City Council Minutes 4-10-06
City Council Meeting – April 10, 2006
about it was the understanding that we weren’t the only source that they were coming to to try to
get this project done and indeed they are receiving support from a variety of sources. The Met
Council just a few meetings ago presented a $300,000 grant for this project to the City so I think
that’s important too that it takes a lot of people to get these things done and a lot of
organizations. A year or so ago when we were asked to support the group and the development
in the form of a letter for the application, it was kind of a trust us and I think we looked at it as an
opportunity. As a city we’ve always looked at these more as opportunity driven then using a
broad brush to meet these goals. And I think we’re comfortable then saying that we do and I
haven’t seen anything over the last year with the site plan approval, especially in other things
that we made a mistake then and I think this is just something, I’m glad to hear that this is
something that we can support as a council. So with that we look forward to the ground breaking
this fall and a nice new apartment building coming up in our city and also expanding some of the
affordable units within our housing so. Appreciate everybody’s effort on this from staff. Mr.
Miller I know has spent a lot of time and Mr. Gerhardt and others and Ehlers and Associates and
Sand Company as well. We appreciate all the effort that you put in to get us to this point so
thank you very much for that. Any other comments? Questions. If not, is there a motion to
approve?
Roger Knutson: Recommended resolution.
Councilman Lundquist: I would move approval of the attached resolution in the staff report to
create Tax Increment Financing District #9.
Councilman Labatt: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there any discussion on that motion?
Resolution #2006-29:Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that
the City Council approve the resolution adopting a modification to the redevelopment plan
for the downtown Chanhassen Redevelopment Project Area and establishing Tax
Increment District No. 9 therein and adopting a tax increment financing plan therefore.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0.
LAKE RILEY/RICE MARSH WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT, APPLICANT
RILEY PURGATORY BLUFF CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT: REQUEST FOR A
WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR EXCAVATION AND MAINTENANCE OF 5
STORM WATER PONDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF IMPROVING WATER QUALITY
IN RICE MARSH LAKE AND LAKE RILEY WATERSHEDS.
Lori Haak: Thank you Mayor Furlong and council members. The applicant, who is the Riley-
Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District is proposing the excavation and maintenance of 5
storm water ponds in the City of Chanhassen for the purposes of improving water quality in Rice
Marsh Lake and Lake Riley, downstream. The wetland alteration permit is necessary because
the applicant proposes the excavation and fill of existing wetlands to the order of 3.28 acres total
in five locations. The applicant is proposing mitigation through the State Wetland Bank at a
ratio of 2 to 1. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 21, 2006 to review the
9
City Council Meeting – April 10, 2006
proposed wetland alteration. Several residents with property near the wetlands, adjacent to Rice
Marsh Lake appeared to obtain additional information about the project. One property owner in
particular, the owner of 8131 Dakota Lane expressed concern that the project proposed
excavation on his property but that he had not received prior notification from the watershed
district that the project would impact his property. His 8131 Dakota is located, it’s the furthest
left property that’s outlined in red on the area photo here. That’s correct, yes. During the
Planning Commission meeting, the plat from the Hidden Valley subdivision was reviewed by
staff and it was found that a drainage and utility easement covers the rear portion of the yard.
Actually if you want to flip it over. Again the property at 8131 Dakota is the furthest to the left
on your screen the utility easement, which contains the city’s sanitary sewer, is located in the
easement that is highlighted in orange and the drainage and utility easement is highlighted in
pink on that drawing. So because there are existing drainage and utility easements in that
location, the project does not propose impacts to property for which additional easements or land
acquisition would be necessary. In response to the lack of communication with affected
residents, the Planning Commission recommended adding a condition to the conditions of
approval that would require the applicant to obtain all appropriate easements and permissions
from affected property owners. Since that meeting city staff has spoken with the applicant
regarding the concerns of the condition and the affected resident. The applicant has agreed to
communicate with those 3 affected property owners prior to construction beginning. So even
though we have the right to, or the applicant, or the public has the right to construct these ponds
and in fact just expand an existing pond, they will be working, the applicant will be working with
the residents in that area. The Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the
proposed project subject to the conditions in the staff report, plus an additional condition 14
which reads, all appropriate easements and permissions must be obtained prior to commencing
work. And with that staff and the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the motion as
printed in the staff report, conditions 1 through 14. With that I’d be more than happy to take any
questions you have.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any questions for staff? Just one and that corresponds to the last
picture that was up on the table there with regard to the different easements. Seeing that now
with the orange portion that delineates the utility, the sanitary sewer is there, is there any
anticipation that there’s going to be interruption in the service?
Lori Haak: Not at all. Actually the existing trail, if we go back to the previous exhibit, is within
the drainage and utility easement and all work would be done south of that trail. So, and actually
in looking at the grading plans, staff has found that actually a good portion of that slope right
along the trail will remain undisturbed, so.
Mayor Furlong: And I guess that’s in addition to not planning any interruptions, we’re going to
make sure we avoid them.
Lori Haak: Absolutely.
Mayor Furlong: Accidental ones.
Lori Haak: Yes.
10
City Council Meeting – April 10, 2006
Mayor Furlong: Alright. Thank you. Any other questions for staff? On this.
Councilman Labatt: Lori, what is the plan with the stuff that’s removed from the ponds?
