
the areas as they go along and maybe this is just something that
nothing can be done about. If I were talking to builders or owners, I
would want to know how long they might think it would take them to get
into a site and get out of it. Clean up and move on to something else.
Dave, I'm sure you know what 11m talking about. Over on Lake...and
then Red Cedar Cove also.
e
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 22
~ Headla: That particular subject did come up here.
David Prillaman: I live at Red Cedar Cove and I was talking about some
of the stuff that I've seen and I know there is going to be more taking
place.
Conrad: In terms of time, we meet twice a month and every time we meet
it probably takes a day or a night of preparation of going through
materials and we have an attendance requirement of 75% which means you
have to be at the meetings 3 out of 4 times simply because of
continuity but two, we need a quorum. We have a lot of folks with a
lot of money, and developers primarily coming in to talk to us and to
represent the community we need to have a quorum. Therefore, the
attendance requirement. How do you feel, do you feel you can meet that
type of requirement?
David Prillaman: I wouldn't have any problem. I don't spend too much
time on vacation...I don't have anything else to do. I don't have
anything to interfere with it. I'm not sitting here making an
application because I want to be on the Planning Commission. I'm
sitting here making an application because I feel I might be of some
help. I could care less about ti tIes. I haven't impressed anybody, I
never wanted to impress, I never had anybody I wanted to impress...
Conrad: What questions do you have of us on the Planning Commission?
-
David Prillaman: None in particular. I've attended a few of the
meetings. Where you've had the open meetings and I don't remember who
was on then. I do have this question having to do with what kind of
follow-ups do you have in respect that I've just been talking about
such as cleaning up building sites and cleaning up those objectional
sites. Is that part of what you fellas do?
Conrad: Not really. I think it's the city staff. We may bring those
i terns up. We may be concerned with a developer in the beg i nn i ng and
layout some requirements for timing. Generally however, because we're
volunteers in the community, we kind of keep our ears open for certain
types of concerns. If folks are abusing things that would be directed
to city staff to follow up on. If we see things that should be
orchestrated in terms of an ordinance, it's our job to raise those
issues and make them part of the ordinance.
David Prillaman: Actually, the most of your activity has to do with
dealing people who come before you with proposals or for overall
planning?
Conrad: We focus on land use and we do that a couple of ways. We work
on what's called the Comprehensive plan which kind of forecasts where
we're going for 10 years and we ask for community involvement.
Typically nobody likes to plan but those of us who are here and
volunteer their time. We also take a look and we use some tools, we
e
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 23
e changed the zoni ng ord i nance, we 100 kat tha t and see wha tit should
be. See if it's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. We review
subdivisions and we hold public hearings. I don't think that
summarizes all that we do. We also make recommendations to those
particular ordinances that we've gone through. A whole bunch of
ordinances as it relates to community development in the last couple of
years.
David Prillaman: At this time, do you have developers making
presentations where there's no sewer and water available? What is your
philosophy as far as the land use where a septic tank is a requirement
and what lot sizes are you talking about? What percolation tests do we
make and what borings do we make and things of that nature?
Conrad: Good questions. I can't summarize that in a little bit of
time. Basically what we've done, the Planning Commission played a
pretty heavy role in that. We've updated all our drainage standards,
our septic system standards in Chanhassen so if a development goes in
on an unsewered area, I think we now have some controls on the quality
of the septic drainage systems. I think we're confident. We've
reviewed that a whole bunch of times. How we want that rural area, the
unsewered area to be developed and we continue to do that. There's
just continual pressure on that particular aspect of Chanhassen. A lot
of developers want to get in and it's a matter of how an intensive use
we want to use for that land.
e
David Prillaman: what are the prospects, apparently there aren't any,
the prospects for being able to eliminate septic systems as such.
Conrad: I'll talk for myself, we basically reviewed...allowing new
development going in simply as residential type of development. Not
real intense, as intensified as within the downtown area but we're
pretty confident that we've got the controls and technology that will
allow that type of septic system without a great deal of harm to the
environment.
David Prillaman: There's an area that I want to call it Crimson Bay on
the east side of Minnewashta, the old Worm's property that abuts on
TH 5. Is that going to be served with septic systems?
Barbara Dacy: Yes, that subdivision was processed before we changed
our ordinance to a 1 unit per 10 acre requirement in the rural area.
That's the rule that we have on the lot sizes now in the rural area.
David Prillaman: What are the lot sizes over there?
Barbara Dacy: Those were 1 per 2 1/2 acres. I think the smallest
there was 2 1/2 and I think one of them got as large as 5.
e
David Prillaman: That's just a matter of curiosity because 13-14 years
ago we finally got sewer around most of Minnewashta and got the lake
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 24
~ cleaned up pretty well. You can't stand in the way of progress but you
have to try and preserve what is being done is not harmful sometime
down the road.