Lori Haak: At this time the applicant has not selected a contractor and until that contractor is
selected, they’re not certain what the fate of that material will be, but one of the conditions in the
staff report is that the city be made aware of that, not only the haul routes but also the final
destination of that material.
Mayor Furlong: This work is being done entirely by the watershed district, correct? And funded
out of the watershed district.
Lori Haak: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: It’s an expansion of existing ponds…improve water quality downstream as
well?
Lori Haak: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you.
Lori Haak: And condition 6, Councilman Labatt is the condition that speaks to that.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Is there any other questions or discussion? Any discussion
on the matter?
Councilman Labatt: No.
Mayor Furlong: I think it’s a good project.
Councilman Lundquist: Yeah, just the communication piece I think is a good thing. I mean it
never hurts to over communicate, especially when you haul in back hoes and bulldozers into
somebody’s back yard. It’s usually good to let them know what’s going on so.
Mayor Furlong: Very good. Any other discussion or items? If not, is there a motion to
approve?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Motion to approve the Wetland Alteration Permit #06-06 subject to
the following conditions, 1 through 14.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilman Lundquist: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion?
11
City Council Meeting – April 10, 2006
Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded that the City Council
approve Wetland Alteration Permit #06-06, subject to the following conditions:
1. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland
Conservation Act (MR 8420) at a ratio of 2:1.
2. The applicant shall notify nearby property owners of the proposed project at least two
weeks prior to beginning work. The notice shall, at a minimum, provide a summary of
the purpose of the project, the timeline for project completion, and contact information
for someone with RPBCWD who is able to provide more information about the project.
It is recommended that the applicant work with the City to identify property owners
receiving notice and to provide a link to a project website from the City’s website.
3. The applicant shall restore any disturbed areas and restore or replace any damage to
infrastructure on City property.
4. All exposed soils from temporary haul routes, exposed slopes above the normal water
level (NWL) and adjacent areas to the project shall be temporarily stabilized and seeded
within the 7, 14, 21 day time frames depending upon slopes. Any concentrated flow
areas shall receive temporary protection within 24 hours of connection to surface waters.
5. Erosion control blanket shall be used in concentrated flow area and for slopes of 3:1. All
remaining areas shall be mulched and seeded to control erosion.
6. The applicant shall provide information regarding the fate of the excavated/excess
material, as well as the stabilization and/or containment of the material.
7. Temporary energy dissipation shall be installed at existing flared end sections to the
bottom of the basin at the end of each day to protect against erosion. This could include
temporary plastic sheeting or geotextile fabric secured to the soil.
8. All existing outlets/proposed outlet structures shall be temporary riser structures until the
ponds and adjacent areas are stable.
9. Street sweeping and scraping shall be needed daily (potentially more often) during active
haul times. A dedicated site pickup sweeper may be needed.
10. The applicant shall provide details as to how dewatering will be accomplished for the
basins in this project.
11. The applicant shall have a flocculent available on the project to facilitate sediment
removal from sediment laden water.
12
City Council Meeting – April 10, 2006
12. Energy dissipation shall be provided at all discharge points from dewatering pumps.
Waters receiving dewatering discharges should be large enough to handle the volume and
velocity of the water.
13. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies
(e.g. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II Construction Permit),
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering, impacts below the OHW of
Rice Marsh Lake), Minnesota Department of Transportation, and comply with their
conditions of approval.
14. All appropriate permissions and easements must be obtained prior to the undertaking of
any construction.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0.
LIBERTY AT CREEKSIDE, 1500 PIONEER TRAIL, APPLICANT TOWN &
COUNTRY HOMES: REQUEST FOR REZONING OF PROPERTY FROM A2 TO
PUD-R; SUBDIVISION WITH VARIANCES OF APPROXIMATELY 36.01 ACRES
INTO 29 LOTS, 5 OUTLOTS, AND PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY; SITE PLAN
APPROVAL FOR 146 TOWNHOUSES; AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
ALTERATIONS WITHIN THE FLOOD PLAIN AND DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE
BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT.
Public Present:
Name Address
Shawn Siders Town and Country Homes
Kevin Clark Town and Country Homes
Robert Nordby Town and Country Homes
Bruce Jeurissen 1500 Pioneer Trail
Kate Aanenson: The subject site located north of Pioneer Trail. West of the future Powers
Boulevard. Oh, I need to use this so, if you don’t mind. And Town and Country Homes is the
applicant. This request is for 146 town home units and this item did appear before the Planning
st
Commission on March 21. Actually it appeared numerous months before that but there was a
lot of work that needed to be done before we actually, were able to process the application. At
the Planning Commission meeting, while they did vote 5-0 there were two main issues that they
discussed. One was the access to the site. The two way access points, and the architecture.
Existing site conditions, if you look at the property, the Jeurissen property has an existing
driveway to the site that serves the homestead and that driveway shows up in this area, and that
driveway is part of the MnDot agreement. It’s allowed to maintain the use as a single driveway
is typical. Once the use has changed and higher use is developed, it is the intent of that driveway
to go away. The Planning Commission, this is the subject site again right here, and the issue that
has come up on this property, it’s providing a two way access and I want to spend a little bit of
time on that issue in itself and go back and tie it back into the AUAR before we start talking
13