Noziska: Dave, you've been in the past been on any of those
commissions in the city?
David Prillaman: No.
Conrad: what do your neighbors say about Chanhassen? What do they
complain about?
David Prillaman: My neighbors are still getting settled into Red Cedar
Cove and they have enough complaints about trying to adjust to some of
the things. Actually I don't hear any complaints. Let's say it that
way. Everybody has a little something that they'd like to have better.
I think Minnewashta Parkway needs some attention but on the other hand
I don't want a speedway because I'm walking all the time. That's the
only thing and there may be something underway as far as that goes. I
think those of us who think that things can be the way they were 25
years ago have got their heads in the sand and you might as well get
them out because that's not going to happen. The important thing is to
make progress that everybody can live with. I think that would be
generally the way I feel about it and I think most of my neighbors
feel.
e
GREGORY GMITERKO
Conrad: To begin with, if you could just give us a brief summary of
your background, work experience, time in the community, that kind of
stuff. The same stuff you put on your application but give us a quick
narrative of that.
Gregory Gmiterko: I just moved to Chanhassen 6 months ago. I work for
a Public Accountant in Golden Valley for the last 9 years.
Conrad: Why don't you tell us why you're interested in the Planning
Commission. Why the Planning Commission? Why not Park and Rec? What
motivated you to join this happy group up here?
Gregory Gmiterko: I've always been interested in planning things for
the future and stuff like that. I'm concerned about how Chanhassen
grows and I want to be a part...
Conrad: Do you have a philosophy on growth. You haven't lived here
that long but either here or other communities, is there a specific
ph i losophy you could share with us tha t you are go i ng to appl y to the
Chanhassen level?
e
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 25
e Gregory Gmiterko: In a way I'd kind of like to keep it in the small
town. I want it to grow but not grow as much as all of the other
subdivisions. Where you still be a part of the city but you also have
some atmosphere to it. Small town atmosphere.
Conrad: What things do you see that were good about Chanhassen's
growth within the few months or bad in our growth? Anything that irks
you, irritates you about how we're growing that you've seen?
Gregory Gmiterko: Not really.
of the new owners...
I like all the new properties.
I'm one
Conrad: What do you think about our downtown.
Gregory Gmiterko: It.'s different. I didn't expect it. See I didn't
see the way it was planned so when I sa w the way the streets ended up
turning out, I was kind of surprised they ended up going that way.
Conrad: A little bit about timing. We meet twice a month which means
there's two nights a month out of your life and there's probably the
night before or a couple nights before where you have to review a
packet of information so there's a time commitment on the Planning
Commission that we really have to hold you to. You're required 75%
attendance at Planning Commission meetings and for very good reasons.
Do you see tha t you ha ve the time to comm it? Do you ha ve tha t type 0 f
time to commit?
e
Gregory Gmiterko: That should be no problem at all.
Conrad: What questions do you have us about the Planning Commission?
Gregory Gmiterko: Not any that I can think of.
Emmings: Are there are particular issues in your neighborhood or in the
city that have provoked your interest in being on this commission?
Gregory Gmiterko: In the development that I'm in now, I'm kind of
disappointed in the way it's turning out.
Emmings: Where are you?
Gregory Gmiterko:
I'm in Brook Hill over south of TH 5.
Emmings: And is part of your interest in coming on the Commission
seeing that something that's going on there that you don't like doesn't
happen in the future?
Gregory Gmiterko: Partly yes.
Emmings: What is it that's called your attention?
e
Planning Commission Meeting
Decembe 9, 1987 - Page 26
~ Gregory Gmiterko: Originally our building was in there first and then
now, a mortgage company owned the land and they sold out to another
builder now so I wasn't too happy with the building that was going in.
Emmings: For what reason?
Gregory Gmiterko: I assumed that all the houses were going to be built
by that one builder... I was told about the lot, that the City of
Chanhassen was very particular about moving into that development as
far as building and I was surprised about how they changed builders.
Headla: You lived in Golden Valley for 9 years?
Gregory Gmiterko:
I lived in Hopkins.
Headla: Then you came here just by chance?
Gergory Gmiterko: My grandparents are from western Minnesota and I was
traveling through Chanhassen 4 or 5 times a year for the last 30 years
and I always liked what I saw.
Conrad: What do your neighbors say about Chanhassen?
e
Gregory Gmiterko: I haven't really talked to them that much. A lot of
the lots around us, nobody lives in them so I don't know the neighbors
that well. What they said, they all really like it out there. It's
nice and quiet out there and everybody is really happy.
ROBERT J. PETERSON
Conrad: Do you have a philosophy of growth for Chanhassen?
Robert Peterson: No. I guess I would like to see some controls on it.
As I've mentioned, I'm in the construction business and I see
developments and developments and developments, go on and on and on,
surely Chanhassen, in my travels throughout the cities and I bid work
all through the metropolitan area, Chanhassen is probably, which I'm
sure you know, developing the most of any of them. I guess I would
like to know that there's a future for me in Chanhassen just as a
resident. That this thing just doesn't get out of hand and start
choking people and things like that. I think the interest of the
people is probably what my concern would be mostly. What's good for
the city. What's good for the people. That's probably the approach I
would take and if that's the wrong approach, then so be it. It's on
the table tonight. It would be for the people. I've seen special
interest in construction just go array. I don't want that. Does that
answer a little bit?
Conrad: What do you see good that's happened out here?
e
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 27
e
Robert Peterson: I live on 5 of the prettiest acres you've got here.
I hate to choke in around but that's why I bought 5 acres. If I wasn't
doing that, I guess I would have bought a lot. I think if it's
controlled, it's just going to be super down the road. I don't know
what the consensus of the total populous is. Does it want to be
another Medina? Does it want to be an Eden prairie or does it want to
be a Chanhassen? I personally think Chanhassen, at least on the south
and west parts of the metropolitan area, is probably the prettiest. I
don't want to see that just eaten up with bricks and concrete
skyscrapers. Again, I like to be a representative of the people's
person. Development has been my livlihood all my life and now I live
here and with some control it's going to be built.
e
Conrad: To talk a little bit about the time commitment, we meet twice
a month every month. Typically we have agendas that take us many
nights until midnight. 7:30 to midnight. It's not fun the next day.
We're trying to structure ourselves away from that but even when we get
committed to structuring ourselves away from that, we get alot of
development pressures and developments trying to fit in and fit on the
agenda that we tend to keep the meetings a little late. For every
meeting there's at least a day of preparation or an evening of
materials that the staff is provided. We have an attendance record
requirement that says you've got to be here 75% of the time. We need
that consistency. We need a forum is really what we need. We can't
disappoint people who come here for public hearings or developers who
are trying to put some money into Chanhassen. How do you see yourself
fulfilling that commitment? Is that a problem with travel?
Robert Peterson: I work 2 miles from here and I live within a 1 1/4
from here. My evenings are not consumed by a lot of television and
things like that.
Conrad: What questions do you have of us?
Robert Peterson: I'll flatter you by telling you that I had applied
for a variance on my own home that I thought... I was fairly
impressed. I needed a variance to build there and I worked in Eden
prairie for so long. I had a problem and it worked really good. Barb
handled it for me.
Headla: Every once in a while we go until midnight, is that going to
be a problem for you? Getting up from the sack the next day?
Robert Peterson:
though.
I don't punch a clock.
I go to bed early at]night
Headla: You don't really see that as a problem?
Robert Peterson: No.
e
Planning Commission Meeting
December 9, 1987 - Page 28
~ Emmings: Is there any particular issue, either in your neighborhood or
in the community that caused you to be interested in being on the
Commission? Do you have any built in biases or anything that we maybe
ought to know about?
Robert Peterson: No. Before I accept things, I have to believe in
them. If it's something that's come up, I see we're talking about
building a community center. Things like that. If I believe in these
things I'll be behind them 100%. If I don't, I would surely join the
majority but I will voice my opinion. If that's wrong, I don't know.
I don't think it is.
Emmings: Has your company does work with this city?
Robert Peterson: Directly with the City, no. We do a lot of these
driveways but again, I'm not an owner in the company, I'm worker. All
I do is bid. I put prices together and that's the extent of my job. I
don't develop any land. I don't own any land. I don't believe there's
any conflict at all.
Headla: With your background, we talk quite a bit about developments
and roads and stuff, do have a problem expressing an opinion about the
way we're going or what should be done there?
--
Robert Peterson: I can be pretty open. Is that what you're asking?
I'd be very open. I guess again, I should emphasize a little bit to
you that if it isn't the Planning Commission, somewhere in this village
I would like to help to do something. Like I say, I've got 30 years
underneath my belt and I'll probably put another 15 years. I think I
can be of some value to somebody and I want to.
Conrad: what do your neighbors say about Chanhassen?
Robert Peterson: Tim Erhart's one of my neighbors. My wife is out
picking up another neighbor tonight by the way, an old farmer who
probably started with the town, got lost on his way to Chanhassen. My
wife got a call at 8:30 and this lady wanted us to go pick up here
husband in Hutchinson. He got lost going to Chan. So she's out there
doing it now.
Emmings moved, Erhart seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Barbara Dacy
City Planner
Prepared by Nann Opheim
e